What prevents a better and more frequent service running between Birmingham, Sheffield and Leeds?

[rapmastaj]

If levelling up was anything more than a slogan, improving CrossCountry trains would be a very good place to start.

 

[modernrail]

If levelling up was anything more than a slogan, improving CrossCountry trains would be a very good place to start.

Exactly. The fact that MP’s along the route are not making that point very strongly is weird. Even more weird since HS2 has been reduced to pointless.

You would think the relevant MP’s of all colours would have been clamouring to be seen to say, right well the Gov has better massively improve CrossCountry to make up for the HS2 pull back. You would also have thought the last Government would have made immediate upgrading of CrossCountry as the most obvious, nosiest part of its network north plan. A version of it would be very easy to implement. Make sure all Ex Avanti voyagers are committed to Cross Country. Instead, silence. It is really poor.

This is of course particularly relevant to the Birmingham, Sheffield, Manchester, Leeds corridors.

 

[EveningStar]

Even though I'm based in Leeds, I avoid XC's Voyagers going towards Birmingham. Instead I go over to the North West and then get down to Birmingham with Avanti. Sure it takes longer but it sure is better than being rammed into a Voyager.

Likewise Newcastle to Worcester. Depending on price and time of day, Northern to Carlisle or TPE to Manchester and then AWC in some form, or even go LNER/GWR via London. Anything to avoid if possible a XC Voyager. Last decent XC journey in terms of comfort was a 47 plus 8 Derby to Newcastle in 2000.

 

[Flying Snail]

Likewise Newcastle to Worcester. Depending on price and time of day, Northern to Carlisle or TPE to Manchester and then AWC in some form, or even go LNER/GWR via London. Anything to avoid if possible a XC Voyager. Last decent XC journey in terms of comfort was a 47 plus 8 Derby to Newcastle in 2000.

I used to avoid Voyagers like the plague, then the 800s came along and the plague didn't seem so bad.

 

[quantinghome]

For me it all comes down to seats per hour. It's worth comparing the Leeds-Birmingham corridor with Leeds-Manchester in that regard. The latter for all its faults has seen significant increases with new rolling stock, whereas Leeds-Birmingham seems completely stuck. Leeds - Manchester will have around 1200 seat per hour come the December timetable, while Leeds - Birmingham will have 200 to 250 for a non-doubled-up XC set. Just rubbish.

There are significant constraints on the route, particularly between Leeds and Sheffield - the Leeds-Wakefield route has a nasty mix of stopping and intercity trains which kills capacity, and the north of Sheffield station has a lot of local services and only two tracks. However there may be room to fit a flighted XC service in.

The immediate and obvious solution is increasing train lengths and the DfT should stop faffing around, frankly. They're paying for additional stock on other lines, so why not this one? 2x5-car gives 500 seats an hour which puts the service in a much better position.

But considering the size of cities on the route, this is nowhere near sufficient. The next step should be to run a shuttle, Leeds-Birmingham-Leeds, every hour. The current XC is flighted with the LNER service from Leeds, so do the same with the other LNER service. With the service via Doncaster this gives us three XC per hour between Sheffield and Birmingham. Make one of them a stopping service and the others Sheffield-Derby-Birmingham only. Now we're up to 800-1000 seats per hour which has the makings of a proper intercity service. It would still be numbingly slow at 2 hours, but at least the capacity would be there. Platform capacity at Leeds and Birmingham might be the killer though.

 

[YorksLad12]

But considering the size of cities on the route, this is nowhere near sufficient. The next step should be to run a shuttle, Leeds-Birmingham-Leeds, every hour. The current XC is flighted with the LNER service from Leeds, so do the same with the other LNER service. With the service via Doncaster this gives us three XC per hour between Sheffield and Birmingham. Make one of them a stopping service and the others Sheffield-Derby-Birmingham only. Now we're up to 800-1000 seats per hour which has the makings of a proper intercity service. It would still be numbingly slow at 2 hours, but at least the capacity would be there. Platform capacity at Leeds and Birmingham might be the killer though.

Apart from there being no room for a terminating service at Leeds (nor Birmingham, I suspect), we're still trying to fit in the Leeds-Sheffield fast Northern service via Wakefield Westgate, which is contingent on the east coast timetable being sorted (and Northern finding two units and staff, and there being platform space at Leeds and Sheffield).

