East Midlands Hub

[CdBrux]

Originally Posted by CdBrux

Well that all depends on where you are going from / to. Very few people will start their journey at Derby station and an interchange from HS2 to Crossrail at OOC may be just as attractive as an interchange to Thameslink at St P!

And living in Belgium you know this because......

I am quite sure very few people actually live in Derby station or work there! I consider starting and ending the journey from, say, your house to your office, not the station which is just an interchange point en route. So for example when I was living in Manchester I would start at home, take a 15 min taxi to Piccadilly, train to Euston, tube to Oxford Circus to visit my companies then HQ. With HS2 I would still start at home, take a taxi to either Picc or the Airport station (if built).

If you look at the numbers on p17 of the Higgins report then it is clear the main source of passengers for the east leg is certainly not Derby or even Nottingham but Leeds, York, Newcastle & possibly Edinburgh.

As for Toton vs Breaston for the better compromise then I admit not knowing the area gives me less feeling for the right solution (especially where people are starting, ending their journey and if the proposed location makes it attractive to go on HS2 or not) and I would agree there is a risk that either location was a bit of a white elephant. Indeed it does seem that the MML will remain important, and I suspect would offer some good competition if allowed.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

I am quite sure very few people actually live in Derby station or work there! I consider starting and ending the journey from, say, your house to your office, not the station which is just an interchange point en route. So for example when I was living in Manchester I would start at home, take a 15 min taxi to Piccadilly, train to Euston, tube to Oxford Circus to visit my companies then HQ. With HS2 I would still start at home, take a taxi to either Picc or the Airport station (if built).

If you look at the numbers on p17 of the Higgins report then it is clear the main source of passengers for the east leg is certainly not Derby or even Nottingham but Leeds, York, Newcastle & possibly Edinburgh.

As for Toton vs Breaston for the better compromise then I admit not knowing the area gives me less feeling for the right solution (especially where people are starting, ending their journey and if the proposed location makes it attractive to go on HS2 or not) and I would agree there is a risk that either location was a bit of a white elephant. Indeed it does seem that the MML will remain important, and I suspect would offer some good competition if allowed.

The only advantage that Breaston has over Toton is it slows an interchange station to be built on the MML while running heavy rail services into Toton from Nottingham and Derby stations would be more of a challenge requiring a reversal. However Toton has other advantages over Breaston, it could easily be linked to the Nottingham tram via a short extension. To extend the tram to Breaston would mean finding a route through Long Eaton wich would involve Derbyshire County Council and Erewash Bourough Council agreeing to the route/funding.

 

[bangor-toad]

Getting the crayons out and playing around with a map of the area, it's possible to have HS2 at Toton and have decent heavy rail connectivity.

"All" that's required is to build a new bit of track to connect Derby services to the north of the new Toton station. OK, that's a fair bit of engineering in itself but if you were to compare that with the level of road/tram/? infrastructure needed for a Breaston station it's probably comparable...
There's also some widening needed to bring HS2 & the MML up into Long Eaton but that's not too challenging, nor would be reinstating the Nottingham-Toton chord. There'd also need to be some adjustment of the levels at Trent Junction to make that bit work.

So, on my crayoning, HS2 is red, the grey lines represent the current MML fast lines and the new bit of track and the light blue represent the MML slows.

 

[21C101]

If you look at the numbers on p17 of the Higgins report then it is clear the main source of passengers for the east leg is certainly not Derby or even Nottingham but Leeds, York, Newcastle & possibly Edinburgh.

Which is why I think the east leg as planned is a white elephant now that HS3 has entered the equation.

London - Birmingham International - Crewe- Manchester - South Yorkshire Parkway (M1 J36) - Leeds and join the ECML just north of York (with spur further south into the Station), with the leeds Manchester Airport Stretch built as 4 track.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Getting the crayons out and playing around with a map of the area, it's possible to have HS2 at Toton and have decent heavy rail connectivity.

