Leicester to London St. Pancras shuttle service?

[londonmidland]

Should the electrification had continued for a few more miles into Leicester (3 miles from Wigston South Jn to Leicester station), then I think it would have been a good idea to introduce a Leicester to London shuttle service.

This would be ran be refurbished Class 360s, running every 30 or 60 minutes, calling at all intermediate stations - Market Harborough, Kettering, Wellingborough, Bedford, Luton & Luton Airport Parkway.

This would provide more useful and frequent connections for passengers travelling to/from the intermediate station to Leicester and beyond, as well as free up the EMR Intercity services for passengers travelling to/from Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield.

The service would use platform 4 at Leicester, with the Ivanhoe either being platform on top of this, or re-platformed to platform 1.

Now I’m not sure how this would affect capacity on the Midland Mainline, as well as London St. Pancras itself, but I’m sure there would be a way to make this work.

I’d like to hear your thoughts on this.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Disregarding all capacity and timetabling issues at this stage, where do you imagine the Class 360 to be coming from? The whole fleet is effectively required for the current Corby service in the medium term with reduced unit capacity after the refurb and growing demand from existing stations, plus, probably, Wixams.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Have thought about this before. I could see a lot of sense in portion working it off the Corby.

 

[bramling]

Should the electrification had continued for a few more miles into Leicester (3 miles from Wigston South Jn to Leicester station), then I think it would have been a good idea to introduce a Leicester to London shuttle service.

This would be ran be refurbished Class 360s, running every 30 or 60 minutes, calling at all intermediate stations - Market Harborough, Kettering, Wellingborough, Bedford, Luton & Luton Airport Parkway.

This would provide more useful and frequent connections for passengers travelling to/from the intermediate station to Leicester and beyond, as well as free up the EMR Intercity services for passengers travelling to/from Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield.

The service would use platform 4 at Leicester, with the Ivanhoe either being platform on top of this, or re-platformed to platform 1.

Now I’m not sure how this would affect capacity on the Midland Mainline, as well as London St. Pancras itself, but I’m sure there would be a way to make this work.

I’d like to hear your thoughts on this.

First question is, who is this intended to benefit? For London journeys, it will not be overly popular at Market Harborough due to the number of stops, and I can’t see many Leicester passengers using it (unless some cheap train-specific fares are offered). Other intermediate journeys south of Kettering are already catered for by the Corby services. So it’s essentially catering for journeys like Leicester-Luton, Leicester-Wellingborough, Leicester-Bedford, which aren’t in massive demand.

I could see more value in having a Leicester-Market Harborough-Kettering-Bedford-St Pancras service which would offer a trade-off between providing some extra capacity on the south end of the route as well as linking intermediate stations.

Unfortunately, pathing any of this would be a nightmare, especially any calls at the London end. Which of the 2tph to each of Sheffield and Nottingham are going to be binned to make space?

 

[SargeNpton]

Have thought about this before. I could see a lot of sense in portion working it off the Corby.

In the same way that portion working of LNWR services splitting and joining at Birmingham New Street proved to be such a good idea?

 

[Topological]

First question is, who is this intended to benefit? For London journeys, it will not be overly popular at Market Harborough due to the number of stops, and I can’t see many Leicester passengers using it (unless some cheap train-specific fares are offered). Other intermediate journeys south of Kettering are already catered for by the Corby services. So it’s essentially catering for journeys like Leicester-Luton, Leicester-Wellingborough, Leicester-Bedford, which aren’t in massive demand.

I could see more value in having a Leicester-Market Harborough-Kettering-Bedford-St Pancras service which would offer a trade-off between providing some extra capacity on the south end of the route as well as linking intermediate stations.

Unfortunately, pathing any of this would be a nightmare, especially any calls at the London end. Which of the 2tph to each of Sheffield and Nottingham are going to be binned to make space?

Wouldn't it make more stations a single change from Sheffield?

If this also allowed the removal of some stops from the "Intercity" trains then that might also have benefit. Even with the extra capacity offered by the 810s relative to the 222s, it is good to allow for growth.

