MML Services following electrification to Nottingham

[JonathanH]

Genuine question, if there's not enough to get to Corby, how was there enough to get to Maidstone/Ashford?

They didn't originally expect to go to Rainham. It would also appear that some of the diagrams and availability was expected to be tighter.

It might also be observed that trains to Bedford are formed of 12 car 700s, while Maidstone and Ashford would have been 8 car 700s, so there would not be enough 12 car 700s to extend to Corby.

 

[70014IronDuke]

A Manton curve would not make much difference to East-West connectivity. It could provide a local service Wellingborough-Kettering-Corby-Peterborough but that's all, and would have to be justifiable on that basis.

But Peterboro' is a hub, with onward connections to Ely, Norwich and (yes) even Cambridge, which I'm sure would be mentioned in the reasoning, even if it is unrealistic for (say) Milton Keynes pax.

Bedford-Peterborough is about 35 miles on the A421/A1, but more than 60 miles by rail with a curve at Manton. The way to link Bedford with Peterborough by rail is at a Tempsford New Town ECML/EWR interchange.

A Manton curve would have no impact on what needs to be run on the Midland Main Line.

It would give for a connection into Corby once per hour, allowing for a current St Pancras-Corby service to be routed to Leicester (which was the OP to this little sub-thread's original suggestion, I think, somewhere up thread). I accept this would be subject to other issues.

The New Towns Taskforce first meeting was in Milton Keynes, the second was in Cambridge. They will be reporting next year. I shall be waiting to see what they recommend.

Agreed.

There are no funds for sops, only for infrastructure that facilitates new housebuilding and economic growth.

It would, of course, not be marketed as a 'sop'. There would be a lot of PR blah about "having extensively researched the possibilities for extending E-W services following the decision that a new line from Bedford to Cambridge not being economically justified, the decision to opt for an extension via Manton allows for multiple new journey possibilities and increased connectivity .... etc etc".

It could be made to look good, after all, most people have swallowed the EMR Connect marketing spiel-propaganda, which has essentially cut direct services between Luton, Bedford and Wellingboro to Leicester, Derby and beyond, services which have existed since the time of the Leicester and Hitchen railway. (Agreed, I doubt there were many back in those days, but that was for a very different era.)

 

[MCR247]

• First stop Leicester, then major stations to Sheffield (or maybe only to Derby. I'm not convinced that Sheffield or Nottingham need more than 1tph to London)

The amount of times I’ve been on full and standing 222s from Nottingham despite the 2tph suggests otherwise.

 

[43074]

It could be made to look good, after all, most people have swallowed the EMR Connect marketing spiel-propaganda, which has essentially cut direct services between Luton, Bedford and Wellingboro to Leicester, Derby and beyond

Relative to the number of passengers who got a faster or higher capacity London service the number of people who lost out here is tiny. Kettering to Leicester went up to half hourly and the connections at Kettering from stations south of there to Leicester/Nottingham aren't bad, I don't see why people are making it such a big deal.

 

[Magdalia]

But Peterboro' is a hub, with onward connections to Ely, Norwich and (yes) even Cambridge

These journeys are all much more direct by road on the A14. The Manton curve does not work because it is such a long way round. Get an old Baker atlas and look at page 39.

It could be made to look good, after all, most people have swallowed the EMR Connect marketing spiel-propaganda, which has essentially cut direct services between Luton, Bedford and Wellingboro to Leicester, Derby and beyond, services which have existed since the time of the Leicester and Hitchen railway. (Agreed, I doubt there were many back in those days, but that was for a very different era.)

A Manton curve isn't going to change the requirement for 2tph from Corby to St Pancras.

 

[LLivery]

They didn't originally expect to go to Rainham. It would also appear that some of the diagrams and availability was expected to be tighter.

It might also be observed that trains to Bedford are formed of 12 car 700s, while Maidstone and Ashford would have been 8 car 700s, so there would not be enough 12 car 700s to extend to Corby.

