Loco hauled substitutions on Bedford - Bletchley

[ExRes]

No signs of any movement from 0610 5Z66 Yarmouth CHS to Leicester LIP

 

[JonathanH]

No signs of any movement from 0610 5Z66 Yarmouth CHS to Leicester LIP

Well no, particularly as the locomotive movement from Peterborough was cancelled - https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:84271/2026-06-22/detailed

 

[jfollows]

No signs of any movement from 0610 5Z66 Yarmouth CHS to Leicester LIP

Yarmouth is presumably where the coaching stock is stabled/maintained by Eastern Rail Services.

Eastern Rail Services

Eastern Rail Services

www.easternrailservices.co.uk

 

[nw1]

I don't know how serious this plan was but cancelling it seems sensible.
I doubt 50 year old stock would have coped with temperatures well in excess of 35C.

Mind you, assuming it's Mk-III, such stock was used in, for example, the summers of 1976, 1990 and 1995 which were notorious for high temperatures, and carrying on for an extended period too. IIRC Mk-III hauled stock was still used as late as summer 2003 when the temperature record was broken. HSTs, also using Mk-III, certainly were, anyhow.

I suspect providing the Mk-III would produce more comfortable conditions than everyone trying to crowd onto the regular shuttle!

 

[sad1e]

Doesn't seem to be going ahead , 0Z66 has been cancelled so no rolling stock from Great Yarmouth for GBRF and I can't seem to see any movements from other operators such as LSL or WCR.

 

[Deepgreen]

Just what a plan like this needs to succeed - constant changes of mind...

 

[zwk500]

Just what a plan like this needs to succeed - constant changes of mind...

Tbf we have no idea how reliable the initial information about it happening was.

 

[PP57601]

I’d say it was a fairly reliable piece of information.
However, the present day railway has many complications and hurdles to overcome.

 

[sad1e]

Tbf we have no idea how reliable the initial information about it happening was.

Well paths and all were in so I assume it was meant to go ahead at some point but was decided against.

 

[D1511]

More people in control who are better at creating the complications and hurdles than they are at negotiating them........

 

[Bletchleyite]

More people in control who are better at creating the complications and hurdles than they are at negotiating them........

I've no idea if that's the reason, but with the forecast red heat warning I'm not sure the cab of a classic diesel loco is where anyone would want to spend their day...with TOCs issuing "do not travel" type warnings and preserved lines withdrawing service it is probably reasonable not to do it, those who do have to travel can use the existing local service assuming the 150s don't conk out.

 

[Tilting007]

More people in control who are better at creating the complications and hurdles than they are at negotiating them........

More people in control who are better at creating the complications and hurdles than they are at negotiating them….

It was cancelled because the operator or route managing the incident didn’t want them.

 

[D1511]

It was cancelled because the operator or route managing the incident didn’t want them.

Why not?

 

[Tilting007]

Why not?

No idea. Seems logical to move people from Bedford when so few buses have been laid on for the amount of trains that usually run. I assume it is down to ownership of the service, who pays and many other things.

 

[D1511]

No idea. Seems logical to move people from Bedford when so few buses have been laid on for the amount of trains that usually run. I assume it is down to ownership of the service, who pays and many other things.

It seems like a wasted opportunity to try to mitigate some of the problems of losing a major London terminus. Disruption doesn't really get much more significant than this, and it might have been a positive look to try to actually do something about it rather than suggest people don't travel or use a crowded RRB. Poor show really.

 

[Trainman40083]

Maybe the line will get reopened far earlier than expected.... But these days, it seems more about "do not travel".

 

[Tilting007]

Maybe the line will get reopened far earlier than expected.... But these days, it seems more about "do not travel".

Track renewal starts Wednesday night.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jun 2026 ==

It seems like a wasted opportunity to try to mitigate some of the problems of losing a major London terminus. Disruption doesn't really get much more significant than this, and it might have been a positive look to try to actually do something about it rather than suggest people don't travel or use a crowded RRB. Poor show really.

Major is a bit strong for St Pancras EMR, but I do agree.

Not even having Buses to MKC is poor.

 

[Haywain]

Major is a bit strong for St Pancras EMR, but I do agree.