I did think of a Derby-Sheffield-Leeds-York service. I might have miscounted, but if TPE have reverted to four fasts from Leeds to Manchester there should be a spare path from Leeds to York (unless the Church Fenton-York section is being used by the hourly Manchester-Huddersfield-Wakefield-Castleford-York service).

Ultimately, if XC could run 8- or 9-car sets as standard, as single units (so not a 4+4 or 4+5 Voyager, which means you don't have to worry about needing staff in the rear set), that would do for me. There'd be an immediate increase in seats on most sets, SDO to worry about either (assuming not an 80x set if you wanted 9 cars).

 

[dodecahedron67]

Apart from there being no room for a terminating service at Leeds (nor Birmingham, I suspect), we're still trying to fit in the Leeds-Sheffield fast Northern service via Wakefield Westgate, which is contingent on the east coast timetable being sorted (and Northern finding two units and staff, and there being platform space at Leeds and Sheffield).

I did think of a Derby-Sheffield-Leeds-York service. I might have miscounted, but if TPE have reverted to four fasts from Leeds to Manchester there should be a spare path from Leeds to York (unless the Church Fenton-York section is being used by the hourly Manchester-Huddersfield-Wakefield-Castleford-York service).

Ultimately, if XC could run 8- or 9-car sets as standard, as single units (so not a 4+4 or 4+5 Voyager, which means you don't have to worry about needing staff in the rear set), that would do for me. There'd be an immediate increase in seats on most sets, SDO to worry about either (assuming not an 80x set if you wanted 9 cars).

There is a spare path XX40 York to Leeds arr XX 06 and XX23 (I think) Leeds to York arr XX50, as well as the XX36 path used some hours by Northern/XC odd extras
Neither of these are used between Colton and Leeds

 

[modernrail]

Apart from there being no room for a terminating service at Leeds (nor Birmingham, I suspect), we're still trying to fit in the Leeds-Sheffield fast Northern service via Wakefield Westgate, which is contingent on the east coast timetable being sorted (and Northern finding two units and staff, and there being platform space at Leeds and Sheffield).

I did think of a Derby-Sheffield-Leeds-York service. I might have miscounted, but if TPE have reverted to four fasts from Leeds to Manchester there should be a spare path from Leeds to York (unless the Church Fenton-York section is being used by the hourly Manchester-Huddersfield-Wakefield-Castleford-York service).

Ultimately, if XC could run 8- or 9-car sets as standard, as single units (so not a 4+4 or 4+5 Voyager, which means you don't have to worry about needing staff in the rear set), that would do for me. There'd be an immediate increase in seats on most sets, SDO to worry about either (assuming not an 80x set if you wanted 9 cars).

I would personally like to see Northern drop the Nottingham service and a new Cross Country service be created using that path, ideally Peterborough to Leicester, Nottingham, Sheffield, Wakefield, Leeds, Bradford- with proper length trains (min 5 cars).

That is the sort of service that would create proper new express connectivity in the midlands and the north.

 

[liamf656]

I would personally like to see Northern drop the Nottingham service and a new Cross Country service be created using that path, ideally Peterborough to Leicester, Nottingham, Sheffield, Wakefield, Leeds, Bradford- with proper length trains (min 5 cars).

That is the sort of service that would create proper new express connectivity in the midlands and the north.

I can't imagine anyone would want to use whats essentially 4 local services bolted together. Each route has its respective flow and they work well separately. Peterborough to Sheffield, people will just use EMR as its quicker. As well, it wouldn't be busy enough for 5 cars. With three reversals, timekeeping would be a bit of an issue too. If it ain't broke don't try to fix it

 

[BrianW]

Exactly. The fact that MP’s along the route are not making that point very strongly is weird. Even more weird since HS2 has been reduced to pointless.

You would think the relevant MP’s of all colours would have been clamouring to be seen to say, right well the Gov has better massively improve CrossCountry to make up for the HS2 pull back. You would also have thought the last Government would have made immediate upgrading of CrossCountry as the most obvious, nosiest part of its network north plan. A version of it would be very easy to implement. Make sure all Ex Avanti voyagers are committed to Cross Country. Instead, silence. It is really poor.