We briefly had similar when the Turbostars first came in to supplement the half-hourly HST. Things soon grew after that.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Dec 2025 ==

Have thought about this before. I could see a lot of sense in portion working it off the Corby.

I can see the sense, portion working does work in many places. Are the 360s any good at being portion worked? My knowledge of what they did on Anglia is limited.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In the same way that portion working of LNWR services splitting and joining at Birmingham New Street proved to be such a good idea?

The issue there was running across Birmingham and thus importing delay. It's more like taking 4 off/putting 4 on at Northampton, which works fine.

 

[ENC Rail]

If there are not enough class 360s, would the 350/2s be worth considering? (Assuming Northern are not taking them on). I'm no expert on the 350s or 360s but I'd imagine they are very similar mechanically, thus reducing crew and depot staff training time. Just an idea!

 

[43096]

Have thought about this before. I could see a lot of sense in portion working it off the Corby.

I'd run the Corby as a portion off the Leicester. In other words northbound the train would detach rear four for Corby. Southbound the Corby portion would arrive first with the Leicester coupling at the back.

 

[cle]

350s make good sense for this in theory.

I don't think Luton needs to be a call - Thameslink is enough for it. LAP is more of a railhead now, it's for the airport (esp with DART) and the many jobs in that area. One Luton area call is fine.

TL should extend all Kentish Town / West Hampstead terminators to St Albans and/or Luton however - for more of a metro service.

 

[JonathanH]

Previous discussion of why splitting at Kettering doesn't work - https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...rification-to-nottingham.274818/#post-6965719

 

[Kingston Dan]

Or you could just electrify the whole MML and reap the rewards.

 

[stadler]

Disregarding all capacity and timetabling issues at this stage, where do you imagine the Class 360 to be coming from? The whole fleet is effectively required for the current Corby service in the medium term with reduced unit capacity after the refurb and growing demand from existing stations, plus, probably, Wixams.

There are dozens of spare class 360 units currently. They are probably the most underused fleet on our network. There are 21 class 360 units. The current London to Corby service requires 6 diagrams. So that is 6 units if you run four them as four car or 12 units if you run them as eight car or 18 units if you run them as twelve car. They have never bothered with twelve car units which means that 12 units is the maximum that are used currently. That leaves at least 9 spare units. That is plenty of extra units to run a potential Leicester service.

 

[Kite159]

Breaking out the crayons, if the wires continued into Leicester then an hourly London - Leicester all station stopper combined with an hourly London to Corby stopper (with a separate Kettering - Corby shuttle to connect with the Leicester stopper). Would allow the Nottingham 'fast' to be sped up.

Although timetabling wise would be a nightmare to fit in with the 2 track railway between Kettering & Leicester area

 

[JonathanH]

Would allow the Nottingham 'fast' to be sped up.

Would that involve two non-stop trains leaving for Leicester three minutes apart? Would Kettering and Market Harborough be left with only a stopping service to London, or an hourly stopping service and an hourly fast? Alternatively, if Kettering and Market Harborough were alternate stops in a faster service, would there just be an hourly service between them?

 

[Kite159]

Would that involve two non-stop trains leaving for Leicester three minutes apart? Would Kettering and Market Harborough be left with only a stopping service to London, or an hourly stopping service and an hourly fast? Alternatively, if Kettering and Market Harborough were alternate stops in a faster service, would there just be an hourly service between them?

Hourly stopper and hourly fast service for Kettering & Market Harborough.

 

[Charlie978]

Personally I would just alternate the current half hourly stopper between Corby and Leicester. That way nothing changes south of Kettering and there’s extra connectivity at Leicester and from the Sheffield.

I believe the Corby - Kettering portion is lightly loaded (although I have never ridden it) so hourly maybe fine. If you were really desperate, could a 4 car shuttle in the missing half hour be pathed only to Kettering?

 

[Magdalia]

I believe the Corby - Kettering portion is lightly loaded (although I have never ridden it) so hourly maybe fine.

The ORR data released on Thursday shows that Corby now has over half a million entries and exits per year, with about 40% of them through journeys to/from London.