"All" that's required is to build a new bit of track to connect Derby services to the north of the new Toton station. OK, that's a fair bit of engineering in itself but if you were to compare that with the level of road/tram/? infrastructure needed for a Breaston station it's probably comparable...
There's also some widening needed to bring HS2 & the MML up into Long Eaton but that's not too challenging, nor would be reinstating the Nottingham-Toton chord. There'd also need to be some adjustment of the levels at Trent Junction to make that bit work.

So, on my crayoning, HS2 is red, the grey lines represent the current MML fast lines and the new bit of track and the light blue represent the MML slows.

Your map makes it clear that the obvious place to put the station is Trent, where wot it used to be.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

The more I think about the merits of Toton vs. Breaston the more I come to the conclusion that neither site is particularly suitable location for the East Midlands Hub. To me the optimum location would be to build the high speed platforms where the cooling towers of Ratcliffe on Soar power station are allowing cross platform interchange with the existing East Midlands Parkway for access to Nottingham, Derby stations and city centres. It would also allow people travelling up from Loughborough and Leicester to access HS2 for services north. Of course all of this assumes that Ratcliffe on Soar will have joined the list of coal fired power stations to close by then and the site become available for redevelopment, but given the superior road network around J24 compared to either Toton or Breaston I think it is an option that should be explored.

The other advantage of this idea is that it means the whole line has to be moved south, assuming that it is possible to thread the line between Kegworth and Kingston on Soar (there looks enough room on Google Earth) then HS2 will pass to the south of East Midlands Airport so no need for an expensive tunnel under the airport or the huge viaduct over J24.

 

[MarkyT]

Getting the crayons out and playing around with a map of the area, it's possible to have HS2 at Toton and have decent heavy rail connectivity.

Alternatively, a south to east chord could be inserted north of the Toton station site to join the Radford-Trowell line. Then Derby - Nottingham and Nottingham -Chesterfied services could be diverted via Toton without reversal, and even MML services from London to Nottingham could call there (probably only the stoppers). Local services from East of Nottingham, instead of terminating there could also go round in a big loop to serve Toton too. For simplicity of connections, with a four platform classic station at Toton, a middle island and its two surrounding tracks could be designated for Nottingham trains with trains departing in either direction towards the Midland station and the outer side platforms would be for Chesterfield and Derby/London respectively.

 

[brianthegiant]

"All" that's required is to build a new bit of track to connect Derby services to the north of the new Toton station. OK, that's a fair bit of engineering in itself but if you were to compare that with the level of road/tram/? infrastructure needed for a Breaston station it's probably comparable...

I like this best of both worlds solution -through classic line and uses Toton site in centre of conurbation so more sustainable for local transport.

The main problem is that the strip of land you have used between the M1 and the Erewash Canal already has outline planning permission to recut the Derby Canal for which they are currently raising funds.

 

[brianthegiant]

David Higgins is in the East Midlands on monday, some sort of announcement looks likely.
We are after all in the season for regional capex announcements

 

[The Planner]

Probably to say Toton is off the table and it will end up at East Mids Pwy.

 

[HSTEd]

Wouldn't it be easier just to build Derby a tram system with a line as far out as Toton?
Its a long way but the open terrain and few needed stops in the last few miles would make the journey relatively rapid.

 

[edwin_m]

Wouldn't it be easier just to build Derby a tram system with a line as far out as Toton?
Its a long way but the open terrain and few needed stops in the last few miles would make the journey relatively rapid.

That might provide some decent access to Derby but not to the centre of Nottingham. As I've posted several times on various topics, by the time you've travelled 16 stops on the tram it would be quicker just to get a train to/from Midland station. Toton needs good connections to a fast train into Nottingham, and if you manage to make that work then it would be reasonably straightforward to extend it to Derby which would be cheaper and quicker than a tram.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Wouldn't it be easier just to build Derby a tram system with a line as far out as Toton?
Its a long way but the open terrain and few needed stops in the last few miles would make the journey relatively rapid.

The area between Derby and Toton is far too rural for it to ever be suitable for a tram route.

