Worries over changes to Scarborough's train services

[peter.rabbit]

Removal of the TPE Scarboroughs would have the benefit of increasing platform capacity at York as any shuttles could use the little-used platform 2 - currently there's a difficult manoeuvre when TPE's cross the ECML to get from the Leeds lines towards Scarborough.

 

[northwichcat]

Removal of the TPE Scarboroughs would have the benefit of increasing platform capacity at York as any shuttles could use the little-used platform 2 - currently there's a difficult manoeuvre when TPE's cross the ECML to get from the Leeds lines towards Scarborough.

A shuttle is one option listed and from what I understand it's plan B with plan A being to tag York-Scarborough on to Blackpool-York.

 

[anti-pacer]

How about TPE taking over the Blackpool-York route and extending it to Scarborough, using 185's?

This way a DMU is running a minimal "under the wires" distance, whilst giving what is essentially a Trans-Pennine route more modern stock.

I'm not sure of the diagram issues or even stock availabilities, but this would mean Scarborough retains a decent link with the stock they've become used to.

Connecting with Manchester and Liverpool is irrelevant if the through loadings are minimal, but I think the main issue here is the prospect of them getting older, lower quality trains.

Great Yarmouth doesn't have through trains beyond Norwich as far as I'm aware, Skegness has a slow 156/8 service to Nottingham, and Blackpool which is much bigger than Scarborough doesn't even have a direct link to London. Therefore cutting Scarborough off from direct trains to Manchester and Liverpool seems fair enough.

I personally think that my proposal, however feasible, would go down pretty well in Scarborough.

 

[NorthernSpirit]

The only other way to do it would be to have a Leeds - Scarborough, Scarborough - York, York - Scarborough, Scarborough - Leeds diagram, similar to what currently happens on the Pontefract Line.

Unitwise I still think the diesel Networkers should be used, and I am think more of capacity what with them being 3+2 seat 3 car units.

 

[northwichcat]

anti-pacer you may want to find out where the other 20% of Scarborough passengers go to before making a comment like that. If 5% go to Manchester and then change to another train then a good connection to Manchester would be just as important as a link to Hull.

 

[YorkshireRider]

The only other way to do it would be to have a Leeds - Scarborough, Scarborough - York, York - Scarborough, Scarborough - Leeds diagram, similar to what currently happens on the Pontefract Line.
.

I suppose if they did it that way platforms 7 and 14 could be used at Leeds, they get little use at the moment. Could actually free some platform space up

 

[anti-pacer]

If keeping a Manchester link is so vital, but the DfT don't want it going under the wires for too long, this could be a solution.

Keep it TPE and use 185's, and run it this way...

Scarborough-Seamer-Malton-York-Leeds-Bradford Int-Halifax-Hebden Bridge-Rochdale-Manchester Victoria.

Anybody who wants to change for faster services to Manchester and the airport could do so at York or Leeds, but those who wanted to stay on could also do so.

This would also provide a faster, higher quality service on the Calder Valley line, with non-stop trains between Leeds and Bradford, and less stops between Halifax and Manchester.

 

[Philip]

Why is it so essential to have modern rolling stock running TransPennine services? A 3-car 185 with FC would be a big reduction in capacity compared to a 3-car 158 and is probably about the same as a 2-car version. I don't think FC is really essential either on the Calder Valley services. Why not just look at the ATW example and give the 158s a thorough refurbishment to give them a modern interior decor?

 

[Haydn1971]

Why is it so essential to have modern rolling stock running TransPennine services?

Several reasons
1, Door position on the 185's allows for shorter platform dwell times
2, Performance of new power units vs old
3, TPE is marketed as a premium service to encourage intermediate distance travellers to transfer from car to rail - which has been successful
4, 15x type units don't get refurbished to a higher standard as a new unit, the travelling passengers aren't stupid enough to accept the nonsense peddled about refurbishment when it's the same train with a new fabric cover and new carpets
5, 15x aren't compliant with 2020 standards for disabilities in terms of such fundamentals as passenger displays and toilets
6, 15x can't go on forever and will at some point need to be replaced, starting early with the 185 was a positive step along that line
7, New trains allow higher fares (good for the TOC)
8, A large single consistent fleet makes for less troublesome fleet management at the start/end of each day and makes maintenance seamless as oddball larger units don't create operational gaps in your service when missing
9, insert one of 100 other reasons I've not thought about

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Why is it so essential to have modern rolling stock running TransPennine services? A 3-car 185 with FC would be a big reduction in capacity compared to a 3-car 158 and is probably about the same as a 2-car version. I don't think FC is really essential either on the Calder Valley services. Why not just look at the ATW example and give the 158s a thorough refurbishment to give them a modern interior decor?

