EMR Connect to Thameslink?

[MaidaVale]

Good Afternoon,

Looking at an overlook of the services, It baffles me why essentially a sub-operation was created within EMR for Connect operating on one line that's not within the East Midlands (Okay Northamptonshire is technically the EM although all stops on-route essentially act as London Commuter towns and are far culturally disconnected from the likes of Nottingham) with one relatively small fleet of trains.

Personally, I think a far better solution post-electrification would have been to include the Corby services into Thameslink, as after all it is only three stops further than the current reach of Thameslink at Bedford and would enable connections further into Central London and beyond with ease, as well as eliminating the need to change for larger intermediate stops such as St Albans. Thameslink already operates to Peterborough which is technically a few miles north of Corby. Corby is also historically part of the Network South East area with the short-lived services between the late 80s and early 90s being branded and operated by NSE along with the station itself.

Interestingly, All stops to Corby from Bedford and All stops to Northampton from Watford are programmed into the Thameslink 700s PIS system, presumably as a futureproofing method. (This happens with a few lines in Kent and Sussex too). The original published NSE plan for Corby services was to have a new 'Three Counties' brand and incorporate them into the Marston Vale running services from Bletchley to Corby, although obviously this fell through after the station closed in the early 90s, and was reopened under EMT in the 2000s.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Oct 2022 ==

Here is an example of a Corby announcement pulled directly from the TL 700s Passenger Information System by the way.

 

[LLivery]

I always believed it would've been better as Thameslink, with one of the Intercity services calling at Kettering, and another a Wellingborough to maintain connections, but it was decided not to. I believe there's not enough stock anyway.

Having lived in Wellingborough and Nottingham, I wouldn't say they're that culturally disconnected. The familiar historic architecture alone made me feel at home, and Northants feels more like the rest of the East Mids than East Anglia (its tv region), and nothing like the South East.

 

[MaidaVale]

I always believed it would've been better as Thameslink, with one of the Intercity services calling at Kettering, and another a Wellingborough to maintain connections, but it was decided not to. I believe there's not enough stock anyway.

Having lived in Wellingborough and Nottingham, I wouldn't say they're that culturally disconnected. The familiar historic architecture alone made me feel at home, and Northants feels more like the rest of the East Mids than East Anglia (its tv region), and nothing like the South East.

I think historically they're connected culturally although in recent years its definitely faded away. The accent around Corby/Kettering/W'boro is very southern whereas the Notts accent is quite clearly rooted in the north, and as a part-time resident of the area I certainly feel the strong similarities with the Herts/Bucks/Beds areas of the South East (but not the other parts really) and not at all with Nottingham/Derby with very little similarity to Leicester. With the three N Northants towns being far flung London commuter towns in the last 10 years, I think it'll only get more and more south-focused as the years progress, which I think should be reflected with Thameslink services.

 

[WizCastro197]

Last thing Thameslink needs is an extension to its network. Reliability would be a major problem and such service wouldn't be able to run as it would have to run from far south and then through that core where plenty can go wrong.

 

[swt_passenger]

This has been suggested in these forums numerous times since the wires reached Corby, this isn’t a new idea. It’s not clear what the problem is it’s intended to solve though.

 

[WizCastro197]

EMR to St Pancras works fine and I just think we should just stick to what works.

 

[Skimble19]

Last thing Thameslink needs is an extension to its network. Reliability would be a major problem and such service wouldn't be able to run as it would have to run from far south and then through that core where plenty can go wrong.

I suppose you could keep the service as is, just transfer the operation of it to Thameslink. The stopper Thameslink Cambridge services don’t go through the core. Not entirely sure what problem doing so would solve though.

 

[WizCastro197]

I suppose you could keep the service as is, just transfer the operation of it to Thameslink. The stopper Thameslink Cambridge services don’t go through the core. Not entirely sure what problem doing so would solve though.

But still transferring it Thameslink, expands its network and increases the likelihood of staff shortages/train crew shortage and or Stock Shortage as units would need to leave other services to work on this one.

 

[MaidaVale]

It’s not clear what the problem is it’s intended to solve though.

I just think it would massively simplify things and reduce the need of travelling to, fully exiting the network at and then waiting at St Pancras mainline like you would for an intercity service for what is a commuter route. I find myself tapping out at Farringdon, boarding a Thameslink service to Luton Airport Parkway and then changing for EMR connect, because as much as it requires a 'change', It cancels itself out as it relieves the requirement of getting another tube/thameslink service to St Pancras, walking across the whole of the concourse and then hanging around (normally standing as the small number of provided seats are usually full) behind the barriers waiting for the next EMR Connect service to board as opposed to just a simple cross-platform (or same platform) change at LTN from a service directly from the London network (for instance Farringdon or London Bridge).