Ahhh thank you

 

[London Trains]

This isn't related to electrification to Nottingham specifically, but I didn’t think it was worth making a new thread over.

Would the existing Corby services be able to have stops at Leagrave added, to relieve Thameslink services and provide some new links? I am not too sure about the pathing, but the main issue I can work out is that it may break the northbound connection at Kettering.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Judging by the way that the xx02/xx32 St Pancras-Sheffield services regularly have to dawdle along from Sharnbrook behind the stopper, definitely not! This commonly leads to lost path at Wigston, Trent, Derby or Dore with late arrival at Sheffield and then missed connections.

 

[miklcct]

This isn't related to electrification to Nottingham specifically, but I didn’t think it was worth making a new thread over.

Would the existing Corby services be able to have stops at Leagrave added, to relieve Thameslink services and provide some new links? I am not too sure about the pathing, but the main issue I can work out is that it may break the northbound connection at Kettering.

I think the top priority is to have an St Albans stop added for connection to Thameslink services which terminates at St Albans.

 

[duffield]

Judging by the way that the xx02/xx32 St Pancras-Sheffield services regularly have to dawdle along from Sharnbrook behind the stopper, definitely not! This commonly leads to lost path at Wigston, Trent, Derby or Dore with late arrival at Sheffield and then missed connections.

And southbound, the services from Corby only have to be about 3 minutes late before they start holding up the service from Nottingham in the Luton area.

I've missed a few connections at St. Pancras due to this; it's already a regular occurrence, so adding another stop at Leagrave would make the current timetable unworkable instead of just fragile.

Edit: If at some point the 360's were replaced with new EMUs with a higher top speed to take advantage of the currently being upgraded OLE, I suppose that might allow an extra stop. Not necessarily Leagrave though.

 

[43074]

This isn't related to electrification to Nottingham specifically, but I didn’t think it was worth making a new thread over.

Would the existing Corby services be able to have stops at Leagrave added, to relieve Thameslink services and provide some new links? I am not too sure about the pathing, but the main issue I can work out is that it may break the northbound connection at Kettering.

Thameslink - especially off peak - does not need relieving from Leagrave, and the demand from Leagrave for those "new links" is tiny. It would break the timetable in both directions.

 

[Merle Haggard]

And southbound, the services from Corby only have to be about 3 minutes late before they start holding up the service from Nottingham in the Luton area.

I've missed a few connections at St. Pancras due to this; it's already a regular occurrence, so adding another stop at Leagrave would make the current timetable unworkable instead of just fragile.

Quite often those Up Corby trains are delayed at Wellingborough waiting to follow a late running Sheffield up the fast (they are slow line from Kettering).

A minor irritation is that, if you're on a late Up Nottingham the Up Corby always departs right time at Kettering (so you have the satisfaction of seeing it leave!) but that, late, Nottingham inevitably delays the following Sheffield, so the Corby that had to leave R/T from Kettering now kicks its heels at Wellingborough waiting to follow the latter. Hey ho!.

Edited for unpredictive text

 

[edwin_m]

And southbound, the services from Corby only have to be about 3 minutes late before they start holding up the service from Nottingham in the Luton area.

I've missed a few connections at St. Pancras due to this; it's already a regular occurrence, so adding another stop at Leagrave would make the current timetable unworkable instead of just fragile.

Edit: If at some point the 360's were replaced with new EMUs with a higher top speed to take advantage of the currently being upgraded OLE, I suppose that might allow an extra stop. Not necessarily Leagrave though.

The 360s are already uprated to 110mph. Short of building some more 810s it's hard to see what else could be done.

Quite often those Up Corby trains are delayed at Wellingborough waiting to follow a late running Sheffield up the fast (they are slow line from Kettering).

A minor irritation is that, if you're on a late Up Nottingham the Up Corby always departs right time at Kettering (so you have the satisfaction of seeing it leave!) but that, late, Nottingham inevitably delays the following Sheffield, so the Corby that had to leave R/T from Kettering now kicks its heels at Wellingborough waiting to follow the latter. Hey ho!.