This is of course particularly relevant to the Birmingham, Sheffield, Manchester, Leeds corridors.

Who's in charge'? Dither and delay were perhaps more understandable when the Transport Secretary was the MP for Forest of Dean, and the Rail Minister MP for Bexhill. Who 'controls' DfT? Loise Haigh is the MP for Sheffield Heeley, and Baron Hendy is in the House of Lords. So who's 'not clamouring?' Anyone speaking for Notwork North?

 

[plugwash]

I think crosscountry has a few major issues.

1. The voyagers make really inefficient use of space. A 4 car voyager is effectively a 3 car train.
2. The length and nature of the routes means you have trains that are overcrowded on some sections of their route, but relatively empty towards the ends. This reduces the "bang per buck" of additional rolling stock. It's hard to run longer trains in the peak's because virtually every train they run will be "in the peaks" somewhere along it's route.
3. They don't go to or from London, where the politicians work. Nor do they serve a single area that politicians may want to curry favour with.

 

[A S Leib]

1. The voyagers make really inefficient use of space. A 4 car voyager is effectively a 3 car train.

4-carriage 220s have an average of 50 seats per carriage; 9-carriage 390s have an average of 52 (but 65 for 5-carriage 800s).

Nor do they serve a single area that politicians may want to curry favour with.

I think the Conservatives winning places like North West Durham in 2019 then Labour currently holding seats like South Norfolk at least might make it less likely that parties try to appeal to the same small number of marginal constituencies. On the other hand, I don't think the South West or Wales have had anything close to Northern Powerhouse / Levelling Up promises – fulfilled or unfulfilled – yet.

 

[Dr Day]

I think crosscountry has a few major issues.

1. The voyagers make really inefficient use of space. A 4 car voyager is effectively a 3 car train.
2. The length and nature of the routes means you have trains that are overcrowded on some sections of their route, but relatively empty towards the ends. This reduces the "bang per buck" of additional rolling stock. It's hard to run longer trains in the peak's because virtually every train they run will be "in the peaks" somewhere along it's route.
3. They don't go to or from London, where the politicians work. Nor do they serve a single area that politicians may want to curry favour with.

A combination of these and other factors presumably mean that the additional revenue generated doesn’t outweigh the additional costs of supplying the extra capacity, hence neither the DfT/Treasury nor the private sector before them have been persuaded to fund anything.

 

[Topological]

Economically, CrossCountry fortunes hinge on what happens with Bristol/Cardiff. Taking the major agglomerations the link between Manchester and Birmingham is going to HS2, the Manchester to Reading/West London switches to HS2 via OOC, Leeds will potentially gain from HS2 eventually. That really leaves Bristol and the South West as the only part of the network unlikely to see investment.

Given the a chord from HS2 onto the Birmigham to Derby line is workable, the easier political win for the East Midlands is to build a chord.

A question then relating to this thread is whether there is scope for some marginal improvements that would help HS2 trains through Sheffield to Leeds before the trains themselves come. It is not the way we tend to do things in the UK though.

Political games will always be played on the TransPennine routes (rightly or wrongly) as they are associated with being Northern, being post-industrial and being the "Red Wall".

 

[WAO]

I'm still inclined to think that some TP's should branch off at Stalybridge for Stockport and so on to B'ham. Yes the route is hybrid at the moment etc but I imagine that many TP passengers might actually prefer direct South Manchester arrivals as they are in the most prosperous parts of the region. It could relieve Castlefield a little and might even justify the Denton line!

WAO

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Manchester to Birmingham could be run with EMU to allow the voyagers saved to double up, but then you do have constraints accommodating the split services terminating in Birmingham New Street.

Would there be capacity to terminate them at Birmingham International?

Option A: improve service in 10+ years with new line, Option B: restore missing XC services now - with chump change from what Option A would've cost.

But option B (restoring the missing XC services) still leaves the problem that the journey is ridiculously slow, whereas option A (reinstate the HS2 Eastern leg) would solve that nicely. Would probably take more than 10 years though from its current scrapped state. Ideally you'd do both, but... ££££

DfT have been told to cut spending and the leasing companies won't drop their prices. So rolling stock remains unused in sidings and the routes with the least political clout end up with short trains.

