MML capacity constraints around Leicestershire

[londonmidland]

With the Midland Mainline electrification ‘paused’ indefinitely, I can’t help but feel that now is the perfect time to tackle one of the biggest pinch points on the Midland Mainline.

That being the section between Syston and Wigston.

This part of the route has several conflicting moves between passenger and freight services. Specifically between East Midlands Railway service staying on the mainline, with CrossCountry and most freight services using the East>West route, between Peterborough and Nuneaton.

In the past, there have been several ideas to resolve this. These being:

- Build an additional platform at Leicester, on the east side of the station, where the carriage sidings are located.
- Re-double the Up and Down slows from Wigston to Syston.
- Build a flyover or underpass at Wigston, to keep XC and freight services separate to the MML traffic.
- Upgrade signalling from three aspect to four aspect.

Of course these were only ideas and none of these have actually come into fruition.

My question is, what is likely to happen first - electrification or capacity improvements? Are there any actual cases or documentation to support these ideas?

 

[Bald Rick]

It’s a good question.

There was initial study work done into Wigston / Leicester some time ago.

But, and it’s a big but (I cannot lie) …

There is no point spending hundreds of millions at Wigston if there isn’t capacity elsewhere on the network to get the extra trains there. Haughley Jn, Ely, all the level crossings (lots and lots of them) and headways Stamford to Frisby are just some of the issues that need resolution too.

(This all needs to be in Speculative Land)

 

[Zomboid]

My question is, what is likely to happen first - electrification or capacity improvements? Are there any actual cases or documentation to support these ideas?

Considering how far the wires have got so far, my guess would be electrification of the station.

 

[Yew]

There is no point spending hundreds of millions at Wigston if there isn’t capacity elsewhere on the network to get the extra trains there.

That feels like the "there is no point fixing traffic jams as they just move" argument, and I feel that is one that often misses the point, the point isn't to remove all traffic jams, the point is to increase the overall capacity of the system by alleviating a bottleneck.

Now whether the increase in capacity caused by elevating the constraint of the system will be considered worthwhile is another question. We have a very expensive outsourcing-heavy way of doing things, and a government that often struggles to understand how state-level investments work.

 

[Johnnie2Sheds]

Syston south curve back to double track, re-quadruple main line throughout area. Electrify. Move Syston station back to accommodate. Reinstate down platform, where up platform of original station was. 70 mph ladder junction at bell lane. Tighten Wigston curve to align with original up and down goods, Nuneaton lines to align with up and down mains. 70 mph ladder junction approaching Knighton. Demolish disused PSB. Extend cramped LIP. Install north curve at Knighton. Commence Ivanhoe service that was promised decades ago. Yea, I think that covers it. Time to bring Leicestershire into the 21st century. Don't worry, it's just my opinion, none of this will happen.

 

[Bald Rick]

That feels like the "there is no point fixing traffic jams as they just move" argument, and I feel that is one that often misses the point, the point isn't to remove all traffic jams, the point is to increase the overall capacity of the system by alleviating a bottleneck.

It’s a different argument.

 

[Zomboid]

Presumably Leicester isn't the constraint on any of the routes through there, so whatever you do won't actually result in any service improvements.

 

[JonathanH]

Presumably Leicester isn't the constraint on any of the routes through there, so whatever you do won't actually result in any service improvements.

Which suggests that a business case is going to very difficult to form. Moreover, if the capital budget for transport spending is going to be reduced by central government, and other schemes are already committed, it doesn't look there will be funding available for projects in this area

 

[Magdalia]

That feels like the "there is no point fixing traffic jams as they just move" argument, and I feel that is one that often misses the point, the point isn't to remove all traffic jams, the point is to increase the overall capacity of the system by alleviating a bottleneck.

To use a different analogy, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

Overall capacity is only increased by addressing the most constricted bottleneck.

 

[35B]

To use a different analogy, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

Overall capacity is only increased by addressing the most constricted bottleneck.

At which point there needs to be a decision about which chain needs to be fixed. Is that the MML chain, or the East>West one? What are operators (including the FOCs) trying to do that they can't because of this section of line?

