West Coast Partnership Franchise

[D854_Tiger]

The invitation to bid for this franchise is to be published shortly, a franchise that will cover the existing WCML franchise and oversee the introduction of HS2 services.

 

I heard a rumour today, from I believe someone who should know, that the invitation for the existing WCML will include proposals for new additional services (no surprise there).

 

Specifically an increase in the Liverpool frequency to half hourly and an increase in the Lancaster/Carlisle/Glasgow frequency (destination depending on time of day) also to half hourly, with a consequent speed up of the existing Glasgow trains by making fewer stops (notably non-stop Preston to Carlisle). Also a 100% Pendolino London - West Midlands - Scotland timetable.

 

The new services also to cover Trent Valley stops throughout the day, with Nuneaton hourly and Tamworth/Lichfield bi-hourly.

 

The additional Pendolino trains to be obtained by plundering the two per hour Birmingham terminating services, which will be replaced by either new trains or existing trains (which not specified).

 

Options include new all electric IEPs, other new trains (to be specified by the bidder) or transfer of IC225 class 91 push pull sets. Also extension of one or both of the existing Birmingham terminating trains to Wolverhampton every hour.

 

My informant sounded plausible (though I don't really know him) and certainly the proposals sound highly likely - doesn't stop it being complete b*****s of course.

 

But I thought hey let's put it out there and see if anyone can confirm or knows better.

[nightstar.train]

I’m not in the know but is the London to Birmingham stretch sufficiently straight to allow 125mph without tilt? I don’t think there’s a snowballs chance of the Mk4 sets being tilt fitted at this stage of their lives. And it’s not an option on the IEP. And I assume that swapping some Birmingham services to 110mph would completely stuff the timetable.

 

As a Glaswegian I applauded our services to the big smoke going half hourly, and doing away with those noisey voyager things.

[caradoc]

Sounds like some interesting ideas there. Liverpool certainly deserves a half-hourly London service, Nuneaton is currently very poorly served by Virgin, and as a fellow Glaswegian I also support improved services to Scotland. One thing I would like to see is the odd additional stop on the Glasgow/Euston services between Warrington BQ and Euston; If every other train stopped at say Rugby or Milton Keynes, this would provide better connectional opportunities than are currently provided by the 'via Birmingham' trains. It occurs to me that bi-mode trains would be ideal for the WCML; They could replace Voyagers on the Shrewsbury, Chester, and perhaps Holyhead, trains, and provide new services to locations off the wires, such as Barrow and maybe even Windermere. 

[Zomboid]

What would be the capacity impact of having more 110mph trains south of Rugby? Would it end up with the tilting trains having to run at 110 as well?

[D854_Tiger]

I’m not in the know but is the London to Birmingham stretch sufficiently straight to allow 125mph without tilt? I don’t think there’s a snowballs chance of the Mk4 sets being tilt fitted at this stage of their lives. And it’s not an option on the IEP. And I assume that swapping some Birmingham services to 110mph would completely stuff the timetable.

 

As a Glaswegian I applauded our services to the big smoke going half hourly, and doing away with those noisey voyager things.

 

I believe south of Rugby there are only two or three places where tilt is necessary for 125 mph running, guessing Weedon, Cheddington and one other.

 

The only reason Network Rail has never bothered to raised the general non-tilting speed limit, everywhere else along that stretch, was because of a lack of non-tilting stock being able to exploit it and with Virgin's MOC clause there never was likely to be.

 

However, that all goes with the new franchise.

 

Incidentally, modern 110 mph stock (i.e. not the old class 86 push pull sets) can almost match Pendolino schedules south of Rugby anyway, it should be remembered that tilt was originally more about 145 mph running than 125 mph.

 

Where tilt comes into its own at 125 mph (and lower speeds) is further north and through the Potteries where it does make a big difference.

 

So the speed limits could easily be raised for the IC225 though obviously not everywhere to the full enhanced speeds tilting provides for.

[Supaned]

I'm not au fait with the current speed differentials on the WCML , but I'd have thought some HST enhanced speeds were possible to allow 91s to run above 110mph , curves excepted. 

 

It may well be the case that a 91 can accelerate quicker than a Pendolino anyway , in which case the non-tilt becomes academic - even if the Pendolino is running at 125mph , realistically , the train behind will only be doing 100mph or so to maintain signal spacing.

[D854_Tiger]

I'm not au fait with the current speed differentials on the WCML , but I'd have thought some HST enhanced speeds were possible to allow 91s to run above 110mph , curves excepted. 

 

It may well be the case that a 91 can accelerate quicker than a Pendolino anyway , in which case the non-tilt becomes academic - even if the Pendolino is running at 125mph , realistically , the train behind will only be doing 100mph or so to maintain signal spacing.

