Proposals to split Northern into two franchises: How would you do it?

[Meerkat]

as this "hides the subsidy" to some extent

I hate this. Hiding subsidies should be avoided - it’s just admitting your pet money pit isn’t really worth the money. And it normally comes from those who howl about companies dubious accounting or tax evasion.

nobody really wants an entirely regional franchise

who do you mean by ‘nobody’? If the DfT are willing to pay for it then companies will bid for it. However they are more likely to bid for small franchises/concessions than a monolithic country wide mess.

 

[randyrippley]

One thing is certain - if there is an E/W split then West need to be cut back to just the commuter services into Manchester, while commuter services into Liverpool should go to Merseyrail. Lancaster - Barrow and Windermere needs go back to TPE. Question is what to do with with the Cumbria coast line and Morecambe branch. Neither fit well with Manchester-centric services. I'd be inclined to turn Morecambe into its own experimental micro-franchise running battery tram-trains (maybe managed by Stagecoach, the dominant local bus co). Cumbria coast is a better fit for whoever gets to run Carlisle-Newcastle.

==edit==
just to enlarge on that, Northern should be split four ways, each with commuter services covering these areas:
Liverpool (e.g. add Preston-Ormskirk and similar to Merseyrail)
Manchester (just the commuter stoppers in/out of the city)
Tyne/Tees/Carlisle-Barrow
Yorkshire (centring on Leeds/Sheffield/Bradford locals and commuters, plus Lancaster/Carlisle - Leeds)
Anything crossing the zones i.e. long distance goes to TPE

 

[Energy]

So do you think we should be suggesting certain Northern-operated routes to transfer to LNER, EMR and AWC? With the rest being kept separate as a smaller franchise or merged with TPE?

Some TPE routes transfered to Northern and maybe some Northern routes could go to EMR.

 

[Energy]

who do you mean by ‘nobody’? If the DfT are willing to pay for it then companies will bid for it. However they are more likely to bid for small franchises/concessions than a monolithic country wide mess.

Do the DfT want to pay to subsidise it though? Companies will bid but if they needed to drop a bid, a smaller regional franchise has a higher likelihood of being dropped than an intercity one.

 

[Meerkat]

Do the DfT want to pay to subsidise it though? Companies will bid but if they needed to drop a bid, a smaller regional franchise has a higher likelihood of being dropped than an intercity one.

The DfT subsidise it now so what changes?
Why are they more likely to drop a small regional bid? Cheaper bidding, less risk and less capital demand for the bidding company (particularly if it’s done as a TfL style concession). I would hope that smaller, simpler franchises would increase the number of bidders.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Leeds - Morecambe

North Western

York - Blackpool

TPE

Leeds - Manchester

North Western

Carlisle - Newcastle

North East

 

[Harvey B]

North Western

TPE

North Western

North East

And i'd introduce a Leeds newcastle to join both parts of the North East side together and would Leeds to carlisle be part of the North East franchise too?

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

And i'd introduce a Leeds newcastle to join both parts of the North East side together and would Leeds to carlisle be part of the North East franchise too?

North Western Leeds to Carlisle via Settle

 

[LOL The Irony]

And i'd introduce a Leeds newcastle to join both parts of the North East side together and would Leeds to carlisle be part of the North East franchise too?

Extend the Carlisle - Newcastle to York.

 

[xotGD]

Extend the Carlisle - Newcastle to York.

Just extend it all the way back to Carlisle via York, Leeds and the S&C.

Really, there is no reason for Northern to run services up the ECML from Newcastle to York.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Just extend it all the way back to Carlisle via York, Leeds and the S&C.

Really, there is no reason for Northern to run services up the ECML from Newcastle to York.

Harvey wanted connection, he got connection.

 

[adrock1976]

I would be in favour of splitting the present day Northern franchise into what used to resemble the former British Rail Regional Railways North West and regional Railways North East with the following modifications:

Preston - Ormskirk and Wigan Wallgate - Kirkby transferred to Merseyrail with extension of electrification. Also extending the present day Southport - Hunts Cross to Warrington Central or Birchwood with the necessary infrastructure improvements.