 

[InTheEastMids]

Previous discussion of why splitting at Kettering doesn't work - https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...rification-to-nottingham.274818/#post-6965719

Am not really seeing the points in this post being addressed in this thread.

Corby now has over half a million entries and exits per year

By far the strongest demand growth on the MML, and much more headroom due to housing growth around Corby. Just don't understand the why you'd abandon this growth and instead implement a more complex and slower timetable to Leicester

Even with the extra capacity offered by the 810s relative to the 222s, it is good to allow for growth.

I agree that the extra capacity the 810s offer could be quickly used up. But buying more 810 vehicles seems like a pretty straightforward solution.

 

[43074]

By far the strongest demand growth on the MML, and much more headroom due to housing growth around Corby. Just don't understand the why you'd abandon this growth and instead implement a more complex and slower timetable to Leicester

Agreed, the strength of the current half hourly patterns south of Leicester is it's simplicity, to abandon that for the sakes of tiny flows like Chesterfield to Bedford only having to change once makes zero sense. Especially given the growth it has generated not only from Corby but also Kettering and Leicester which have already recovered to pre 2020 traffic levels.

The weakness of the timetable, and probably what a future recast will seek to address, is it's day to day performance, it is reliant on flat crossing moves from fast to slow lines with very tight junction margins in both directions to work south of Wellingborough (i.e. not only with Thameslink but also EMR Connect). Putting an extra train per hour on the already busy two track section between Kettering and Leicester would make it more fragile and not help reliability further south.

 

[Helvellyn]

There are dozens of spare class 360 units currently. They are probably the most underused fleet on our network. There are 21 class 360 units. The current London to Corby service requires 6 diagrams. So that is 6 units if you run four them as four car or 12 units if you run them as eight car or 18 units if you run them as twelve car. They have never bothered with twelve car units which means that 12 units is the maximum that are used currently. That leaves at least 9 spare units. That is plenty of extra units to run a potential Leicester service.

Once refurbished with 2+2 seating and luggage racks for Luton Airport stops there will be a need to sort things so that 12-car services can be operated to/from Corby. Many services are full through to/from Bedford in the peaks as it is with the existing outer suburban seating layout. So that would need 18 of the 21 units available.

 

[70014IronDuke]

Agreed, the strength of the current half hourly patterns south of Leicester is it's simplicity, to abandon that for the sakes of tiny flows like Chesterfield to Bedford only having to change once makes zero sense. Especially given the growth it has generated not only from Corby but also Kettering and Leicester which have already recovered to pre 2020 traffic levels.

Given that Kettering has never before had such a service as now - with 2 tph non-stop + 2 tph semi-fast to St Pancras, along with 2 tph to Mkt Harboro, Leicester, Nottingham, plus OK connections at Leicester for Derby, Chesterfield Sheffield - it honestly has no excuses not to be at record levels.
It's the other stations towards London which have lost the through services and one-change at Leicester that have missed out on direct connections.

The weakness of the timetable, and probably what a future recast will seek to address, is it's day to day performance, it is reliant on flat crossing moves from fast to slow lines with very tight junction margins in both directions to work south of Wellingborough (i.e. not only with Thameslink but also EMR Connect). Putting an extra train per hour on the already busy two track section between Kettering and Leicester would make it more fragile and not help reliability further south.

All true except, surely, the last sentence? I'd have thought Kettering to Wigston was the 'easy bit' in the OP's plan. Just four trains per hour each way, and flighted close to each other. If there is freight, it can always go via the back road, can't it?

 

[Bald Rick]

Should the electrification had continued for a few more miles into Leicester (3 miles from Wigston South Jn to Leicester station), then I think it would have been a good idea to introduce a Leicester to London shuttle service.

This would be ran be refurbished Class 360s, running every 30 or 60 minutes, calling at all intermediate stations - Market Harborough, Kettering, Wellingborough, Bedford, Luton & Luton Airport Parkway.

