Trivia: worst connected cities?

[LateThanNever]

:roll: Plymouth is not too well connected just now!

Quite, and at 260thou although reasonably well -but very slowly- served to a fair variety of destinations ,Plymouth shouldn't be subjected to this arbitrary and intermittent cut off!

 

[Kite159]

For it's size, Salisbury is well connected. London, Exeter, Cardiff, Portsmouth/Brighton.

Sprinter city!

 

[Northern_Light]

I'm not saying it is, I completely agree with you. I was just referring to Taunton's comment about there only being rail links to the north and south...

And you quite correctly point out that there are population issues to the west of the city.

Only towns of any consequence outside the city boundary are Westhill and Banchory. The population of the former is over 10,000 and indeed Westhill is a significant employment area. But it is only 6 miles from the city centre and building a line here would be full of technical issues. How do you build a new track in and around the city centre? And do so in a cost effective manner? Even if the town were significantly larger than it is, you would at the very least have to think twice about it.

Banchory has only around 7,500 inhabitants. It does appear to have something going for it in that there is a disused track from the town to Aberdeen. But is it really worth rebuilding both the line and bridges for such a small population? Especially as so many living here and other towns/suburbs on the old line work away from Aberdeen city centre?

To say the least, I feel that the BCR for such schemes will be extremely low. For this reason, I have to sadly conclude that there willl be no line to the west of Aberdeen for the foreseeable future and beyond. This probably is the case for other towns in NE Scotland not connected to the network.

But I will stand by what I said earlier. For the size of Aberdeen, I feel it is reasonably, if not brilliantly, connected to our main cities.

 

[thenorthern]

thanks to CrossCountry Plymouth has very good links for its location.

Gloucester though doesn't seem to have very good services to other cities and seems to have more trains to Nottingham than London.

 

[47802]

Bradford has always been overshadowed by Leeds and even more so in recent years, large sections of the Bradford conurbation can just as easy go to Leeds as well as Bradford like me I have a Bradford address and I live 7 miles from Leeds, 5 miles from Bradford I would nearly always catch a train from Leeds as the Bus service to Leeds is better, the Bus service to my village was better to Bradford years ago but now clearly reflects modern day demand.

I don't see that the service is that bad certainly much better than say 20years ago, with frequent trains to Leeds from both stations, 2 trains an hour to Manchester when it used to be 1, a service in recent years to Huddersfield, and 5 trains a day to London, although having said that it does have the worst London service for its population size.

 

[Carlisle]

I suppose DFT rail and it's predecessors must share a bit of the blame for some of the issues on this thread as places mentioned like Brighton ,Portsmouth, Liverpool and Blackpool etc all used to be part of the cross country network albeit not that well served

 

[Parallel]

I don't know if it's been mentioned but Bangor gets a pretty poor service too, usually only 2tph - One to Holyhead and one to either Birmingham International or Cardiff Central (alternating).

 

[Spaceflower]

Sunderland. An hourly train between Newcastle and Middlesbrough which is not only very slow but mostly operated by a single pacer and supplemented only by 4 or 5 direct trains to York and London and an additional local train in the morning peak. Not only that, but after 9pm there are no trains.

For its size, I can't think of a worst connected city.

That's discounting the Metro ofcourse.

 

[thenorthern]

Although its not a city I have always found Mansfield's connections quite bad, I would agree about Walsall although thats not a city either.

 

[FQ]

I was meaning the larger ones yes.

One I thought of is Leicester, yes it does have 4 trains per hour to London and the Birmingham to Stansted Airport trains but it doesn't have any connections to the North West, North East, Scotland or the South West.

Yes, Leicester does need more train services such as a Leicester-Glasgow Central train calling at Leicester, Derby, Sheffield, Wakefield Westgate, Leeds, York, Darlington, Durham, Newcastle Central, Edinburgh Waverley, Haymarket and Glasgow Central.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't know if it's been mentioned but Bangor gets a pretty poor service too, usually only 2tph - One to Holyhead and one to either Birmingham International or Cardiff Central (alternating).

What about London Euston trains?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Also Aberdeen is really bad.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

For it's size, Salisbury is well connected. London, Exeter, Cardiff, Portsmouth/Brighton.