Greater Manchester, South Yorkshire, West Yorkshire, and Tyne & Wear Passenger Transport Executives to have direct input into service levels, infrastructure improvements, and quality of local services within their patch.

Lancaster - Morecambe/Heysham Harbour to operate as a shuttle, maybe converted to tram operation with Lancaster city centre being seriously penetrated and/or possibly extended to Lancaster University.

The present day Leeds - Lincoln Central via Barnsley to be revised to run Leeds - Nottingham (which would double the frequency between Leeds and Nottingham via Wakefield Kirkgate, and Barnsley to every 30 minutes) with the Lincoln Central trains being curtailed to run Lincoln - Sheffield (or Dore & Totley). This would eliminate the present day Leeds - Lincoln trains interacting with Nunnery Main Line Junction twice. Furthermore, being as the Leeds - Nottingham would be running on mostly former Midland Railway metals, this service would be transferred to the East Midlands franchise.

The present day Manchester - Sheffield via Hope Valley locals would remain unchanged. When the Hope Valley Capacity Upgrade is eventually completed, the present day Cleethorpes - Manchester Airport TPE to be revised to run Cleethorpes - Liverpool Lime Street via Warrington Central vice the Airport. A second Hope Valley TPE to be introduced between Liverpool Lime Street and Hull Paragon via Warrington Central. This would maintain the 30 minute frequency between Liverpool and Sheffield via Warrington Central and Manchester Pic, with the present day Sheffield - Hull via Goole limited stop transferring to TPE. A new East Midlands Manchester Pic - Nottingham (so as to maintain the 60 minute frequency between Manchester and Nottingham via Chesterfield) calling at Stockport, Hazel Grove (maybe), Chinley, Dore & Totley, Chesterfield, Alfreton, Toton Interchange for HS2 (maybe when it reaches the East Mids), Beeston, and Nottingham.

The Liverpool Lime Street - Crewe via Earlestown, Manchester Pic, and Airport local all stations to be revised to run Liverpool Lime Street - Manchester Victoria, Manchester Piccadilly - Airport, and Crewe - Airport. This would improve timetable reliability and robustness.

The present day TPE franchise to be revised with the Manchester Airport/Liverpool Lime Street - Glasgow/Edinburgh via Preston services transferring to the Intercity West Coast franchise. The remaining TPE routes to be merged into the new Regional Railways North East franchise, which would include the Hope Valley routes and maybe the York - Blackpool via Halifax and Burnley route.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Lancaster - Morecambe/Heysham Harbour to operate as a shuttle, maybe converted to tram operation with Lancaster city centre being seriously penetrated and/or possibly extended to Lancaster University.

It would be hard to sell tram conversion unless the Eden Project could fund it instead of their crackpot cable car idea. However, I agree in principle - this should be part of the Lakes and Furness service group and worked using 15x and crews from the same pool as the Cumbrian Coast.

As for Heysham - should this even stay open? It gets in the way of an even regular interval service to Morecambe, and I believe it's barely used? Alternatively "do a Fishguard", build a station located to actually serve Heysham (a 2-car single platform can't cost that much) and serve it hourly.

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/how-should-heysham-and-morecambe-be-served.197628/ to continue this subthread.

 

[Killingworth]

The present day Manchester - Sheffield via Hope Valley locals would remain unchanged. When the Hope Valley Capacity Upgrade is eventually completed, the present day Cleethorpes - Manchester Airport TPE to be revised to run Cleethorpes - Liverpool Lime Street via Warrington Central vice the Airport. A second Hope Valley TPE to be introduced between Liverpool Lime Street and Hull Paragon via Warrington Central. This would maintain the 30 minute frequency between Liverpool and Sheffield via Warrington Central and Manchester Pic, with the present day Sheffield - Hull via Goole limited stop transferring to TPE. A new East Midlands Manchester Pic - Nottingham (so as to maintain the 60 minute frequency between Manchester and Nottingham via Chesterfield) calling at Stockport, Hazel Grove (maybe), Chinley, Dore & Totley, Chesterfield, Alfreton, Toton Interchange for HS2 (maybe when it reaches the East Mids), Beeston, and Nottingham.