6 platforms with something like 16 northbound MML departures every off-peak hour, and it's not 'major'?

 

[Tilting007]

6 platforms with something like 16 northbound MML departures every off-peak hour, and it's not 'major'?

EMR is 4 platforms.

 

[Trainman40083]

EMR is 4 platforms.

I guess they could have included the two for Thameslink, where frequent trains join the MML.

 

[Tilting007]

I guess they could have included the two for Thameslink, where frequent trains join the MML.

As TL are still running to St Albans and Luton the passengers at the south end of the route and catered for, but the thread is about proposed additional trains (not provided). Only 2 buses per hour Bedford to Luton is unlikely to move many people compared to the train service provision that normally serves Bedford.

 

[AlterEgo]

My information is that nobody was prepared to pay for it, which is why it didn't happen.

 

[Class 466]

I think with the forecasted high temperatures, it’s probably best this didn’t happen. Last thing you want is more people travelling on the promise of additional connections for it all to go wrong and lead to more people being stranded.

 

[rmHawk765]

Only 2 buses per hour Bedford to Luton is unlikely to move many people compared to the train service provision that normally serves Bedford.

2 buses an hour versus approx 80 carriages an hour.

I think with the forecasted high temperatures, it’s probably best this didn’t happen.

I do agree running what is effectively a railtour to boost commuter services in 30 C+ weather is not the best of ideas... but a bus every 6-10 minutes could easily be a suitable replacement for a week or so, particularly as it does not put strain on any other mainlines unlike forcing people to go to Bletchley does.

 

[Tilting007]

My information is that nobody was prepared to pay for it, which is why it didn't happen.

Probably true…

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jun 2026 ==

2 buses an hour versus approx 80 carriages an hour.


I do agree running what is effectively a railtour to boost commuter services in 30 C+ weather is not the best of ideas... but a bus every 6-10 minutes could easily be a suitable replacement for a week or so, particularly as it does not put strain on any other mainlines unlike forcing people to go Bletchley does.

A bus to MK is tried and tested for when the WCML is blocked…

 

[rmHawk765]

A bus to MK is tried and tested for when the WCML is blocked…

Assuming you meant MML, in this case a bus to Luton is superior as it's only this specific section of the MML that is blocked and TL continues to run a frequent service from the northernmost point possible. If a larger part of the line was blocked (e.g for planned engineering), that is when a bus to MKC may be the only viable option (I appreciate there is such a blockage this weekend). Why would you displace passengers that are used to the TL service patterns when it is likely easier to just run frequent buses to Luton?

 

[Tilting007]

Assuming you meant MML, in this case a bus to Luton is superior as it's only this specific section of the MML that is blocked and TL continues to run a frequent service from the northernmost point possible. If a larger part of the line was blocked (e.g for planned engineering), that is when a bus to MKC may be the only viable option (I appreciate there is such a blockage this weekend). Why would you displace passengers that are used to the TL service patterns when it is likely easier to just run frequent buses to Luton?

I meant when the WCML is blocked the coaches shuttle very frequently between Bedford and MKC.
Going to Luton does make more sense, of course it does bur2 buses per hour doesn’t. MK is likely an easier option for bussing people to avoid the M1 and offers plenty of trains to London.

 

[Haywain]

EMR is 4 platforms.

Are EMR the sole users of the MML?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jun 2026 ==

Going to Luton does make more sense, of course it does bur2 buses per hour doesn’t.

Well, there’s only two trains an hour from Luton, so no point in providing a more frequent bus.

 

[LUYMun]

I think with the forecasted high temperatures, it’s probably best this didn’t happen. Last thing you want is more people travelling on the promise of additional connections for it all to go wrong and lead to more people being stranded.

Or for said trains to be overcrowded with gricers thus reducing possibility of seats and increasing crowding risk.

 

[rmHawk765]

I meant when the WCML is blocked the coaches shuttle very frequently between Bedford and MKC.

Oh alright, apologies. Yes, I mean the treatment of WCML passengers doesn't come as a surprise... but what is the typical Bedford-MK bus frequency when there are large MML closures?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jun 2026 ==

Well, there’s only two trains an hour from Luton

It is 4 trains an hour in the peak, so the bus should be timetabled to match this at peak.