 

[DownSouth]

The area between Derby and Toton is far too rural for it to ever be suitable for a tram route.

No, it's the perfect distance for light rail. It would just need the right sort of trams - more like an interurban equipped for speeds up to 80 km/h than a city centre tram.

But a regular Derby-Toton-Nottingham train service would be better.

 

[brianthegiant]

Probably to say Toton is off the table and it will end up at East Mids Pwy.

really?
I thought no stations on bends was a requirement?
Assuming it has to align with the available corridor to the north of Trent Juction through Long Eaton. Is it possible to achieve a ~0.5km straight platform section at EMD and keep it to the North of M1 J24?
Wouldn't you have to push it further east on the southern approach to EMD and closer to Kegworth, possibly crossing the M1/A453?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

No, it's the perfect distance for light rail. It would just need the right sort of trams - more like an interurban equipped for speeds up to 80 km/h than a city centre tram.

But a regular Derby-Toton-Nottingham train service would be better.

East Midlands metro - could call it the 'Brian Clough Express'

 

[HSTEd]

The area between Derby and Toton is far too rural for it to ever be suitable for a tram route.

It would convert more into a sort of light metro thing once it got beyond the bounds of Derby proper - and running across open fields means it would be relatively cheap to build.

That might provide some decent access to Derby but not to the centre of Nottingham. As I've posted several times on various topics, by the time you've travelled 16 stops on the tram it would be quicker just to get a train to/from Midland station. Toton needs good connections to a fast train into Nottingham, and if you manage to make that work then it would be reasonably straightforward to extend it to Derby which would be cheaper and quicker than a tram.

Although the tram would certainly have major benefits in terms of waiting times, the journey time is projected to be 30 minutes for the all stops service on the NET.
Currently the train to Long Eaton takes ~17 minutes and I have to assume journey time to Toton would be similar - and I am not sure you would pick up sufficient passengers without the intermediate stops so you can't really cut those out.

Which means the trains time advantage is a lot smaller than I thought it was.
Which means the higher frequency of the tram might win out.
Could always run a limited stop tram service in amongst the normal ones that leaves immediately before a stopper and arrives at Toton immediately after the previous one.

 

[MCR247]

The 'core' section of NET (Highbury Vale - Nottingham Station) will have a tram every 3/4 minutes, so I don't know how you're going to fit these express trams in?

 

[The Planner]

really?
I thought no stations on bends was a requirement?
Assuming it has to align with the available corridor to the north of Trent Juction through Long Eaton. Is it possible to achieve a ~0.5km straight platform section at EMD and keep it to the North of M1 J24?
Wouldn't you have to push it further east on the southern approach to EMD and closer to Kegworth, possibly crossing the M1/A453?

I was being facetious, Ive no idea what he is going to say.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Locating the Hub at the current East Midlands Parkway was one of the engineering options presented to HS2 Ltd and the DfT but they decided against it:

EMI19 East Midlands Parkway (South West Approach)
(8.5.5) This station option would be located in a rural location, adjacent to and west of the existing East Midlands Parkway station, which itself lies just to the west of the Ratcliffe-on-Soar Power Station. It would be an elevated, centrally-loaded through station, with the curved tracks raised over the valley on viaducts to clear the A453 and existing rail tracks, and going through the Red Fort Hill Scheduled Ancient Monument in a cutting. Junction 24 of the M1 would be approximately 2.5km to the west.
(8.5.6) Multi-storey car parks would be provided underneath the station, with the concourse located on an intermediate level. A covered pedestrian link would facilitate interchange with the existing rail station and provide access to the forecourt.
(8.5.7) The station would offer interchange with rail on the conventional network via the East Midlands Parkway station, but would be 2.8km from the A50 / A453 junction and 5km from East Midlands Airport. Derby would be 16km away and Nottingham 13km.
(8.5.8) Key issues would include the level of the northern approach and the curvature of the alignment, the demand associated with its rural location, the long walking distance between the high speed station and the existing station, and the impact of the elevated station (which would have a wide footprint) and alignment on the rural setting, which is in Green Belt land and in a flood risk zone.