 

I've heard it said that the main reason tilt was deemed a pre-requisite for 125 mph running on the WCML was Virgin's MOC clause.

 

The section of WCML between Stafford and Wolverhampton is a conventional 125 mph railway, where the non-tilting Voyagers run at full line speed and ironically the Pendolinos are restricted to 110 mph because the tilt is disabled.

[D854_Tiger]

One further point won't the new open access Blackpool - Euston service be using IC225 sets.

[D854_Tiger]

Sounds like some interesting ideas there. Liverpool certainly deserves a half-hourly London service, Nuneaton is currently very poorly served by Virgin, and as a fellow Glaswegian I also support improved services to Scotland. One thing I would like to see is the odd additional stop on the Glasgow/Euston services between Warrington BQ and Euston; If every other train stopped at say Rugby or Milton Keynes, this would provide better connectional opportunities than are currently provided by the 'via Birmingham' trains. It occurs to me that bi-mode trains would be ideal for the WCML; They could replace Voyagers on the Shrewsbury, Chester, and perhaps Holyhead, trains, and provide new services to locations off the wires, such as Barrow and maybe even Windermere. 

 

No mention was made of new trains for those services but, in any case, when Hitachi have finished the GW and EC orders, next off the book is the WC class 802 order, then Hull Trains and most likely a new fleet for the Midland main line so any orders for the WCML could be somewhat down the queue.

 

In any case, removing Voyagers from the Scotland trains (normally two of them for each service) should free up plenty more stock for the off wires WC services and, of course, Blackpool is probably off limits for the new franchise now, since the go-ahead was given for the open access services.

 

Come to think of it, he did mention more London trains for Shrewsbury, as a consequence of that, and the possibility of sending them via Stafford (reverse) rather than via Wolves and Brum, just as quick, doesn't take up slots through the busy WM corridor and one possible way some of those extra TV stops could be covered.

 

The extension of the Birmingham terminators to Wolverhampton is as much about DfT's big idea for freeing up congestion at New St, as gifting Wolverhampton with extra trains, nowadays the concept of terminating trains at New St is about to become illegal.

[TheSignalEngineer]

 

The extension of the Birmingham terminators to Wolverhampton is as much about DfT's big idea for freeing up congestion at New St, as gifting Wolverhampton with extra trains, nowadays the concept of terminating trains at New St is about to become illegal.

 

Terminating at Wolverhampton is probably as bad as at New Street. That's why they used to stop in Platform 1 then run to Oxley to change ends at one tme. Terminating at New Street was always frowned on. Terminators were often booked for the Magical Mystery Tour via Handsworth Park to Vauxhall and Duddeston and then being held in Monument Lane Loop until their platform was vacant.

[Clay Country]

No mention was made of new trains for those services but, in any case, when Hitachi have finished the GW and EC orders, next off the book is the WC class 802 order, then Hull Trains and most likely a new fleet for the Midland main line so any orders for the WCML could be somewhat down the queue.

Hitachi has the luxury of being able to put AT300s together in three countries so production capacity isn't likely to be an issue if the winning WCP bidder wants a few Hitachi bi-modes.

[RfDforever]

The time advantage of 125mph trains seems to be marginal at the South end of the WCML; looking at Open Train times for WTT times from Milton Keynes to Euston the Virgin start to stop times for Pendolini are only about 1 1/2 minutes (North Wales = Voyager services slightly slower) quicker than London Midland trains that are similarly non-stop between these two points. It's also worth pointing out that despite the publicity about the 350/1's being uprated to 110 mph 350/2s can keep time when used on the Crewe service and fast Northamptons - and this has been confirmed anecdotally in conversation by drivers (when travelling passenger, I must add) 

I'm also confused that all 125mph trains on the WCML tilt (apart from W'hampton Stafford) but this is for passenger comfort, not line safety we are told. Not sure why the other main lines manage 125 without tilting - are they really less curvy? 

Some off peak services (including Anglo-Scottish) are single Voyagers and do not seem to be at all overcrowded - unlike the situation on XC, which seems much more in need of extra capacity.

[black and decker boy]

I thought the Virgin MOC ended some time ago with the end of the franchise. We are currently in a direct award, ie new contract with no MOC hence the various attempts by Grand Central to get permission to run open access services over the last few years

 

In terms of class 802, the West Country build is underway in Italy and I think the first unit is here on test (but I might be mistaken). They are being built in parallel to the class 800/801 fleets being assembled in Newton Aycliffe. The TPE fleet are next with Hull Trains last I think.