Therefore it wouldn't necessarily fix an issue (as no Thameslink services really ever do on any of their routes), but simply just enhance connectivity and simplify things.

 

[WizCastro197]

I just think it would massively simplify things and reduce the need of travelling to, fully exiting the network at and then waiting at St Pancras mainline like you would for an intercity service for what is a commuter route. I find myself tapping out at Farringdon, boarding a Thameslink service to Luton Airport Parkway and then changing for EMR connect, because as much as it requires a 'change', It cancels itself out as it relieves the requirement of getting another tube/thameslink service to St Pancras, walking across the whole of the concourse and then hanging around (normally standing as the small number of provided seats are usually full) behind the barriers waiting for the next EMR Connect service to board as opposed to just a simple cross-platform (or same platform) change at LTN from a service directly from the London network (for instance Farringdon or London Bridge).

Therefore it wouldn't necessarily fix an issue (as no Thameslink services really ever do on any of their routes), but simply just enhance connectivity and simplify things.

Whilst also increasing the likelihood of cancellations and disruption to to stock or crew shortages as I have already mentioned. Better connectivity would be great but the consequences/negatives far outweigh the positives.

Do you want this service to run from St Pancras Mainline because you would still need to exit the network to get to the platforms. I am confused as to what you actually want to happen here?

 

[MaidaVale]

Whilst also increasing the likelihood of cancellations and disruption to to stock or crew shortages as I have already mentioned. Better connectivity would be great but the consequences/negatives far outweigh the positives.

Do you want this service to run from St Pancras Mainline because you would still need to exit the network to get to the platforms. I am confused as to what you actually want to happen here?

No, My main suggestion was services directly through the Thameslink core to simply changes and improve connectivity as it would only be a three stop extension to the Bedford services. The transfer to Thameslink for St Pancras Mainline terminators would make sense in a geographical and operational perspective although would offer little to no benefit whatsoever for customer experience (apart from possibly higher capacity and more luggage space), with the added disruption element.

 

[WizCastro197]

No, My main suggestion was services directly through the Thameslink core to simply changes and improve connectivity as it would only be a three stop extension to the Bedford services. The transfer to Thameslink for St Pancras Mainline terminators would make sense in a geographical and operational perspective although would offer little to no benefit whatsoever for customer experience (apart from possibly higher capacity and more luggage space), with the added disruption element.

Would all 4 Bedfords go to Corby? Corby simply doesn't have the capacity.

 

[MaidaVale]

Would all 4 Bedfords go to Corby? Corby simply doesn't have the capacity.

Not necessarily no, I don't think it currently requires 4tph at the minute anyway especially with the added onboard capacity. I do understand where you're coming from with the disruption, although that's mostly just an issue with Thameslink's structure and not a bi-product of the networks size if it was run more efficiently. All of this is why I posted in the speculative thread rather than on a main thread relating to the topic as obviously it has a lot of things that would make it hard to implement in the current state of affairs, but overall I think it makes more sense over the Sub-operation of EMR and would improve things if GTR managed to run it well.

 

[Magdalia]

Be careful what you wish for. The Hitchin-Peterborough service is almost entirely Thameslink and comments on this forum make clear that it has been a disaster for users compared to their old service that ran to/from Kings Cross. The Hitchin-Cambridge service would be just as bad but fortunately the stopping trains still run to/from Kings Cross, so users aren't totally reliant on trains running through the Thameslink core.

 

[NorthOxonian]

I think historically they're connected culturally although in recent years its definitely faded away. The accent around Corby/Kettering/W'boro is very southern whereas the Notts accent is quite clearly rooted in the north, and as a part-time resident of the area I certainly feel the strong similarities with the Herts/Bucks/Beds areas of the South East (but not the other parts really) and not at all with Nottingham/Derby with very little similarity to Leicester. With the three N Northants towns being far flung London commuter towns in the last 10 years, I think it'll only get more and more south-focused as the years progress, which I think should be reflected with Thameslink services.

I'm not sure you can use that cultural connection as the basis for a rail franchise. There are certainly similarities across "South Midlands" (which I'd definite as Northants, Beds, western Cambs, northern Bucks, north/east Oxon, and maybe the bits of Herts furthest from London) - both in terms of culture and also the way people travel. But because nearly all of the lines are radial in that part of the country, grouping it all into one franchise just wouldn't work.

It's also worth pointing out that while EMR Connect might have operational and geographical similarities to the longer Thameslink services to Bedford, it's harder to argue it's similar to something like the Sutton Loop or the Sevenoaks service.