Any attempts to sever the direct connection between Sheffield and Manchester Airport would/will be fiercely resisted! It wouldn't be too popular in Grimsby, Scunthorpe and Doncaster either. When extra capacity is provided with reliable 6 car TPE trains more will be drawn to that currently overloaded service from East Midlands and Northern trains that currently carry quite a lot of traffic for the airport. Cutting a direct train to Liverpool, would sell badly too!

When/if an extra hourly service can be introduced between Sheffield and Manchester (it looks rather difficult at present, even when the HVCIS is completed) it would certainly please users from Chinley, Hope and Dore if they could get as near as possible to a half hourly service between the two cities.

 

[adrock1976]

Any attempts to sever the direct connection between Sheffield and Manchester Airport would/will be fiercely resisted! It wouldn't be too popular in Grimsby, Scunthorpe and Doncaster either. When extra capacity is provided with reliable 6 car TPE trains more will be drawn to that currently overloaded service from East Midlands and Northern trains that currently carry quite a lot of traffic for the airport. Cutting a direct train to Liverpool, would sell badly too!

When/if an extra hourly service can be introduced between Sheffield and Manchester (it looks rather difficult at present, even when the HVCIS is completed) it would certainly please users from Chinley, Hope and Dore if they could get as near as possible to a half hourly service between the two cities.

I never suggested cutting the Sheffield - Liverpool trains, rather by having a new Liverpool - Hull via Warrington Central which would effectively replace the present day Liverpool - Norwich along the common section between Liverpool and Sheffield. My suggestion of revising running the existing Cleethorpes - Airport to Liverpool via Warrington Central would still maintain the 30 minute frequency between Liverpool and Manchester Pic via Warrington Central, and between Manchester Pic and Sheffield via Stockport.

The extra hourly Manchester - Nottingham East Mids service for the Hope Valley upgrade that I suggested would run via Dore South Curve between Dore & Totley and Chesterfield. No intermediate stations along the ex CLC line via Warrington Central, nor the ex Midland routes via Hope Valley and the mainline/Erewash Valley will have their frequency cut at all if I am making sense (hence how I suggested revising the Leeds - Lincoln to be curtailed to run Lincoln - Sheffield (or Dore & Totley) with the remaining Leeds - Sheffield via Barnsley extended to run to Nottingham via Alfreton, replacing the present day section of the Liverpool - Norwich between Sheffield and Nottingham.

 

[Killingworth]

The extra hourly Manchester - Nottingham East Mids service for the Hope Valley upgrade that I suggested would run via Dore South Curve between Dore & Totley and Chesterfield. No intermediate stations along the ex CLC line via Warrington Central, nor the ex Midland routes via Hope Valley and the mainline/Erewash Valley will have their frequency cut at all if I am making sense (hence how I suggested revising the Leeds - Lincoln to be curtailed to run Lincoln - Sheffield (or Dore & Totley) with the remaining Leeds - Sheffield via Barnsley extended to run to Nottingham via Alfreton, replacing the present day section of the Liverpool - Norwich between Sheffield and Nottingham.

Nothing is likely to be significantly changed until we get closer completion of the HVCIS, and it's still not 100% certain to happen. There are issues getting paths out of Manchester by either currently used route. By the end of 2021 we should be able to see a start date for the work to commence and have more confidence in 2023 as a completion date. By then Liverpool - Norwich shouldy have been remapped and we should see how well 6 coach TPE services are coping with increased traffic (the 6 car 7.08 out of Sheffield is already well filled after Dore) - and possibly a few 4 car Northerns at peak times.

There is considerable surpressed demand on this route at present which is why the 4th hourly Sheffield-Manchester service is needeed.

