The Midland Main Line (why is it so slow)

[will1337]

51m 66ch PBO - NOT. That'd be an average of 100 miles an hour. It takes 31 min Nottingham to Grantham and then there's another 30 miles to Peterborough.

 

[Metroland]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7975345.stm

 

[Waverley125]

I did Nottingham-Leicester a couple of months back. Was cheduled to take 2hr 2min, and was packed to the Gills on a 7 car meridian.

I reckon an alternative service would prove popular. 1h2 min to Peterborough, 20 min to Grantham on the fast line, another 20 (non stop) to Nottingham. 1hr 40 mins. Would also provide a much improved service to Grantham and Peterborough, and would give Nottinghamers some choice in their rail travel.

FCC being FCC, I'd imagine they'd also try and undercut EMT on ticket prices.

 

[MCR247]

I did Nottingham-Leicester a couple of months back. Was cheduled to take 2hr 2min, and was packed to the Gills on a 7 car meridian.

I reckon an alternative service would prove popular. 1h2 min to Peterborough, 20 min to Grantham on the fast line, another 20 (non stop) to Nottingham. 1hr 40 mins. Would also provide a much improved service to Grantham and Peterborough, and would give Nottinghamers some choice in their rail travel.

FCC being FCC, I'd imagine they'd also try and undercut EMT on ticket prices.

Like they'd let a 365 on the fast lines delaying ther NXEC/fHT/GC services! Please think before posting, you have posted sometihing like the on every thread to do with the MML.

 

[ungreat]

I did Nottingham-Leicester a couple of months back. Was cheduled to take 2hr 2min, and was packed to the Gills on a 7 car meridian.

I reckon an alternative service would prove popular. 1h2 min to Peterborough, 20 min to Grantham on the fast line, another 20 (non stop) to Nottingham. 1hr 40 mins. Would also provide a much improved service to Grantham and Peterborough, and would give Nottinghamers some choice in their rail travel.

FCC being FCC, I'd imagine they'd also try and undercut EMT on ticket prices.

It takes us 15 mins to do the 18 mile run to Huntingdon from Peterborough,and thats on a good day.You seem to forget(or don't realise)that FCC have a "running brake test"policy in force..we get up to reasonable speed,then apply a step 2 brake application and observe a reduction.This applies on crew change,uncoupling and departure from first station en route.This can and does affect timings. 20mins to Grantham with all those NXEC about..not possible!

Also,the route from Notts-Grantham is not 100mph track.

But what do I know...only been driving for 22 years!!

 

[Waverley125]

i bow to your greater route knowledge.

All I'm saying is that the service would provide a good link Notitngham-Peterborough/Grantham above what is currently available, and that it would make good use of rolling stock that would otherwise sit around at Peterborough.

 

[Edvid]

Speaking of which, is an upgrade to 125mph (fast lines Luton - Sharnbrook) still on the cards? 26 miles seems rather short...

Looks like it is, according to page 114 of a CP4 Delivery Plan support document:

The scope of this project is subject to further development work.
The project will make use of and amend, where required, the high output track renewals planned on the MML. This is varied in location and subject to change, but for 2009/10 will concentrate on the section of line between Sharnbrook (south of Luton) and Sundon (north of Luton).

Two points:
* Sharnbrook is actually north of Bedford :roll:
* The stretch in question is probably approx. 20 miles long now they mention Sundon

 

[MCR247]

i bow to your greater route knowledge.

All I'm saying is that the service would provide a good link Notitngham-Peterborough/Grantham above what is currently available, and that it would make good use of rolling stock that would otherwise sit around at Peterborough.

It wouldnt be good use as even if the were cheaper than EMT I would rather travel on a 222 or HST than a 365 to London. As well the 365 takes longer!

 

[Broken Viking]

May i suggest a 56 with 2000tons behind it, blasting through Mkt Harboro and Wellingboro at about 80. That'd straighten it out a little!

Nice idea mate...Nice idea! I'm all for it! 8)

Incidentally, the APT-E was speed tested along sections of the current MML back in 1978CE and it managed to achieve speeds back then that are faster than anything we can hit today on the same line - At least without having to fish up a Pendo from somewhere, and a 60 to work as it's power unit!

The full detail of the APT-E's run can be read in OS Nock's Two Miles a Minute on page 108. Here's a quick draft-in of the speeds that E-train managed to hit on that run, though...

• St. Albans: 175km/h (Versus 105km/h normal),
• Luton: 170km/h (Versus 125km/h),
• Bedford: 185km/h (Vs. 125km/h),
• Wellingborough: 150km/h (Vs. 85km/h),
• Kettering: 180km/h (Vs. 110km/h),
• Mkt. Harborough: 150km/h (Vs. 75km/h),
• Approach Leicester: 215km/h (Vs. 95km/h)

So - To be perfectly blunt - There's nothing wrong with the Midland Main Line at all in speed terms (Although a bit of realignment at Wellingborough and Mkt. Harborough wouldn't go amiss!)...The real problem seems to be the wusses on the board at EMT who don't appear to be keen on pushing 125mph or more. :roll:

So c'mon EMT! If the APT-E managed to hit 135mph on the MML during the 70's, then ye can have thy Valenta'd HSTs do close to the same speed today without any concerns...And ye'll get more speed-freak passengers, too!

 

[The Planner]

The APT-E tilted, enough said....and I bet it had nothing in front of it when it did it.

 

[90019]

then ye can have thy Valenta'd HSTs do close to the same speed today without any concerns

A brilliant plan with only two minor flaws:
1. They've all been MTU'd
2. HSTs can't tilt

 

[laseandre]

Ah ha! EMT's HSTs aren't MTU'd! They've been fitted with VP185s, as any enthusiast worth his salt should know!

 

[Kneedown]

I stand to be corrected here, but isn't there one Valenta left?
Was informed by a fitter that the engine mileage was low so they were going to leave it for a while.

 

[asylumxl]

Shame the 222s don't tilt like the 221s. I wonder if they could mix and match lol

 

[Pumbaa]

Shame the 222s don't tilt like the 221s. I wonder if they could mix and match lol

They can couple up to push each other, but the systems are completely different. Either would require a significant downgrade/upgrade to become compatible.

 

[tbtc]

Shame the 222s don't tilt like the 221s. I wonder if they could mix and match lol

Given the additional weight needed to carry the tilt equipment (IIRC), I presume we'd need a lot of time savings from tilting before it outweighed (no pun intended) the hassle.