Purple Orange
On Moderation
Surely Leicester could be a destination in it’s own right with some trains still extending to Sheffield & Derby.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Midlands and North - Rail Needs Assessment report
- Thread starter Bald Rick
- Start date
- Status
Surely Leicester could be a destination in it’s own right with some trains still extending to Sheffield & Derby.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Agree, the East Midlands extends a lot further South than the boundary within the report and includes not only Leicester but also Northampton which gets completely neglected. Yet on the West Midlands side, it considers improvements all the way down to Hereford and Worcester. The obvious issue it should have considered for Northampton and Leicester is the lack of North - South rail services, there's the M1 motorway which is the economic artery running down the East Midlands yet there's no rail services along that route south of Leicester, to Northampton and Milton Keynes.
On the positive side there's reports that DfT and Network Rail have been looking at the Northampton to Market Harborough route outside the NIC report, though whether anything will come of it...
Greybeard33
Established Member
Well, it shows a frequency increase between Sheffield and London from 2tph in the baseline to 3tph in the +25% package. So maybe the 104 minutes is an average, with 1tph on HS2 and 2tph remaining on the MML. Whereas at least 3 of the 4tph between Nottingham and London are assumed to be routed via HS2?
I suspect the current timings in the report are also averages, rather than the fastest service between each city pair.
It would have been helpful if the report had explained the methodology.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
MML would still need something very similar to the existing service (at least south of Derby and Nottingham) to continue to serve Leicester.
I do mean a local service. In the event of absence or reduction in Cross Country services I fail to see why such a thing would not be possible, or indeed required. Whether it interworks or provides a through service to Matlock or Nottingham (or Crewe?) is implementation specifics.
Northampton is one of the big beneficiaries of Phase 1 released capacity, so hardly "neglected".
Firstly it was neglected in the NIC report, which is the topic of this thread, because Northampton wasn't included or considered despite it being within the East Midlands region.
Secondly, the major problem with rail if you live in Northampton is that there are no rail services to most of your nearby towns and cities - you can't get to Wellingborough, Kettering or Corby, despite them being significant county towns just along the A45, or Leicester or Nottingham just along the M1, or Market Harborough, or Daventry.
Northampton already has fast rail services down to London and to Birmingham, these services are already good, so HS2 Phase 1 releasing extra capacity on the WCML while it may provide some marginal benefits to the travelers using those services to existing destinations, doesn't address the more significant problem for Northampton which is the lack of rail routes and services to most of its adjacent towns and cities.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
With the fastest trains running via HS2 there is still a need for the present number of services on the Birmingham-Derby route to provide a reasonable service between those places. With them no longer needing to provide fast service between the largest cities, there would be scope for more calls at Burton.
Class 170101
On Moderation
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 8,662
I wasn't convinced by any of the complete options in the report to be frank. I think we need to be looking at wiring Kettering to Nottingham, Derby, Sheffield and then onwards to Doncaster, Wakefield Westgate and also York via Ferrybridge. I would add Derby to New Street via both Tamworth and Lichfield routes and the link to the WCML at Lichfield. I would also consider Nottingham to Chesterfield and routes via Rotherham Central for add ons.
Transpennine between Manchester Stations and York via Huddersfield and Dewsbury. Leeds to Hull and ECML connections at Hambleton and Temple Hirst. Whether you would then add Huddersfield to York via Castleford and Normanton to Leeds at a later date I don't know.
As for the High Speed route I preferred the route via Bradford as shown in one of the options as well as the HS2 Stage 2B complete though whether the link to Sheffield is worth it now I'm not sure. How much of a saving is it from Toton to Sheffield compared to joining the MML at Chesterfield? I also wonder if a spur to Leeds is the right thing to do and that actually it would better to have an through Station at Leeds, though probably at the expense of being underground.
Transpennine between Manchester Stations and York via Huddersfield and Dewsbury. Leeds to Hull and ECML connections at Hambleton and Temple Hirst. Whether you would then add Huddersfield to York via Castleford and Normanton to Leeds at a later date I don't know.
As for the High Speed route I preferred the route via Bradford as shown in one of the options as well as the HS2 Stage 2B complete though whether the link to Sheffield is worth it now I'm not sure. How much of a saving is it from Toton to Sheffield compared to joining the MML at Chesterfield? I also wonder if a spur to Leeds is the right thing to do and that actually it would better to have an through Station at Leeds, though probably at the expense of being underground.
grumpyoldman01
Member
From what I'd read so far, I'd got the impression that the frequency would stay.
Is the typical Cross Country journey of 20-50 miles influenced by the inclusion of former Central services? I ask that because back in the 1990s BR's IC XC had the longest average distant journey of any IC sector.
Purple Orange
On Moderation
Related to the report, but has there been any further information made available as to when the IRP will be published? And does anyone know of a link that documents the timetable for tabling phase 2b western branch legislation?
I have been unable to find it but I am sure there was either an Atkins or Greengauge report call for a HS2 junction at Litchfield that would allow a London-Birmingham interchange-Derby-Chesterfield-Sheffield service.... Nottingham and Leicester gained with Notts Leicester London Fast service twice an hour direct to St Pancreas.
That would potentially leave scope and money for Notts Birmingham service via Stenson Junction....
I am convinced that the best option for Leeds is to go via Manchester Pic and onto London/Birmingham....
That would potentially leave scope and money for Notts Birmingham service via Stenson Junction....
I am convinced that the best option for Leeds is to go via Manchester Pic and onto London/Birmingham....
The Planner
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 19,718
The current plans still allow that, the eastern leg just needs to dump itself on the classic network near Kingsbury/Tamworth.
Dave_Cardboard
Member
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 215
Litchfield...? That's a seriously long spur off HS2. Dam them spell checkers - I presume you meant Lichfield..!
[/PEDANT]
Last edited:
WatcherZero
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 10,272
Was supposed to have been published in December
On the whole I agree. HS2 eastern leg should eventually be built, but as a third phase (which comes after HS2 to Manchester is built and NPR as well).
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I’d agree with this too. If the XC route can be sped up that’d be great. It’d be good to have 1tph calling at Birmingham Int, Burton, Derby and Sheffield and the other calling at Birmingham Int, Derby, Cheyseriekd and Sheffield. This opens up possibilities for XC services between Leeds and Birmingham to be sped up. Eventually when the eastern leg comes along the journey could be sped up further.
Last edited:
Purple Orange
On Moderation
Wasn’t that the NIC report?
No, the NIC report is advice to Governemnt, the IRP is the Government's plan, which will of course be informed by the NIC report.
Purple Orange
On Moderation
Yes I understand that. I’m just wondering about the timings of reports. I.e. NIC report was what was due in December and has since been published, but the IRP report comes at a later date (unless that too was due in December and is now late).
0
The IRP was due by the end of the year, so must now be late. It won’t be far away though.
The IRP was due by the end of the year, so must now be late. It won’t be far away though.
WatcherZero
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 10,272
I saw it reported that HS2 Ltd minutes from the start of December said it was going to be published before Christmas so that it was before the Parliamentary recess. It was also reported to be following close behind the rail needs assessment though that itself was a month or two late (was originally supposed to be October in time for the spending review which then got cancelled).
Purple Orange
On Moderation
Ah I see now. I was clearly confused with the timing. No doubt it is emblematic of further delays across the whole project.
- Status