Edited for unpredictive text

The recent Modern Railways article mentions tweaking the timetable including re-considering where the Corbies cross between fast and slow.

 

[Merle Haggard]

The 360s are already uprated to 110mph. Short of building some more 810s it's hard to see what else could be done.

The recent Modern Railways article mentions tweaking the timetable including re-considering where the Corbies cross between fast and slow.

On the Down, at first the xx.07 departures from Wellingborough crossed to the slow North of there and the xx.37 ran fast line to Kettering South. They all seem to cross at Wellingborough North now, and they often either knock an up express (?Notts) or are held waiting it and knock the following Sheffield. On the Up they always run slow to Wellingborough then cross at W'bro south, with the complication mentioned above.

//

As a pedant, the sign at Wellingborough that says 'London trains leave from both platform 2 & 4' worries me if I'm standing on Platform 3; but I suppose they really mean 'either' .

 

[30907]

I think the top priority is to have an St Albans stop added for connection to Thameslink services which terminates at St Albans.

It looks possible in the Down direction but difficult on the Up in the present timetable.
It would allow the inhabitants of Cricklewood and Hendon to get north with one fewer change (and faster). I wonder what increased revenue would result?

 

[miklcct]

It looks possible in the Down direction but difficult on the Up in the present timetable.
It would allow the inhabitants of Cricklewood and Hendon to get north with one fewer change (and faster). I wonder what increased revenue would result?

And also Kentish Town as well.

A Corby service alone doesn't help much, but if the 360 with added stops goes all the way to Leicester or even Loughborough and Nottingham, it will be very competitive with a coach from Finchley Road, given the coach runs nowhere near every half an hour.

 

[Bald Rick]

It looks possible in the Down direction but difficult on the Up in the present timetable.
It would allow the inhabitants of Cricklewood and Hendon to get north with one fewer change (and faster). I wonder what increased revenue would result?

Almost certainly a reduction in revenue.

 

[deltic08]

There certainly was talk of rebuilding the B582 overline bridge at Wigston in the summer of 2025 to facilitate Wigston to Syston electrification (with the basic point being that locals were understandably nervous about months of closure). Based on what I've seen about procurement for the future phases, it would suggest the intention is to accelerate the rate of progress, which is welcome. Kettering to Wigston has taken longer to deliver than Weaver Junction to Glasgow.

Edit: There is a story on the Independent's website about 36 rail projects considered to be at risk from cancellation by Rachel Reeves. MMLE isn't one of them.

Oh I hope so.
I am passionate about 25kv electrification. With Church Fenton, Stalybridge, Wigston and Barrhead energised there is very little to look forward to for years.
Wigston to Syston has most bridges rebuilt already for reasons other than electrification. There is no need at present to go that far to make operation easier to Leicester with electric only trains and electric/diesel/battery change over for bi/trimodes.
With Leicester station road bridge unable to be lifted, could slab track be fitted? Line speed is unlikely to be raised above 40mph so stresses on the track will be lower than speeds above that allowing a thinner base of concrete therefore more headroom. Platform ends can be shortened accordingly if the risk to passengers is deemed a hazard from the overhead wire and maybe lengthened at the other end if necessary when the station track layout is remodelled.
Is the B582 bridge between Wigston and Leicester station the only one that needs rebuilding? I assume the tunnels have sufficient clearance.

 

[43074]

It looks possible in the Down direction but difficult on the Up in the present timetable.
It would allow the inhabitants of Cricklewood and Hendon to get north with one fewer change (and faster). I wonder what increased revenue would result?

And also Kentish Town as well.

A Corby service alone doesn't help much, but if the 360 with added stops goes all the way to Leicester or even Loughborough and Nottingham, it will be very competitive with a coach from Finchley Road, given the coach runs nowhere near every half an hour.

It would still be faster to travel via St Pancras from those stations than to change to a 360 at St Albans though, especially to Nottingham/Derby/Sheffield. Plus it would be too political with Luton Airport who like their half hourly non stop trains to London.