I'd run the Corby as a portion off the Leicester. In other words northbound the train would detach rear four for Corby. Southbound the Corby portion would arrive first with the Leicester coupling at the back.

No capacity for that, as discussed in the thread linked to by @JonathanH

TL should extend all Kentish Town / West Hampstead terminators to St Albans and/or Luton however - for more of a metro service.

No capacity for that, discussed in other threads.

Personally I would just alternate the current half hourly stopper between Corby and Leicester.

Again, no capacity for that.

The weakness of the timetable, and probably what a future recast will seek to address, is it's day to day performance, it is reliant on flat crossing moves from fast to slow lines with very tight junction margins in both directions to work south of Wellingborough (i.e. not only with Thameslink but also EMR Connect). Putting an extra train per hour on the already busy two track section between Kettering and Leicester would make it more fragile and not help reliability further south.

The fragility is not the crossing movements as such, but that almost every train is on minimum headway and/or minimum margins at least once (and often many more times) in its journey. That means any delay, for any reason, causes reactionary delay that spreads through the network.

The more sprightly 810s when on electric, and 110mph for the 360s, will each help matters a little.

 

[baz962]

No capacity for that, as discussed in the thread linked to by @JonathanH



No capacity for that, discussed in other threads.



Aain, no capacity for that.



The fragility is not the crossing movements as such, but that almost every train is on minimum headway and/or minimum margins at least once (and often many more times) in its journey. That means any delay, for any reason, causes reactionary delay that spreads through the network.

The more sprightly 810s when on electric, and 110moh for the 360s, will each help matters a little.

Don't suppose you know when 110 for 360's will be , considering the wires have been finished for a few months now.

 

[Bald Rick]

Don't suppose you know when 110 for 360's will be , considering the wires have been finished for a few months now.

I don’t, sorry

 

[cactustwirly]

Given that Kettering has never before had such a service as now - with 2 tph non-stop + 2 tph semi-fast to St Pancras, along with 2 tph to Mkt Harboro, Leicester, Nottingham, plus OK connections at Leicester for Derby, Chesterfield Sheffield - it honestly has no excuses not to be at record levels.
It's the other stations towards London which have lost the through services and one-change at Leicester that have missed out on direct connections.


All true except, surely, the last sentence? I'd have thought Kettering to Wigston was the 'easy bit' in the OP's plan. Just four trains per hour each way, and flighted close to each other. If there is freight, it can always go via the back road, can't it?

What back road is that?

Manton? Would require reversals and extra complications

The service pattern is broadly an improvement on what has gone before, faster journey times to London from Nottingham and Kettering and arguably with the 810s a huge improvement in quality. The biggest flows are to London and these are more improved Vs previously

 

[Kite159]

Or even swap over the calls at Kettering & Market H onto the Sheffield 'stopper'. Swapping departure times at St pancras with the XX;33 being a Nottingham Fast (Leicester only) and the XX;36 being the Sheffield stopper.

That way Mr Biggins of Kettering is happy he has a direct train to Long Eaton

 

[westcoaster]

I never under stood why for example the fast Nottingham and Sheffield, could not be coupled and split at Leicester. That would save a path an hour and free up platform space at St Pancras.

 

[Topological]

I never under stood why for example the fast Nottingham and Sheffield, could not be coupled and split at Leicester. That would save a path an hour and free up platform space at St Pancras.

From the outside that is not a bad point.

Northbound, the units would be together anyway so could run through Platform 2 without major issue.

Southbound, there is the potential for issues, but both Platforms 3 and 4 are available. Hence the issue is not as acute as Northbound when Platform 1 may be blocked by the CrossCountry.

IF all trains were 5 car then worst case the on time portion could go south alone while the late portion joined whatever was next into Leicester. It would occupy one of the southbound platforms, but the other would still be available.

Of course, this would not work when there are already 10-car running as they could not join and the 5-car would have to wait longer. Still not the end of the world though.

 

[Bald Rick]

I never under stood why for example the fast Nottingham and Sheffield, could not be coupled and split at Leicester. That would save a path an hour and free up platform space at St Pancras.

Because some of them will be 10 car….