Sprinter city!

Also there is Bath and Bristol.

 

[Parallel]

Yes, Leicester does need more train services such as a Leicester-Glasgow Central train calling at Leicester, Derby, Sheffield, Wakefield Westgate, Leeds, York, Darlington, Durham, Newcastle Central, Edinburgh Waverley, Haymarket and Glasgow Central.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What about London Euston trains?

I hadn't thought of those, but having looked it up, Bangor only gets 5 trains to London Euston and three of those are before 09:30, and also doesn't get any direct services to Euston after 14:25.

 

[northwichcat]

I don't know if it's been mentioned but Bangor gets a pretty poor service too, usually only 2tph - One to Holyhead and one to either Birmingham International or Cardiff Central (alternating).

Between 07:30 and 23:30 there are 23 trains arriving at Bangor from the Rhyl direction which is on average 1 service every 40 minutes or 3 trains every 2 hours in that direction.

Based on the population of Bangor (16,000 permanent residents and an extra 10,000 students in term time) I think the current timetable suits the city very well. Having direct trains to alternating destinations: Cardiff, Birmingham, London and Manchester means a higher number of students will either have a direct service to their home town or be able to get to it with just 1 change.

 

[thenorthern]

This hasn't been mentioned but St Albans I would say doesn't have very good links, no East Midlands Trains stop there and there is only the Thameslink and Abbey Branch Line.

 

[Western Lord]

.

Gloucester though doesn't seem to have very good services to other cities and seems to have more trains to Nottingham than London.

Gloucester used to have a through station (Eastgate) on the Birmingham-Bristol line and most expresses stopped there (more than stopped at Cheltenham). After closure of the Tuffley loop and Eastgate station, trains had to reverse at Central. At first nothing much changed and turnround locos were provided at Central to speed up reversals. Over the years, in spite of the advent of HSTs and later, Voyagers (much easier to reverse), Gloucester lost it's express services altogether. How this was allowed to happen I don't know.

 

[transmanche]

This hasn't been mentioned but St Albans I would say doesn't have very good links

But it's one of those "technical" cities with a population of less than 60,000.

 

[adrock1976]

Yes, Leicester does need more train services such as a Leicester-Glasgow Central train calling at Leicester, Derby, Sheffield, Wakefield Westgate, Leeds, York, Darlington, Durham, Newcastle Central, Edinburgh Waverley, Haymarket and Glasgow Central.

Or alternatively Leicester/East Midlands region to Glasgow calling at Derby, Sheffield, Barnsley (selected services), Wakefield Kirkgate, Leeds, Skipton, Hellifield (to connect with extended services from Blackburn direction), Settle, Appleby, Carlisle, Motherwell, and Glasgow Central.

This would be similar to the original Midland Railway Thames Clyde express that ran years ago.

 

[FQ]

Or alternatively Leicester/East Midlands region to Glasgow calling at Derby, Sheffield, Barnsley (selected services), Wakefield Kirkgate, Leeds, Skipton, Hellifield (to connect with extended services from Blackburn direction), Settle, Appleby, Carlisle, Motherwell, and Glasgow Central.

This would be similar to the original Midland Railway Thames Clyde express that ran years ago.

Wow that would be REALLY good.

 

[Cherry_Picker]

Who would use it though?

 

[Kite159]

Yes, Leicester does need more train services such as a Leicester-Glasgow Central train calling at Leicester, Derby, Sheffield, Wakefield Westgate, Leeds, York, Darlington, Durham, Newcastle Central, Edinburgh Waverley, Haymarket and Glasgow Central.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What about London Euston trains?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Also Aberdeen is really bad.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Also there is Bath and Bristol.

Bath & Bristol on the Cardiff trains (plus the SWT service to Bristol)
I also forgot the direct service to Great Malvern via Worcester-Super-Mare

 

[thenorthern]

I think so far Bradford and Sunderland are the winners here so far.

 

[TheWalrus]

How are Bath and Bristol badly connected?

In regards to Lincoln my suggestion would be to merge Lincoln-Sheffield and Sheffield-Manchester giving direct services from Lincoln to Mnachester. Also have more regular London services either through the franchised operator or open access and extend Cardiff-Nottingham to Newark and Lincoln, giving direct links to Birmingham, Derby and beyond.