 

[cle]

Old shires cultural connections don't mean anything - accents etc - it's where do people study/work/shop/recreate/procreate - and so forth.

I think it's ok as it is today, but I do think the second Corby is something of a wasted path. It's a turnback though, so I get that.

Once Leicester is wired, I would redirect 1tph from Corby there, and in it's place maybe extend 1tph Thameslink. Would be a slower run, but direct to core and of course, a cheaper option for a pretty poor town. Like LM offered. The MML is a rip-off compared to the equivalent 'commuter' grade fares to Northampton, Huntingdon etc.

Alternatively, the second Corby tph could go to Oxford. I doubt many direct end to end journeys, but it's something better than a Kettering shuttle, and offers a few new connections across the 'South Midlands' and via Bletchley. Might help at Bedford re platforms - until the potential fancy rebuild.

 

[MaidaVale]

Once Leicester is wired, I would redirect 1tph from Corby there, and in it's place maybe extend 1tph Thameslink.

I think that's actually a really good idea, Would mean that Wellingborough still retains its direct "semi-fast" EMR connect service as opposed to permanent stopping Thameslinks (as if everything went Thameslink, Customers from Kettering and Corby could get the fast intercity services that stop at Kettering anyway if they were that bothered about speed), Yet would also introduce the handiness of core access and intermediate stops such as St Albans. It would also re-instate the direct service between Leicester and Wellingborough/Bedford/Luton which is something that EMR Connect did make worse, although an additional Thameslink service per hour to Corby with the second EMR Connect going to Leicester would fix a lot of those issues, as just swapping that second Tph to Corby for Leicester instead would be devastating without a replacement second service.

 

[JonathanH]

Essentially what is being suggested here though is the service to Wellingborough, Kettering and Corby being slowed down, stopping at St Albans, Harpenden, Leagrave, Harlington and Flitwick in addition to the stations it already stops at. Is that really what is going to go down well with passengers? There isn't capacity for the current EMR Connect service to link into Thameslink or spare units.

As for Thameslink being the method to unlock cheaper fares to Leicester, that simply isn't going to happen.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

I think historically they're connected culturally although in recent years its definitely faded away. The accent around Corby/Kettering/W'boro is very southern

I wouldn’t say that. The accent around Corby is a combination of Estuary, Glaswegian, and gentle rural South Rutland.

 

[InTheEastMids]

This has been suggested in these forums numerous times since the wires reached Corby, this isn’t a new idea. It’s not clear what the problem is it’s intended to solve though.

Yes, and I think it's often some people trying to align the MML ops with the ECML and WCML.
(although conversely, the MML has similarities with GWML, with 1 operator doing high-frequency cross London, and another taking care of everything else)

Once Leicester is wired, I would redirect 1tph from Corby there, and in it's place maybe extend 1tph Thameslink

I don't think this can be delivered without really big timetable changes. Other forum members might have a better grasp on this, but if you imagine extending the XX15 London-Corby to Leicester instead, it gets in the way of EMR intercity services, and probably needs to sit at Leicester when all 4 platforms are used by other services. it will also have taken 90 minutes to get there, so either only for changing trains or filling it up with very low price advance ticketholders.

The MML is a rip-off compared to the equivalent 'commuter' grade fares to Northampton, Huntingdon etc.

This is basically spending more money to avoid grasping the nettle of fares reform.

To me, HS2 (assuming something is built) is the trigger for thinking a bit more radically. Remove the Notts/Derb/Shef - London passengers, and the purpose and priorities of what's currently the EMR operation changes beyond all recognition, so a good point to consider completely recasting the services.

 

[liamf656]

This subject has been done to death and quite simply, it would be a nightmare for Thameslink to extend to Corby.

You have to think about how passengers and MPs would react if their already slow commuter train slows down even more. The Connect service works good as it is, it offers a fast link from London to Luton and opens up the possibility to extend once an hour to Leicester once electrification and a timetable recast permits.

Not many would do end to end journeys (in my personal opinion, I wouldn’t even do Bedford to Brighton on one), when interchanges can easily be made at both Luton stations, so there’s be little point in that respect

Thameslink doesn’t have the stock or staff to run to Corby. Fair enough they can be trained up and you’d argue that the 360s could be absorbed into the main fleet but then having a mix of traction would be a nightmare to diagram. It’s be very unlikely for the DFT to sign off more 700s either

Thameslink isn’t renown for its reliability with its already complex network. Expanding that network is only increasing the chance for the service to fall apart if something does go wrong

Now there is the option to keep the service as it is but transfer it all to Thameslink, but that would change absolutely nothing and would not benefit anyone

Overall it’s yet another solution looking for a problem, only this time it’s less of a solution and more of a problem itself

 

[Bald Rick]

Would be a slower run, but direct to core and of course, a cheaper option for a pretty poor town. Like LM offered.