And if there were an upgrade elsewhere (e.g. sort out the headways east of Syston), would something then be necessary to get the value out of those changes - and if so, what?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I find it so frustrating - the MML still not electrified. Might not happen now in my lifetime.

 

[Dr Hoo]

I find it so frustrating - the MML still not electrified. Might not happen now in my lifetime.

Surely the opposite is the case in the context of this thread? If the existing layout had already been wired it makes alleviation of the double track and single lead bottlenecks even more disruptive and expensive.
A lesson well applied to Bristol where the Filton Bank re-quadrupling, Ashley Down station construction, Bristol East Junction re-modelling and renovation of the Temple Meads roof above the tracks have just been completed and ‘cleared the decks’ for prospective wiring.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Surely the opposite is the case in the context of this thread? If the existing layout had already been wired it makes alleviation of the double track and single lead bottlenecks even more disruptive and expensive.
A lesson well applied to Bristol where the Filton Bank re-quadrupling, Ashley Down station construction, Bristol East Junction re-modelling and renovation of the Temple Meads roof above the tracks have just been completed and ‘cleared the decks’ for prospective wiring.

I like your positive thinking.

 

[35B]

Surely the opposite is the case in the context of this thread? If the existing layout had already been wired it makes alleviation of the double track and single lead bottlenecks even more disruptive and expensive.
A lesson well applied to Bristol where the Filton Bank re-quadrupling, Ashley Down station construction, Bristol East Junction re-modelling and renovation of the Temple Meads roof above the tracks have just been completed and ‘cleared the decks’ for prospective wiring.

That’s quite a charitable view of NRs delays in electrifying to Bristol, and their descoping of Temple Mead’s

 

[JonathanH]

That’s quite a charitable view of NRs delays in electrifying to Bristol, and their descoping of Temple Mead’s

Not an unreasonable one though - sonething similar applies about not putting the costs of the Reading station rebuild on the budget for the Elizabeth Line. Getting projects on the 'right' budget and avoiding doing things twice is appropriate handling of public money.

 

[35B]

Not an unreasonable one though - sonething similar applies about not putting the costs of the Reading station rebuild on the budget for the Elizabeth Line. Getting projects on the 'right' budget and avoiding doing things twice is appropriate handling of public money.

Which raises some interesting questions about where the extra costs of a lot more diesel should fall given how the decision was taken. It would almost certainly have been more economical had the two been done as an integrated project, rather than arbitrarily split for convenience.

 

[cle]

For Leicester, wasn't there also a potential 5th platform on the western side - i.e. to handle Midlands Connect additional services? Appreciate that isn't part of the macro network capacity discussion, but certainly would see more rail services into Leicester/shire... ?

 

[Mikey C]

Surely the opposite is the case in the context of this thread? If the existing layout had already been wired it makes alleviation of the double track and single lead bottlenecks even more disruptive and expensive.
A lesson well applied to Bristol where the Filton Bank re-quadrupling, Ashley Down station construction, Bristol East Junction re-modelling and renovation of the Temple Meads roof above the tracks have just been completed and ‘cleared the decks’ for prospective wiring.

The pathetically slow rebuild of Oxford station and the Botley Road bridge would fall into that category too.

I'm sure further spend on the MML will be announced before the next election. A lot of seats up for grab, and I imagine the Tories and Reform will be promising improvements as well, and playing the "Labour cancelled your electrification, they're not interested in the East Midlands card"...

 

[JonathanH]

I'm sure further spend on the MML will be announced before the next election. A lot of seats up for grab, and I imagine the Tories and Reform will be promising improvements as well, and playing the "Labour cancelled your electrification, they're not interested in the East Midlands card"...

There are much bigger issues for voters in the Leicester area than the state of the railway through Leicester, as the last election demonstrated.

Also, further spend on any capital railway projects is specifically at risk from the search for sources of more defence spending.

 

[InTheEastMids]

For Leicester, wasn't there also a potential 5th platform on the western side - i.e. to handle Midlands Connect additional services? Appreciate that isn't part of the macro network capacity discussion, but certainly would see more rail services into Leicester/shire... ?

The only public thing was a "Strategic Advice for funders/stakeholders" report, 5+ years ago.
i.e. not a plan, but something to set out the sorts of solution (and £) that'd be needed to deliver different service aspirations.