What we think might be achieved with a few additions to the HVCIS is unilkely to get us anywhere. Network Rall are making clear that the basic plans are all we're likely to get; no optional cossovers or bi-directional sections currently to be included. They would materially help resilience around the Dore and Totley section but cost a lot to construct and maintain.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

And i'd introduce a Leeds newcastle to join both parts of the North East side together and would Leeds to carlisle be part of the North East franchise too?

Extend the Carlisle - Newcastle to York.

I reckon that if one were to attempt bridging the almost-total divide between the Northern services in the northeast with those elsewhere in the network (which as I noted on the forum a few days ago means that travelling solely by Northern services between the Whitby Line and geographically-nearby points such as York and Scarborough takes a full day) the most sensible option would be to extend the Hull-York service to Darlington, stopping at Northallerton and Thirsk; extending the Carlisle-Newcastle to York makes little sense given the fact that Carlisle already has a direct service to Leeds.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Any attempts to sever the direct connection between Sheffield and Manchester Airport would/will be fiercely resisted! It wouldn't be too popular in Grimsby, Scunthorpe and Doncaster either. When extra capacity is provided with reliable 6 car TPE trains more will be drawn to that currently overloaded service from East Midlands and Northern trains that currently carry quite a lot of traffic for the airport. Cutting a direct train to Liverpool, would sell badly too!

When/if an extra hourly service can be introduced between Sheffield and Manchester (it looks rather difficult at present, even when the HVCIS is completed) it would certainly please users from Chinley, Hope and Dore if they could get as near as possible to a half hourly service between the two cities.

absolutely right! Axing the Cleethorpes to Manchester Airport service would be a bad move. The capacity has been increased to 6 carriages due to sever overcrowding between Manchester and Sheffield, Sheffield and Doncaster as well as Doncaster and Scunthorpe.

 

[FishUK]

The Liverpool Lime Street - Crewe via Earlestown, Manchester Pic, and Airport local all stations to be revised to run Liverpool Lime Street - Manchester Victoria, Manchester Piccadilly - Airport, and Crewe - Airport. This would improve timetable reliability and robustness.

Not totally sold on your nuking my commute, mate.

 

[xotGD]

I reckon that if one were to attempt bridging the almost-total divide between the Northern services in the northeast with those elsewhere in the network (which as I noted on the forum a few days ago means that travelling solely by Northern services between the Whitby Line and geographically-nearby points such as York and Scarborough takes a full day) the most sensible option would be to extend the Hull-York service to Darlington, stopping at Northallerton and Thirsk; extending the Carlisle-Newcastle to York makes little sense given the fact that Carlisle already has a direct service to Leeds.

Running a service purely to benefit people with free Northern 'go anywhere' tickets as Delay Repay compensation doesn't sound like a sensible strategy.

 

[yorksrob]

The only way to properly square the circle would be to have a small number of new franchises nationwide based roughly on geographical regions. The idea would be to ensure that each region had a bundle of London commuter, InterCity and regional routes and keep the necessary cross-subsidies within the industry. It is impossible to run an effective railway network without some amount of cross subsidy of some sort, so better to keep it in house and let the Government top up where necessary.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

Running a service purely to benefit people with free Northern 'go anywhere' tickets as Delay Repay compensation doesn't sound like a sensible strategy.

Well, it wouldn't only benefit them - to be honest, I didn't even know those existed until very recently! It would potentially allow the creation of cheaper "Northern Only" tickets between various points in the northeast and North Yorkshire which currently are effectively served by two almost-entirely-distinct Northern rail networks despite being close together geographically, which would perhaps work out well for Northern in terms of added custom.