Why would it be cheaper? Is it cheaper for Northampton passengers to get the stopper rather than the fast train?

 

[JonathanH]

Why would it be cheaper? Is it cheaper for Northampton passengers to get the stopper rather than the fast train?

I agree with your question, but a slow train from Rugby to London run by LNR is cheaper than a fast one run by Avanti. Somewhat surprised that the DfT isn't doing something to level up fares.

 

[cle]

Because presumably, a TL fare, advance or other, might be cheaper than the legacy ‘inter city’ nature of fares to Wellingborough and up.

Exactly as the LNR/Avanti comparison. Not referencing just stopping patterns intra-operator.

 

[miklcct]

Bedford is 80 km away from London - normally where outer commuter trains end, including Milton Keynes, Basingstoke, etc.

Anywhere further becomes a regional express type operation, for example, the distance from the London Terminal to Corby is similar to the distance to Portsmouth / Southampton.

Therefore it is inappropriate for Thameslink to run anywhere further. In fact I don't think Peterborough trains should run into the core as well - the problem on this route is the 80 km limit lies on nowhere major and the next major destination Peterborough is very far away.

 

[Magdalia]

Bedford is 80 km away from London - normally where outer commuter trains end, including Milton Keynes, Basingstoke, etc.

Anywhere further becomes a regional express type operation, for example, the distance from the London Terminal to Corby is similar to the distance to Portsmouth / Southampton.

Therefore it is inappropriate for Thameslink to run anywhere further. In fact I don't think Peterborough trains should run into the core as well - the problem on this route is the 80 km limit lies on nowhere major and the next major destination Peterborough is very far away.

On the ECML Huntingdon is that place, especially when considered jointly with nearby Godmanchester and St Ives. If GN suburban electrification had happened in the early 1960s, as planned by the BTC, then Huntingdon would have been the limit of suburban operation.

Instead all of the Deltic inspired track improvements between Hitchin and Peterborough came before electrification, while the local service was still very sparse. Huntingdon was remodelled for high speed running, removing the third through platform and replacing it with a bay on the up side.

Many older Huntingdon people still regard the 1980s as the heyday of their train service, when they had a non-stop HST to/from London every 2 hours, and an hourly Hitchin-Huntingdon DMU shuttle that was reversed across the layout in gaps (they still existed then) between the fast trains.

The regular through the day Kings Cross-Peterborough method of operation only came with ECML electrification. With the increased level and speed of services the Huntingdon reversals became impractical.

 

[cle]

Many older Huntingdon people still regard the 1980s as the heyday of their train service, when they had a non-stop HST to/from London every 2 hours, and an hourly Hitchin-Huntingdon DMU shuttle that was reversed across the layout in gaps (they still existed then) between the fast trains.

That is nowhere near as good as today's service. The peak fasts were as good a ride as the two-hourly HSTs. But typical of older folks' misrepresented nostalgia.

 

[swt_passenger]

Bedford is 80 km away from London - normally where outer commuter trains end, including Milton Keynes, Basingstoke, etc.

Anywhere further becomes a regional express type operation, for example, the distance from the London Terminal to Corby is similar to the distance to Portsmouth / Southampton.

That is only your opinion. Having lived in the Portsmouth/Southampton area for nearly 50 years I’ll repeat a point made a few months ago. They are significant London commuter origins, even if currently somewhat reduced compared to 2019…

You’re trying to come up with standardised explanations for every part of a network that’s been in random development for so long now, the various lines around London have to be accepted as all different...

 

[cle]

Agreed. There are no rules and each historical line has its own quirks. And yet 'NSE' ran to Exeter but Rugby was beyond 'the Northampton line'.

I remember when Ipswich and Peterborough were NSE dotted lines and not frequently served. Today's situation of having actual places which are destinations, plus offering many onwards rail connections - is far more useful than arbitrarily ending at smaller places like Huntingdon, Manningtree or Bedwyn. Instigates counter-direction and off-peak travel too, plus less London-centricity.

 

[miklcct]

Agreed. There are no rules and each historical line has its own quirks. And yet 'NSE' ran to Exeter but Rugby was beyond 'the Northampton line'.

I remember when Ipswich and Peterborough were NSE dotted lines and not frequently served. Today's situation of having actual places which are destinations, plus offering many onwards rail connections - is far more useful than arbitrarily ending at smaller places like Huntingdon, Manningtree or Bedwyn. Instigates counter-direction and off-peak travel too, plus less London-centricity.

In this case why do LNR suburban trains end at Tring, which isn't a useful destination in itself, and where intercity trains don't call at all?