Is that really the case? Seems a bit odd if it is, since you'd think it'd be better for the leasing companies to lease any spare stock at a price the DfT are willing to pay rather than have it sitting in the sidings earning them nothing.

 

[The Planner]

Would there be capacity to terminate them at Birmingham International?

No.

 

[WAO]

... then why not run them through as a service to say Worcester - the Crosscity principle?

 

[Halish Railway]

Are there any infrastructure issues that prevent 10 car voyagers (for example)?

Chesterfield can only accommodate 9 vehicles, so the rear coach of a 10 car working needs to locked out of use given the lack of selective door opening (If the doors are manually unlocked they need a maintenance key to unlock them). It certainly is possible to have a 10 car working on Edinburgh to Plymouth workings and it has happened many times in the past, however, it is a poor use of resources given that one of the 5 carriage units could have been used to lengthen a 4 car working to 5 car or a 4/8 car working to 9 carriages.

It would be good if there was investment in CrossCountry and/or the fixes needed to allow splitting of some routes.

The most significant investment that would benefit the CrossCountry routes is the Midland Rail Hub, specifically the Bordesley Chords and expansion of Moor Street, facilitating a planned additional 2tph to Leicester (Totalling 2tph New Street to Peterborough and beyond and 2tph Moor Street to Leicester), 1tph to Cardiff and Bristol (also calling at Bromsgrove, Worcestershire Parkway and Ashchurch).

I would personally like to see Northern drop the Nottingham service and a new Cross Country service be created using that path, ideally Peterborough to Leicester, Nottingham, Sheffield, Wakefield, Leeds, Bradford- with proper length trains (min 5 cars).

That is the sort of service that would create proper new express connectivity in the midlands and the north.

Or revive the ancient Midland Mainline plan of extending London to Sheffield services to Leeds throughout the day. This would require additional 810s of course.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

... then why not run them through as a service to say Worcester - the Crosscity principle?

But the obvious route to do that (Manchester-Wolverhampton-New Street-Worcester via CrossCity line) involves a reversal at New Street, which is probably not much better than terminating there. I'm not sure if it's possible to avoid that using the Camp Hill line? But either way you also have capacity on the single track section between Worcester and Droitwich to contend with.

EDIT: Another thought occurs to me: There is one tph Shrewsbury-Birmingham via Smethwick that I think currently terminates at New Street. Would it be possible to combine that with the New Street-Camp Hill-King's Norton services when they start, so that's fewer trains terminating? I'm wondering if that could free up capacity at New Street for a new hourly Manchester-Birmingham EMU service to terminate (which recall was suggested as a way to free up XC stock to improve Birmingham-Leeds capacity).

 

[The Planner]

But the obvious route to do that (Manchester-Wolverhampton-New Street-Worcester via CrossCity line) involves a reversal at New Street, which is probably not much better than terminating there. I'm not sure if it's possible to avoid that using the Camp Hill line? But either way you also have capacity on the single track section between Worcester and Droitwich to contend with.

EDIT: Another thought occurs to me: There is one tph Shrewsbury-Birmingham via Smethwick that I think currently terminates at New Street. Would it be possible to combine that with the New Street-Camp Hill-King's Norton services when they start, so that's fewer trains terminating? I'm wondering if that could free up capacity at New Street for a new hourly Manchester-Birmingham EMU service to terminate (which recall was suggested as a way to free up XC stock to improve Birmingham-Leeds capacity).

The paths don't match, the Shrewsbury arrives xx.00, the Camp Hill departs xx.57 southbound, You need an 8 minute dwell northbound in a middle platform, which neither service stops in.

 

[WAO]

Point taken about Worcester but there are other destinations without reversal. The principle is to avoid terminating at busy central stations, with attendant layovers, platform occupations etc, as exampled elsewhere.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The paths don't match, the Shrewsbury arrives xx.00, the Camp Hill departs xx.57 southbound, You need an 8 minute dwell northbound in a middle platform, which neither service stops in.

Well I was assuming you'd want some rejigging of the timetable to allow such a change The point was, whether in principle you could free capacity at New Street by matching services that terminate from the West with services that terminate from the East

Point taken about Worcester but there are other destinations without reversal. The principle is to avoid terminating at busy central stations, with attendant layovers, platform occupations etc, as exampled elsewhere.