Just to enter the debate about the Class 185 units where you make a comment about First Class in your quote above, having made a considerable number of journeys from Wilmslow to Shrewsbury, Ludlow, Hereford and points to the south of them on the Class 175 units (both 2-car and 3-car) of ATW in the only available option of standard class, and even more journeys from Manchester Airport to York and Durham on the Class 185 units of First TPE in the first class section, can you realise why my wife and I make this choice when it is made available to us ?

We have used Class 185 units when they have been diverted in the past through Rochdale and Hebden Bridge and found that route through the Calder Valley quite acceptable and indeed most enjoyable.

 

[Philip]

Several reasons
1, Door position on the 185's allows for shorter platform dwell times
2, Performance of new power units vs old
3, TPE is marketed as a premium service to encourage intermediate distance travellers to transfer from car to rail - which has been successful
4, 15x type units don't get refurbished to a higher standard as a new unit, the travelling passengers aren't stupid enough to accept the nonsense peddled about refurbishment when it's the same train with a new fabric cover and new carpets
5, 15x aren't compliant with 2020 standards for disabilities in terms of such fundamentals as passenger displays and toilets
6, 15x can't go on forever and will at some point need to be replaced, starting early with the 185 was a positive step along that line
7, New trains allow higher fares (good for the TOC)
8, A large single consistent fleet makes for less troublesome fleet management at the start/end of each day and makes maintenance seamless as oddball larger units don't create operational gaps in your service when missing
9, insert one of 100 other reasons I've not thought about

But those reasons apply for most routes. The talk is of 185s spreading their wings further south towards Nottingham and possibly Norwich, so would it not make more sense to use the cascaded 158s from this area to strengthen the existing 158 fleet on the Calder Valley?

 

[northwichcat]

If keeping a Manchester link is so vital, but the DfT don't want it going under the wires for too long, this could be a solution.

Keep it TPE and use 185's, and run it this way...

Scarborough-Seamer-Malton-York-Leeds-Bradford Int-Halifax-Hebden Bridge-Rochdale-Manchester Victoria.

Like I said you need to look at exactly where the other 20% from Scarborough go to. (I don't think that information is publicly available though.) Only 2% from Scarborough end journeys in Manchester, if 3% from Scarborough end journeys at stations which involve a change at Manchester Piccadilly and don't have a direct service from Manchester Victoria then good connections to service to/from Manchester Piccadilly would prove more useful than a direct service to Manchester Victoria.

It's also worth estimating how many people split tickets when travelling to/from Scarborough.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But those reasons apply for most routes. The talk is of 185s spreading their wings further south towards Nottingham and possibly Norwich, so would it not make more sense to use the cascaded 158s from this area to strengthen the existing 158 fleet on the Calder Valley?

The proposed new South TPE (which might be Liverpool-Doncaster-Hull) and Liverpool-Nottingham, together with possibly an additional Manchester-Sheffield service all using the same type of rolling stock and being in the same franchise will mean all services have the same standard of rolling stock. Currently you can go First Class from Liverpool to Sheffield but only if you use TPE and change at Manchester.

I think by the time 158s will be released from Liverpool-Nottingham it'll be December 2018 (or later if North TPE electrification gets delayed) by which time the rolling stock owners will have making any non-compliant Sprinters properly accessible will be a high priority and starting to withdraw Pacers will come in to play.

 

[David Barrett]

But those reasons apply for most routes. The talk is of 185s spreading their wings further south towards Nottingham and possibly Norwich, so would it not make more sense to use the cascaded 158s from this area to strengthen the existing 158 fleet on the Calder Valley?

The Norwich element is scarcely a possibility as the DfT have discussed splitting the Norwich-Liverpool services at Nottingham in order to transfer the Liverpool section to Trans Pennine. This split would also suit the projected future workings after MML & Hope Valley Electrifications as would the truncation of certain TP routes post electrification. Messing about with diesels on the Liverpool route is an unnecessary move and no more than a pack shuffling exercise, far better to design a service suited to electric traction as and when rolling stock and wiring are available for use. In my view, and this goes for all of the TP related options in the DfT consultation document, leave everything well alone until electrification. In the event of the electric service being an advance over all which has gone before, a change of trains using the 185s as feeders from those parts of the periphery destined to remain diesel worked might just be a saleable product.