Also, my preference for logic and tidiness means my brain just itches a bit at the rather-ridiculous gap in the Northern network in what is, after all, part of the north! :P

 

[Meerkat]

The only way to properly square the circle would be to have a small number of new franchises nationwide based roughly on geographical regions. The idea would be to ensure that each region had a bundle of London commuter, InterCity and regional routes and keep the necessary cross-subsidies within the industry. It is impossible to run an effective railway network without some amount of cross subsidy of some sort, so better to keep it in house and let the Government top up where necessary.

why are cross subsidies necessary, and why is better to hide the cost of social services by hobbling the reputation of all rail services?

 

[yorksrob]

why are cross subsidies necessary, and why is better to hide the cost of social services by hobbling the reputation of all rail services?

The 'reputation' issue only arises due to the right wing assumption that subsidised services are an undesireable or iniquitous thing, rather than a benefit to society.

However, that aside, the railway is by its nature a network of main and secondary routes. The main lines need secondary routes to collect and distribute passengers and freight in order for them to be successful, therefore it makes sense for some revenue gained on the core routes to support those secondary networks.

 

[Meerkat]

The 'reputation' issue only arises due to the right wing assumption that subsidised services are an undesireable or iniquitous thing, rather than a benefit to society.

However, that aside, the railway is by its nature a network of main and secondary routes. The main lines need secondary routes to collect and distribute passengers and freight in order for them to be successful, therefore it makes sense for some revenue gained on the core routes to support those secondary networks.

The reputation matters because the hidden subsidies hide how successful some rail services are - rail in general gets lumped as a money pit. And if subsidies are a good thing why are you so keen to hide them?
The main passenger services don’t like or want freight sharing their tracks. I am not totally convinced that they need the the secondary services either (which get their share of the ticket revenue anyway).
Hidden subsidies allow farces like the Conwy Valley Line to continue- get them out in the open and justify (or not) the need for them.

 

[yorksrob]

The reputation matters because the hidden subsidies hide how successful some rail services are - rail in general gets lumped as a money pit. And if subsidies are a good thing why are you so keen to hide them?
The main passenger services don’t like or want freight sharing their tracks. I am not totally convinced that they need the the secondary services either (which get their share of the ticket revenue anyway).
Hidden subsidies allow farces like the Conwy Valley Line to continue- get them out in the open and justify (or not) the need for them.

The primary reason why I want to hide subsidies is because too many policy formers in Government/Whitehall share the incorrect, and frankly absurd view that a subsidised railway is automatically an iniquity.

In a sensible world run by sensible people, of course transparancy would be desireable, but we live in a world where Northern Rail was split off solely to run it down, and look where that's left us.

Far better to bundle up different types of railway into geographical territories, then the railway can get on with itself without the regional bits going to rack and ruin.

 

[Meerkat]

So rather than win he argument you want to hide the problem.
It’s just dishonest, and I wonder whether it is because some people don’t want honest discussions like how much cheaper it would be to bin the Conwy line and subsidise buses instead.

 

[cactustwirly]

I reckon that if one were to attempt bridging the almost-total divide between the Northern services in the northeast with those elsewhere in the network (which as I noted on the forum a few days ago means that travelling solely by Northern services between the Whitby Line and geographically-nearby points such as York and Scarborough takes a full day) the most sensible option would be to extend the Hull-York service to Darlington, stopping at Northallerton and Thirsk; extending the Carlisle-Newcastle to York makes little sense given the fact that Carlisle already has a direct service to Leeds.

Why? What's the need, there are plenty of other services from York to Darlington

 

[mspljd1990]

Yorkshire & North Eastern Railway, and the old North Western Trains name?

I'd give the traditional transpennine routes (York - Blackpool, Leeds - Manchester Victoria) to the Eastern Franchise, and the more recent ones (Wigan/Southport - Leeds, Chester - Leeds) to the West.

Would both franchises keep the Class 195s?

 

[Harvey B]

Yorkshire & North Eastern Railway, and the old North Western Trains name?

I'd give the traditional transpennine routes (York - Blackpool, Leeds - Manchester Victoria) to the Eastern Franchise, and the more recent ones (Wigan/Southport - Leeds, Chester - Leeds) to the West.

Would both franchises keep the Class 195s?

I hope so