 

[tram21]

Wasn't it the original plan anyway, given that the announcement system of the 700 has Corby already loaded into it?

The 700s have Nottingham and Birmingham NS loaded onto them, but I can't see them coming up here any time soon!!

 

[Merle Haggard]

The 360s are already uprated to 110mph. Short of building some more 810s it's hard to see what else could be done.

The recent Modern Railways article mentions tweaking the timetable including re-considering where the Corbies cross between fast and slow.

If they continue to Sharnbrook on the Up wouldn't that adds extra time? I think it's only 75 on the slows Wellingboro' to Bedford.
On the Down, crossing them at Sharnbrook would possibly avoid delays to other services (in both directions) but make forward connections at Kettering less certain.

 

[Nottingham59]

If they continue to Sharnbrook on the Up wouldn't that adds extra time? I think it's only 75 on the slows Wellingboro' to Bedford.

Openrailwaymap says 50mph.
Is there any reason why the slows can't be speeded up between Wellingborough and Sharnbrook?

 

[absolutelymilk]

The 360s are already uprated to 110mph. Short of building some more 810s it's hard to see what else could be done.

What's their acceleration like? Would more modern stock be able to improve on this (just as the 805s made up some time compared to 221s on the WCML because their acceleration is better, even though their top speed is lower. I realise not all of the time before anyone says it!)

 

[D365]

The lack of stopping service between Luton Airport Parkway and East Midlands is very inconvenient for airport travellers. By terminating the Connect service at Leicester, the whole network can save one change to travel to the airport.

East Midlands only serves as a regional hub at best. Notwithstanding the fact that transit at East Midlands Airport is provided only by buses, not trains, I would be surprised if there is any market for ground transfer between East Midlands Airport and Luton Airport.

 

[tram21]

East Midlands only serves as a regional hub at best. Notwithstanding the fact that transit at East Midlands Airport is provided only by buses, not trains, I would be surprised if there is any market for ground transfer between East Midlands Airport and Luton Airport.

I think the OP meant the East Midlands as a region, not the airport!

 

[A0]

I think the top priority is to have an St Albans stop added for connection to Thameslink services which terminates at St Albans.

Not even close - the only even vaguely sensible stop for adding to EMR services is Luton Airport Parkway.

East Midlands only serves as a regional hub at best. Notwithstanding the fact that transit at East Midlands Airport is provided only by buses, not trains, I would be surprised if there is any market for ground transfer between East Midlands Airport and Luton Airport.

I don't think the issue is connection between East Mids Airport and Luton Airport - however, there probably is demand to travel from Leicester, Loughborough and even Nottingham to Luton Airport. Luton is the UK's 5th busiest airport (after Heathrow, Gatwick, Manchester and Stansted) - so stopping EMR longer distance services there would make some sense - and far more sense than either St Albans or Bedford both of which routinely get peddled on these boards.

 

[Haywain]

the connections at Kettering from stations south of there to Leicester/Nottingham aren't bad,

You don't travel from south of Kettering to Derby or Sheffield then. Half an hour or more standing around at Kettering and Leicester on the way is pretty bad.

 

[Dr Hoo]

You don't travel from south of Kettering to Derby or Sheffield then. Half an hour or more standing around at Kettering and Leicester on the way is pretty bad.

The northbound 'connection' between the Corby service and the following Nottingham, which calls at Kettering, is usually around 7 minutes isn't it?

 

[Haywain]

The northbound 'connection' between the Corby service and the following Nottingham, which calls at Kettering, is usually around 7 minutes isn't it?

Something like that, and then you have the standing around at Leicester for the second change to take into consideration. After all, the first thing you see at Kettering is a Sheffield train hurtling through, knowing full well that you will be on one half an hour later.

 

[MikeFromLFE]

And this links the previous comment about airport links - surely the occasional service to / from Sheffield, Nottingham and Leicester could provide a stop at Luton Airport rather than insisting on a change at Kettering with the associated hanging around and lugging bags on & off trains?