 

[Starmill]

In regards to Lincoln my suggestion would be to merge Lincoln-Sheffield and Sheffield-Manchester giving direct services from Lincoln to Mnachester. Also have more regular London services either through the franchised operator or open access and extend Cardiff-Nottingham to Newark and Lincoln, giving direct links to Birmingham, Derby and beyond.

What, and have passengers sit on a Northern 142 for that length of time!? You've got to be mental (or just unlucky!) to travel on it just from Manchester to Sheffield at present, and its only every 2 hours for much of the day!

 

[thenorthern]

Bristol I would say is ok for links to other cities, it has regular links to most cities in the country, in some ways I would say it rivals Manchester for links to other cities.

 

[FQ]

How are Bath and Bristol badly connected?

In regards to Lincoln my suggestion would be to merge Lincoln-Sheffield and Sheffield-Manchester giving direct services from Lincoln to Mnachester. Also have more regular London services either through the franchised operator or open access and extend Cardiff-Nottingham to Newark and Lincoln, giving direct links to Birmingham, Derby and beyond.

I disagree with the idea to connect the Lincoln-Sheffield and the Sheffield-Manchester but I agree to have more Lincoln-London trains. They could call at stations along different lines.
1. Lincoln, Sleaford, Peterborough and London Kings Cross.
2. Lincoln, Newark North Gate, Grantham, Peterborough, Stevenage and London Kings Cross.
3. Lincoln, Nottingham, East Midlands Parkway (only some services), Leicester and London St Pancras.
Another train they could have could be a Lincoln-Plymouth calling at Lincoln, Nottingham, Leicester, Nuneaton, Birmingham New Street, Cheltenham Spa, Bristol Parkway, Bristol Temple Meeds, Taunton, Exeter St Davids, Newton Abbot and Plymouth.

 

[TheWalrus]

In regards to Lincoln my suggestion would be to merge Lincoln-Sheffield and Sheffield-Manchester giving direct services from Lincoln to Mnachester. Also have more regular London services either through the franchised operator or open access and extend Cardiff-Nottingham to Newark and Lincoln, giving direct links to Birmingham, Derby and beyond.

What, and have passengers sit on a Northern 142 for that length of time!? You've got to be mental (or just unlucky!) to travel on it just from Manchester to Sheffield at present, and its only every 2 hours for much of the day!

I didn't say anything about 142s obviously it would have to be after electrification and more long-distance DMUs would have been freed up. It would also have to be sped-up as like you say, they are stopping services at present so would probably need to cut stops if possible.

 

[Parallel]

How are Bath and Bristol badly connected?

I think Bath and Bristol were being added to the list of the links Salisbury has!

 

[Michael.Y]

Gloucester lost it's express services altogether. How this was allowed to happen I don't know.

It hasn't though, has it?

http://trains.im/location/GCR/2014/03/24//PAD
http://trains.im/location/PAD/2014/03/24//GCR

Alternate hours filled by connections at Swindon or Bristol Parkway.

 

[FQ]

I didn't say anything about 142s obviously it would have to be after electrification and more long-distance DMUs would have been freed up. It would also have to be sped-up as like you say, they are stopping services at present so would probably need to cut stops if possible.

Oh,
in that case it would be good to have Lincoln-Manchester trains but extend them to Liverpool.
If it isn't 142 or 144 then that is fine.

 

[merlodlliw]

St David's
St Asaph

Not so sure about St Asaph, no trains since the land cruises passed through,but an excellent bus service to Rhyl main line station,also the GHA X50/52 link it with Wrexhams huge hospital & town every hour.Lovely City/village,lived there for a few years in the late 60s/early 70s.

 

[sheff'd victoria]

In regards to Lincoln my suggestion would be to merge Lincoln-Sheffield and Sheffield-Manchester giving direct services from Lincoln to Mnachester. Also have more regular London services either through the franchised operator or open access and extend Cardiff-Nottingham to Newark and Lincoln, giving direct links to Birmingham, Derby and beyond.

The issue of the Lincoln service has come up in the Gainsborough Rail Action Plan comments http://grap.eavb.co.uk/