I think the most ambitious scenario had 5 tph North/South (4 IC plus a further service).
Plus something like 2tph Nottingham-Coventry, 2tph Peterborough-Birmingham, 2tph Leicester-Birmingham

The basic idea in terms of infrastructure was 4-tracking from Leicester to Wigston, with the western pair from P3/4 handling all IC traffic, the Eastern pair from P1/2 used by anything to/from Nuneaton. Then either a P0 (car park) or P5 (carriage sidings) for terminating services (maybe 2tph).

None of the above is funded, I think the only thing on the horizon is Midlands Rail Hub East which might add an extra 2tph Leicester-Birmingham sometime.
What has been managed is the demolition of a perfectly good pub and... nothing.

 

[cle]

so if that extra 2tph Leicester-Moor St came to fruition, where could it turn? Or would it need to extend to turn back somewhere with more platform capacity, e.g East Mids Parkway?

 

[NCT]

My preference would be for the 2tph Birmingham - Leicester stopper to operate through with a beef up 2tph Leicester - Nottingham stopper. This depends on paths lining up either side of Leicester and Nuneaton - Melton working as a distinct 'Slow' side in a 4-track formation through Leicester, Wigston North Junction permitting.

 

[The Planner]

so if that extra 2tph Leicester-Moor St came to fruition, where could it turn? Or would it need to extend to turn back somewhere with more platform capacity, e.g East Mids Parkway?

Without going through all the documentation that may be out there, you may find that MRH could provide 2tph extra to Leicester with the asterisk of "subject to enhancements outside its scope". Not saying that is the case though, someone may have timetabled it to prove its possible.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I'm sure further spend on the MML will be announced before the next election. A lot of seats up for grab, and I imagine the Tories and Reform will be promising improvements as well, and playing the "Labour cancelled your electrification, they're not interested in the East Midlands card"...

I really hope you are correct.

 

[Bald Rick]

The pathetically slow rebuild of Oxford station and the Botley Road bridge would fall into that category too.

I'm sure further spend on the MML will be announced before the next election. A lot of seats up for grab, and I imagine the Tories and Reform will be promising improvements as well, and playing the "Labour cancelled your electrification, they're not interested in the East Midlands card"...

No chance. It might be in some election manifestos, but nothign will be announced.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Corby provides an interesting example.

Labour re-open Corby station. Labour lose Corby at next election.

The Conservatives electrify to Corby and provide its best ever service. Conservatives lose Corby at next election.

 

[Zomboid]

Corby provides an interesting example.

Labour re-open Corby station. Labour lose Corby at next election.

The Conservatives electrify to Corby and provide its best ever service. Conservatives lose Corby at next election.

There might be places where rail service enhancement wins votes, but it's clearly not Corby.

 

[35B]

There might be places where rail service enhancement wins votes, but it's clearly not Corby.

Which, for those of us who care about the railway, is an important detail to remember - it may be really important for us, and many people may say "it's important", but that doesn't always convert to voting behaviour.

 

[AndrewE]

Which, for those of us who care about the railway, is an important detail to remember - it may be really important for us, and many people may say "it's important", but that doesn't always convert to voting behaviour.

It is a mystery to me what does drive voting behaviour... Over 40 years ago a university friend who had grown up on a farm and whose brother took it over said to us "Farmers always do better under Labour governments, I can't understand why they always vote Conservative!"

Of course nowadays (since Blair) it seems that obeying the Treasury's Thatcherite rules is the only way to get the "Market's" approval and avoid destruction by the media generally. Which has very unfortunate results for public transport, social housing, healthcare and especially social care. We see the results in mental health issues rebounding onto the railway almost daily.

 

[londonmidland]

On a slightly different note, does anyone know why the Up Fast at Leicester (platform 3) is only cleared for 40mph for passenger and 25mph for freight? I assume its something to do with clearances south of the station, as the line curves towards the left past the London Road overbridge? I also note that historically, immediately north of platform 2, the line speed used to raise to 110mph. However, this has now been dropped to 40mph, until you get past the junction leading to Humberstone Road Sidings.

Still a lot better than the previous 15mph restriction on all lines through the station, however is there scope for further line speed improvements through this area?