EMI19a East Midlands Parkway (South Approach)
(8.5.9) This station option was developed only during the design stage leading to the short-list. It would be similar in connectivity and location to option EMI19, but on a different line of route.
(8.5.10) Unlike EMI19, the option EMI19a station would be integrated with the existing East Midlands Parkway station, which would be completely reconfigured. The station would be situated at grade, with a centrally-loaded concourse above providing access to new platforms for the existing rail services as well as the high speed services on the west side. There would be a new road layout configuration, pedestrianised forecourt, access and parking on the west.
(8.5.11) Key issues included disruption to existing services due to the necessary complete realignment of the Midland Main Line, impacts on a nearby Scheduled Ancient Monument, and demand associated with the rural location.

 

[HSTEd]

The 'core' section of NET (Highbury Vale - Nottingham Station) will have a tram every 3/4 minutes, so I don't know how you're going to fit these express trams in?

The core of Manchester Metrolink pushes higher than that I believe.
But even without them I am not convinced the time saving by having heavy rail is actually that large.

 

[edwin_m]

Locating the Hub at the current East Midlands Parkway was one of the engineering options presented to HS2 Ltd and the DfT but they decided against it:

This was partly due to the attitude of Rushcliffe council, which appears to have changed since then - seem my previous post:

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1974637&postcount=31

The site being on a flood plan was also a concern, but then Toton is also on flood plain.

I don't think there is a restriction on platforms on a curve - it would only be a question of platform stepping distances, which aren't significant if the curve is shallow enough for non-stopping trains to pass at high speeds. The pointwork either end might need to be straight though.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Although the tram would certainly have major benefits in terms of waiting times, the journey time is projected to be 30 minutes for the all stops service on the NET.
Currently the train to Long Eaton takes ~17 minutes and I have to assume journey time to Toton would be similar - and I am not sure you would pick up sufficient passengers without the intermediate stops so you can't really cut those out.

Which means the trains time advantage is a lot smaller than I thought it was.
Which means the higher frequency of the tram might win out.
Could always run a limited stop tram service in amongst the normal ones that leaves immediately before a stopper and arrives at Toton immediately after the previous one.

Nottingham-Derby non-stop is a little over 20min so train from either Toton would be a bit less than 17min and Breaston less still. If the connecting train can be timed to arrive just before a HS2 departure and depart just after a HS2 arrival then the frequency of a tram isn't an advantage. And if the tram takes 30min then the London through journey will be no quicker than on the existing MML, once the train-tram connection time and a few minutes of likely MML accelerations are factored in.

 

[HSTEd]

I very much doubt the connecting train can be timed to reliably connect with the HS2 services - you would end up with a very odd 'pulsing' timetable which is going to be hard to provide rolling stock for. (As you know that balancing East Midlands calls across the hour is hardly going to be one of HS2s timetabling priorities).

That will also lead to problems with platform occupancy at Nottingham station - which considering they are still short of platforms after the reconstruction that doesn't seem to really have helped matters much (Grantham trains are still chronically held for 7-8 minutes at or around Netherfield, apparently to wait for a platform).

The train to Nottingham Midland would be 17-18 minutes at least (at Toton), there will be even greater difficulty finding nonstop paths in Nottingham approach, and going to Breaston introduces even more fun timetabling problems because then you are on the main line MML which will probably mean you have to run the trains as Derby-Nottingham all shacks shuttles.
18 minutes at best - a significant number of passengers will be arriving at Midland via the tram as it is (and many on through trams from Toton) so you will still have the transfer time delays in the journey times (arrivals by car/taxi will likely transfer directly to Toton/Breaston to save a nasty trip into the centre).
I am not convinced you can build a case for regular shuttles as superior to the tram, which gets you the frequency, without much journey time loss.
Especially with all the extra infrastructure you have to build to support them.

 

[bunnahabhain]

To begin with you've already got two trains per hour for Nottingham which would likely run via a Toton HS2 station, the Nottingham to Leeds and Norwich to Liverpool services.