[Davexoc]

The time advantage of 125mph trains seems to be marginal at the South end of the WCML; looking at Open Train times for WTT times from Milton Keynes to Euston the Virgin start to stop times for Pendolini are only about 1 1/2 minutes (North Wales = Voyager services slightly slower) quicker than London Midland trains that are similarly non-stop between these two points. It's also worth pointing out that despite the publicity about the 350/1's being uprated to 110 mph 350/2s can keep time when used on the Crewe service and fast Northamptons - and this has been confirmed anecdotally in conversation by drivers (when travelling passenger, I must add)

 

There seems to be quite a bit of slack in the timetable. Last time I caught a s/bound Pendo from MK it was over 10 early into the platform, in fact the platform staff thought it was a through service. Similarly n/bound we stopped outside MK for several minutes and still arrived several early, so I'm not sure the WTT is really that representative.

 

I believe south of Rugby there are only two or three places where tilt is necessary for 125 mph running, guessing Weedon, Cheddington and one other.

 

Why do you need tilt at Cheddington? Its straight.

The curvy bits are Berkhampstead, Linslade and Wolverton. Not that sharp but switchbacks or S curves.

 

Dave

[Edwin_m]

I'm also confused that all 125mph trains on the WCML tilt (apart from W'hampton Stafford) but this is for passenger comfort, not line safety we are told. Not sure why the other main lines manage 125 without tilting - are they really less curvy? 

A tilting train can go round the same curve at a higher speed without subjecting the passengers to excessive lateral forces - as you say both speeds are well below those at which the train is at risk of overturning, although I think there are some extra calculations to be done in places prone to crosswinds.  So on many WCML curves there are two sets of speed boards, one for tilting and one for non-tilting trains.  There is also the TASS system which enforces lower speeds for tilting trains if their tilt isn't operating, which logically seems a bit unnecessary given that the hazards from that sort of overspeed are more about spilled cups of coffee than major derailments. 

 

Because there have been very few 125mph non-tilting trains on the WCML nobody has bothered to work out a set of speed restrictions for them so the non-tilting speed boards only go up to 110.  If HS2 decided to do this then they could probably shave a few minutes off the schedules for their classic compatibles, as there must be places where higher speeds are possible without tilt. 

 

The ECML probably is less curvy, at least south of Darlington, but at least one potential open access operator is claiming significant time savings for a tilting train.  However the comparison here is between 125mph tilt and 125mph non-tilt so even if both routes had the same amount of curves the saving on the ECML would be smaller. 

Edited November 3, 2017 by Edwin_m

[Supaned]

A tilting train can go round the same curve at a higher speed without subjecting the passengers to excessive lateral forces - as you say both speeds are well below those at which the train is at risk of overturning, although I think there are some extra calculations to be done in places prone to crosswinds.  So on many WCML curves there are two sets of speed boards, one for tilting and one for non-tilting trains.  There is also the TASS system which enforces lower speeds for tilting trains if their tilt isn't operating, which logically seems a bit unnecessary given that the hazards from that sort of overspeed are more about spilled cups of coffee than major derailments. 

 

Because there have been very few 125mph non-tilting trains on the WCML nobody has bothered to work out a set of speed restrictions for them so the non-tilting speed boards only go up to 110.  If HS2 decided to do this then they could probably shave a few minutes off the schedules for their classic compatibles, as there must be places where higher speeds are possible without tilt. 

 

The ECML probably is less curvy, at least south of Darlington, but at least one potential open access operator is claiming significant time savings for a tilting train.  However the comparison here is between 125mph tilt and 125mph non-tilt so even if both routes had the same amount of curves the saving on the ECML would be smaller. 

 

Just a minor correction - the TASS (Tilt Advisory and Speed Supervision) system enforces speed compliance with tilt active - not the other way around. If the tilt is not functional on a tilt-fitted train , the TASS has no effect.

[D854_Tiger]

Just a minor correction - the TASS (Tilt Advisory and Speed Supervision) system enforces speed compliance with tilt active - not the other way around. If the tilt is not functional on a tilt-fitted train , the TASS has no effect.

 

The TASS system authorises tilt, without it the Pendolinos won't tilt and they then won't exceed 110 mph either, being speed limited without a tilt authorisation.

 

I believe the TASS system is line side transducer based and it authorises the Pendolino to tilt, determines the maximum tilt angle, the maximum speed and the distance the authorisation is valid for.

 

The entire WCML TASS system was made necessary due to what I believe are just a couple of spots (south of Rugby) where two passing trains, one with a wrong side tilt failure and one tilting normally, could, in theory, have kinematic envelopes that come into conflict.

 

At those places, the TASS system authorises a reduced permissible maximum tilt angle and hence a slightly reduced speed, to prevent the possibility of this ever happening.

 

It's a highly unlikely theoretical risk that, in day to day operation, would likely be a never, or extremely rare, occurrence but still has to be catered for.