 

[northwichcat]

The Norwich element is scarcely a possibility as the DfT have discussed splitting the Norwich-Liverpool services at Nottingham in order to transfer the Liverpool section to Trans Pennine. This split would also suit the projected future workings after MML & Hope Valley Electrifications as would the truncation of certain TP routes post electrification. Messing about with diesels on the Liverpool route is an unnecessary move and no more than a pack shuffling exercise, far better to design a service suited to electric traction as and when rolling stock and wiring are available for use. In my view, and this goes for all of the TP related options in the DfT consultation document, leave everything well alone until electrification. In the event of the electric service being an advance over all which has gone before, a change of trains using the 185s as feeders from those parts of the periphery destined to remain diesel worked might just be a saleable product.

I suspect DfT are looking at options for wiring and DMU cascades to replace Sprinters in the future and see Liverpool-Nottingham and Liverpool-Sheffield-Hull as suitable options for switching to electric and using 185s in the short term. It's an easier option to change routes when franchises are re-let than to do it mid-franchise (as with TPE and Scottish services.)

 

[fireftrm]

I would love to see a 1/2 hourly service, but whatever happens it cannot be worse than it becoming a Northern run one. They are the absolute pits.

 

[Hebden Bridger]

You have to question how many of the 20% 'other' means stations which involve using a Manchester or London train.

Yes, but if the figure was significant and affected the conclusions to be drawn then it should be mentioned as a footnote or in the text - unless of course you suspect the DfT are trying to hide something.

 

[northwichcat]

Yes, but if the figure was significant and affected the conclusions to be drawn then it should be mentioned as a footnote or in the text - unless of course you suspect the DfT are trying to hide something.

As they support a half-hourly York-Manchester Airport electric service and a half-hourly Newcastle-Liverpool electric service why would they possibly have anything to hide relating to Scarborough or Middlesbrough?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why is it so essential to have modern rolling stock running TransPennine services? A 3-car 185 with FC would be a big reduction in capacity compared to a 3-car 158 and is probably about the same as a 2-car version. I don't think FC is really essential either on the Calder Valley services. Why not just look at the ATW example and give the 158s a thorough refurbishment to give them a modern interior decor?

I'm sure they'll be people on EMT 158s tomorrow wishing they were on 185s given the reliability of the air-conditioning on 158s and the forecast being for temperatures between 27 and 32oC in main towns and cities on the Liverpool-Norwich route.

 

[David Barrett]

I'm sure they'll be people on EMT 158s tomorrow wishing they were on 185s given the reliability of the air-conditioning on 158s and the forecast being for temperatures between 27 and 32oC in main towns and cities on the Liverpool-Norwich route.

And former 158 users currently on 185s knowing what may be coming to a station near them in the not too distant future.

 

[Bullfield WEst]

They probably wait until Saturday for 1F05 EM the 0856 St Pancras International to Scarborough

 

[Oscar]

I agree that the branch deserves a half-hourly service between York and Scarborough and a regular direct service to/from Leeds is highly desirable. Given the relatively small number of passengers making journeys to/from the North West, providing good connections is probably more sensible. Ideally there should be connections leaving York for London, Newcastle/Scotland and Manchester (and other destinations) within about 5-10 minutes of the Scarborough train arriving, with the same happening in the reverse direction (as a Takt timetable would provide).

 

[scarby]

I agree that the branch deserves a half-hourly service between York and Scarborough and a regular direct service to/from Leeds is highly desirable. Given the relatively small number of passengers making journeys to/from the North West, providing good connections is probably more sensible. Ideally there should be connections leaving York for London, Newcastle/Scotland and Manchester (and other destinations) within about 5-10 minutes of the Scarborough train arriving, with the same happening in the reverse direction (as a Takt timetable would provide).

I'm afraid I find the currently service totally inadequate. As you state, it's often poor for connections (particularly Cross Country services, with a tendency to arrive in York just as a southband service is departing/has departed).

The second issue is I've lost count of the time I have spent on York station after being delayed on an incoming service and I have narrowly missed the connection from York. Just the other week I had to spend 70 minutes at York after my Cross Country train missed the intended connection to Scarborough by 10 minutes and I had to catch the 22.00 instead of the 20.40.

Finally the whole service is prone to frequent delays, not caused on the York-Scarborough stretch itself but by any problems that occur/accumulate on the Liverpool-York section. In the end it's Scarborough passengers that can bear the brunt of this, as if a train is delayed/cancelled, there aren't alternative services serving the same stretch as with York-Leeds, Leeds-Manchester, etc.

So while some local politicians seem up in arms about the possible loss of through trains, I'd much prefer a half-hourly, reliable Scarborough-York shuttle, even if it was operated with inferior stock.

 

[Class 170101]

Just the other week I had to spend 70 minutes at York after my Cross Country train missed the intended connection to Scarborough by 10 minutes and I had to catch the 22.00 instead of the 20.40.