 

[edwin_m]

I very much doubt the connecting train can be timed to reliably connect with the HS2 services - you would end up with a very odd 'pulsing' timetable which is going to be hard to provide rolling stock for. (As you know that balancing East Midlands calls across the hour is hardly going to be one of HS2s timetabling priorities).

That will also lead to problems with platform occupancy at Nottingham station - which considering they are still short of platforms after the reconstruction that doesn't seem to really have helped matters much (Grantham trains are still chronically held for 7-8 minutes at or around Netherfield, apparently to wait for a platform).

I agree.

going to Breaston introduces even more fun timetabling problems because then you are on the main line MML which will probably mean you have to run the trains as Derby-Nottingham all shacks shuttles.

I don't agree. It's simply a case of adding an extra stop in the existing services. It would need some priority in the timetable though.

I am not convinced you can build a case for regular shuttles as superior to the tram, which gets you the frequency, without much journey time loss.
Especially with all the extra infrastructure you have to build to support them.

I agree with respect to Toton, which is why it's likely to be a boost for car travel and a disadvantage to inward investment at both Nottingham and Derby. I think Breaston could be made to work.

 

[HSTEd]

Problem is the MML around the Nottingham-Derby area is a complete mess - its a horrible mass of double track through stations, flat junctions and branches going in every direction.
The less load put on it (in my opinion) the better.

 

[po8crg]

Problem is the MML around the Nottingham-Derby is a complete mess - its a horrible mass of double track through stations, flat junctions and branches going in every direction.
The least load put on it (in my opinion) the better.

Either that, or a large bomb on Trent Junction and then reconstruct it properly.

 

[brianthegiant]

no announcement as such today, just clarification that Toton & Breaston are the only options being looked at, and that an announcement will be made in the summer, (or 2016 if you listen to Anna Soubry).

 

[RichmondCommu]

No, it's the perfect distance for light rail. It would just need the right sort of trams - more like an interurban equipped for speeds up to 80 km/h than a city centre tram.

But a regular Derby-Toton-Nottingham train service would be better.

No sorry I think you're missing the point here. Its not the suitability of the trains themselves but the fact that there are very few settlements of any size once you leave Derby. You would be building a very expensive tram line to serve Toton and very little else.

 

[NotATrainspott]

No sorry I think you're missing the point here. Its not the suitability of the trains themselves but the fact that there are very few settlements of any size once you leave Derby. You would be building a very expensive tram line to serve Toton and very little else.

However, how what is the cost per kilometre of a tram line in open country? With no major civil engineering works of any kind necessary, and as light rail systems are allowed to have level crossings, I can't see it being anywhere near the cost of tracks along populated streets.

 

[DownSouth]

No sorry I think you're missing the point here.

Nope.

Its not the suitability of the trains themselves but the fact that there are very few settlements of any size once you leave Derby. You would be building a very expensive tram line to serve Toton and very little else.

And that's why it would be excellent - it would be a fit-for-purpose solution that would provide the service needed to make the Toton HS2 station work. In the suburbs of Derby you'd get the convenience of local stopping options where the people are (instead of requiring them to travel to a heavy rail station) and high frequency (which heavy rail could not match), and then the remaining cross-country segment of the trip from Derby to the HS2 station would be rapidly eaten up by the nice fast interurban-style LRVs.

 

[edwin_m]

And that's why it would be excellent - it would be a fit-for-purpose solution that would provide the service needed to make the Toton HS2 station work. In the suburbs of Derby you'd get the convenience of local stopping options where the people are (instead of requiring them to travel to a heavy rail station) and high frequency (which heavy rail could not match), and then the remaining cross-country segment of the trip from Derby to the HS2 station would be rapidly eaten up by the nice fast interurban-style LRVs.

However cheap a new light rail route would be, it would be more expensive than the heavy rail route that is already there. Even if 100 Derby passengers board/alight each HS2 train, that would only be around four trams per hour so not really enough to justify a new route.