Actually not many destinations if the point is to run an EMU from Manchester - because you can only go on the lines that are electrified. That basically restricts you to Birmingham International/Coventry/Rugby/the WCML South (or the line to Lichfield - can't see that working ).

Perhaps you could do it by extending an Avanti Euston-Birmingham to Manchester if there's any spare stock? (Which also removes another terminator from New Street)

 

[swt_passenger]

As is usual, most suggestions seem to ignore intermediate journeys between Bournemouth and New Street, such as to from Oxford, Banbury or Leamington. They won’t easily transfer to HS2. I‘m not convinced south coast to Birmingham via a change at Old Oak Common will be much better than the existing route, but opinions vary.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

As is usual, most suggestions seem to ignore intermediate journeys between Bournemouth and New Street, such as to from Oxford, Banbury or Leamington. They won’t easily transfer to HS2. I‘m not convinced south coast to Birmingham via a change at Old Oak Common will be much better than the existing route, but opinions vary.

I don't believe HS2 will prevent those intermediate journeys from happening. There will still be slower trains such as Bournemouth-New Street. But - assuming HS2 does eventually make it to the North - people travelling very long distances are more likely to swap to HS2, possibly leaving more capacity for people making shorter journeys such as Birmingham to Oxford.

 

[swt_passenger]

I don't believe HS2 will prevent those intermediate journeys from happening. There will still be slower trains such as Bournemouth-New Street. But - assuming HS2 does eventually make it to the North - people travelling very long distances are more likely to swap to HS2, possibly leaving more capacity for people making shorter journeys such as Birmingham to Oxford.

Yes what I meant I suppose was the suggestion that nobody would be running them. Clearly if terminating at New St, (if that work), they could be operated by the future replacements for either GWR or SWR, but I think they’re still part of the debate.

 

[AndrewE]

Point taken about Worcester but there are other destinations without reversal. The principle is to avoid terminating at busy central stations, with attendant layovers, platform occupations etc, as exampled elsewhere.

so make them the simple NE to Brum shuttle, but going in to New St and head-on out the other end.
There are lines to accommodate almost any journey requirement...

p.s. not quite any journey, by the look of it, but a chord across what looks like ex-gasworks land at Saltley to connect Aston to Bromford Bridge/Water Orton should do the trick... (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Saltley,+Birmingham/@52.5007599,-1.8576269,1131m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x4870bae4cbf6d879:0x6d1f0fb079326eb9!8m2!3d52.4933803!4d-1.8530914!16zL20vMGMzZ2s5?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MTEyNC4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw==)

pps I have just realised that it is possible (without using the Lifford Curve) by going out northbound to Bescot then via Walsall and Sutton Park.

 

[Topological]

Do the Camp Hill aspirations prevent a Reading to Moor Street service? There is still spare land for platforms at Moor Street. The assumption of using New Street to terminate could be relaxed. I appreciate onward journey issues etc.

We are drifting away from Birmingham to Leeds via Sheffield, but the nature of the CrossCountry beast makes everything interconnected.

 

[Halish Railway]

Do the Camp Hill aspirations prevent a Reading to Moor Street service? There is still spare land for platforms at Moor Street. The assumption of using New Street to terminate could be relaxed. I appreciate onward journey issues etc.

We are drifting away from Birmingham to Leeds via Sheffield, but the nature of the CrossCountry beast makes everything interconnected.

There was talk of an additional Moor Street to Oxford Chiltern service. That could easily work by increasing the weekdays Moor Street to Leamington service to hourly and extending it to Oxford.

 

[The Planner]

Do the Camp Hill aspirations prevent a Reading to Moor Street service? There is still spare land for platforms at Moor Street. The assumption of using New Street to terminate could be relaxed. I appreciate onward journey issues etc.

We are drifting away from Birmingham to Leeds via Sheffield, but the nature of the CrossCountry beast makes everything interconnected.

You could do Reading Moor St now. The chords make no difference.

There was talk of an additional Moor Street to Oxford Chiltern service. That could easily work by increasing the weekdays Moor Street to Leamington service to hourly and extending it to Oxford.

Bit pointless when the Reading is right behind it at Leamington.