I can't believe thats much of a hardship these days - just go to the Tap.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I agree that the branch deserves a half-hourly service between York and Scarborough and a regular direct service to/from Leeds is highly desirable. Given the relatively small number of passengers making journeys to/from the North West, providing good connections is probably more sensible. Ideally there should be connections leaving York for London, Newcastle/Scotland and Manchester (and other destinations) within about 5-10 minutes of the Scarborough train arriving, with the same happening in the reverse direction (as a Takt timetable would provide).

You wouldn't want trains terminating at Leeds from the east if it can be avoided. As I check my Quail Map and confirm there isn't much terminating capacity from this directions at Leeds, two bay platforms, and I believe that there was a suggestion to make the 13/14 bay platforms into one through platform which leaves one east facing bay left.

It should also be pointed out that just because the populus of Scarborough apparently don't wish to travel beyond Leeds that the populus of York would not. All these little shuttle services running east to west across the country is silly in the extreme just to protect performance and apparently to make best use of the electrification. Next we will be saying that XC between Plymouth and Edinburgh should be split at Derby, Sheffield and York because it doesn't make best use of the wires existing and forthcoming.

 

[Oscar]

What's the point of electrification if we don't make use of it? I don't suggest that the Scarborough - Leeds service should necessarily terminate there, there's no reason it couldn't be joined to another service such as a Manchester Victoria or Blackpool service. If most passengers don't travel the full length of long distance through services and there is a high turn-over in one place, splitting the service there can sometimes be sensible if there are operational benefits. Sometimes through services limit connectivity. For example, If a Newark - London path is used for a through Lincoln service, this provides lower frequencies and capacity overall than running to/from somewhere further north and providing efficient connectives at Newark North Gate.

 

[Starmill]

It should also be pointed out that just because the populus of Scarborough apparently don't wish to travel beyond Leeds that the populus of York would not. All these little shuttle services running east to west across the country is silly in the extreme just to protect performance and apparently to make best use of the electrification. Next we will be saying that XC between Plymouth and Edinburgh should be split at Derby, Sheffield and York because it doesn't make best use of the wires existing and forthcoming.

I don't know, I've always thought that Manchester to Coventry is such a long way to run a very expensive diesel train under the wires that the benefit of using an EMU might almost exceed the cost of the loss of direct trains from points north of Birmingham to Oxford, Reading, Basingstoke and Southampton (and it it were me, I wouldn't consider XC for Manchester - Basingstoke or Southampton but go via London!).

But it'd be a moot point, because the electric spine should plug the relatively short gap, depending on what happens to Basingstoke - Southampton.

 

[21C101]

One advantage of a local "shuttle" service would be that it would be easier to reopen Haxby. I think to make it acceptable it would need to be a half hourly service operated by class 158s or equivalent and at least one through IC125 services to London a day as well.

The most sensible service to join it to would seem to me to be the Leeds to York via Harrogate.

This would give a through Harrogate to Scarborough service and those not particularly mobile who dont want to change even if the journey is longer, could also use it from Scarborough to Leeds.

Either way, they won't get away with just turning it into an hourly branch line with the sage of Effingham residing nearby.

 

[Oscar]

One advantage of a local "shuttle" service would be that it would be easier to reopen Haxby. I think to make it acceptable it would need to be a half hourly service operated by class 158s or equivalent and at least one through IC125 services to London a day as well.

Quite possibly, though much of Haxby would still be quite a walk from the station and this would still lengthen journey times to/from Scarborough.

The most sensible service to join it to would seem to me to be the Leeds to York via Harrogate.

What about platform at York? A Scarborough to Harrogate service would have to reverse on platform 3 or 5. These services are normally required for longer distance services. These platforms probably be required simultaneously by ECML trains and platforms further west by TransPennine services if good connections to/from Scarborough are to be provided.

 

[scarby]

I can't believe thats much of a hardship these days - just go to the Tap.

Oh... caught red-handed.

 

[IanXC]

Quite possibly, though much of Haxby would still be quite a walk from the station and this would still lengthen journey times to/from Scarborough.

It wouldn't be an increase to the current timing. The Haxby project includes line speed works to ensure the overall journey time from York to Malton does not increase. Also its my understanding that the line has Sprinter differentials so there may be a time gain from that too if 158s were to be used.

 

[blackfive460]

Also its my understanding that the line has Sprinter differentials so there may be a time gain from that too if 158s were to be used.

That's correct. 158s and other lighter units can run at 90 while 185s, loco and coaches and presumably HSTs for any through London services are limited to 75.

 

[Class 170101]

HSTs may be able to use Sprinter Differentials. I have seen situations where this happens.