[peanuts]

would it be a possibility tbat some of the extras to lime street go via manchester a d the chat moss thus expanding capacity at picc

[D854_Tiger]

would it be a possibility tbat some of the extras to lime street go via manchester a d the chat moss thus expanding capacity at picc

 

I would have thought not, Liverpool half hourly was one of the original aims of the WCML upgrade that had to be cut back due to the decision to limit the upgrade to 125 mph running.

 

The slower speeds meaning there weren't enough Pendolinos to cover the promised timetable.

 

The losers in that equation were Liverpool and the TV stops.

 

This timetable enhancement would just seem to be a case of now being able to correct those wrongs.

[TheSignalEngineer]

would it be a possibility tbat some of the extras to lime street go via manchester a d the chat moss thus expanding capacity at picc

Problems with capacity at Piccadilly are more to do with Platforms 13/14 and the line to Deansgate rather than the terminating platforms. There will be more than enough terminating capacity when Ordsall Chord takes TPE-Airport service moves from the East Lines to the Styal Lines involving reversals out of the dead end platforms. Conversely it will make Platforms 13/14 even worse as the DafT seem to think they can avoid providing more capacity on the MSJ&A lines but still run an extra 3 or 4 trains per hour each way through there.

[Zomboid]

Aren't Manchester trains pretty full? The ones I've used have been. Adding Liverpool passengers to that isn't likely to improve matters, and the long trundle through Stockport etc will probably mean they'd be overtaken by a direct service.

 

It always struck me that Liverpool had a pretty poor service compared to the likes of Manchester and Birmingham - as well as getting 1/3 of the London service level, it's not on the XC map either, and possibly ought to be.

[caradoc]

Aren't Manchester trains pretty full? The ones I've used have been. Adding Liverpool passengers to that isn't likely to improve matters, and the long trundle through Stockport etc will probably mean they'd be overtaken by a direct service.

 

It always struck me that Liverpool had a pretty poor service compared to the likes of Manchester and Birmingham - as well as getting 1/3 of the London service level, it's not on the XC map either, and possibly ought to be.

 

Agree absolutely; Liverpool has somehow become very much the poor relation of Manchester (possibly in footballing as well as railway terms !); Manchester has three trains per hour to London, and two Cross-Country trains per hour to Birmingham, from where one heads south-west and the other south. Liverpool in contrast has one per hour to London and none beyond Birmingham. Is there perhaps a case for one of the Cross-Country trains starting from Liverpool instead of Manchester, with the hourly Euston/Manchester via Crewe service diverting via Birmingham ? That would also allow one of the half-hourly Birmingham/Liverpool services to run to Preston instead, improving the current relatively poor (ie hourly) service between Crewe and Warrington, Wigan and Preston.

[Zomboid]

I suspect the only way to make it work is additional trains of some sort. To put Liverpool onto the XC map the simplest way would be too extend one or both of the half hourly Manchester trains via the already overflowing through platforms at Piccadilly, which doesn't immediately sound like a great idea. Or a new service from one of the legs south of Birmingham - I don't know where the most demand would be from though, or whether they'd fit in through New St. Anything else just shifts the problem around. It's the kind of thing that HS2 is designed to help with though...

 

Half hourly to London via Runcorn should be the minimum though.

[RfDforever]

Thank you for the responses to my query about 125 mph running on the WCML.

Despite the impression some clearly have,  it is NOT the case that tilt is only used infrequently on a few well known curves; I travelled yesterday, and on the short section Northbound between Roade and Kilsby tunnel (the section where Mr Stephenson meandered around Northamptonshire to keep his line nearly level before diverting via Weedon in case the French got stroppy again) I counted 7 left leans and 6 to the right - mainly pairs in quick succession on S-bends. Maybe this is exceptional, though.

[RfDforever]

Sounds like some interesting ideas there. Liverpool certainly deserves a half-hourly London service, Nuneaton is currently very poorly served by Virgin, and as a fellow Glaswegian I also support improved services to Scotland. One thing I would like to see is the odd additional stop on the Glasgow/Euston services between Warrington BQ and Euston; If every other train stopped at say Rugby or Milton Keynes, this would provide better connectional opportunities than are currently provided by the 'via Birmingham' trains. It occurs to me that bi-mode trains would be ideal for the WCML; They could replace Voyagers on the Shrewsbury, Chester, and perhaps Holyhead, trains, and provide new services to locations off the wires, such as Barrow and maybe even Windermere. 

With regard to providing better connectional opportunities; the up Scottish trains that go via Birmingham arrive at Crewe at xx 57 and the up Chester/North Wales trains leave at xx 55  (you can often catch a passing glimpse there); a little tweak (I know easier said than done) would provide an earlier arrival time (nearly an hour) at both Milton Keynes and Euston. It works Northbound (Chester trains arr xx49, Scotland via Birmingham dept.  xx 09).