EMR to introduce reduced Inter City service from Monday 20th July

[London Trains]

Sins of the past being revisited on the children of today. EMR can only make their timetable work if they can have two units working two different services in the platforms at St Pancras at the same time. That's what's driven the 5-car 24m formation. If different decisions had been made twenty odd years ago to give more platform capacity we wouldn't be in this mess as EMR could have just ordered either full length 7 or 9-car units or even just 5-car 26m units. We'd probably be in a different mess to be fair but not this specific mess

It's been proven many times on the forum that this isn't true.

Here are two different posts detailing how services could be run with fixed formation units:

Agreed. That's why I don't think adding loads of extra services is realistic. However, it very much is possible to run the existing pattern (6 tph EMR services) at full length using the existing 4 platforms. The entire connect service runs from platform 1 in the current timetable, so leaving that as-is, that gives 3 platforms for 4 tph.

IC services arrive at (current timetable)
.08 Sheffield
.27 Nottingham
.38 Sheffield
.57 Nottingham

IC services depart at (current timetable)
.03 Sheffield
.06 Nottingham
.32 Sheffield
.35 Nottingham

My proposal:
The .08 arrival forms the .35 departure
The .38 arrival forms the .06 departure
The .27 arrival forms the .03 departure
The .57 arrival forms the .32 departure

The .08 arrives in the platform the .03 departed from
The .38 arrives in the platform the .32 departed from
The .27 arrives in the platform the .06 departed from
The .57 arrives in the platform the .35 departed from

In this way, you get 4 tph cycling through three platforms.

Note how no service has to share platforms, all have sufficient turn-around time (25+ minutes), and this way every service can be full-length, without changing the timetable.

Not strictly true. If you used the fleet to their best potential you will have

360s
Arrive XX:52 depart XX:15
Arrive XX:22 depart XX:45

Nottinghams
Arrive XX:54 depart XX:35
Arrive XX:24 depart XX:05

Sheffields
Arrive XX:38 depart XX:02
Arrive XX:08 depart XX:32

This is achievable using all 4 platforms

 

[edwin_m]

If they'd ordered longer units, they might not have needed quite so many but the total number of coaches would be greater, and some of them would be running around largely empty at off-peak times. Bi-mode vehicles cost a lot to least and to operate. So it's basically because their franchise bid put forward a train plan that would work in theory* and were probably cheaper than anyone else's. If they'd tried to be more lavish, another bidder would probably have undercut them.

*and might still work if they can get all the trains delivered and working properly.

 

[WesternLancer]

If they'd ordered longer units, they might not have needed quite so many but the total number of coaches would be greater, and some of them would be running around largely empty at off-peak times. Bi-mode vehicles cost a lot to least and to operate. So it's basically because their franchise bid put forward a train plan that would work in theory* and were probably cheaper than anyone else's. If they'd tried to be more lavish, another bidder would probably have undercut them.

*and might still work if they can get all the trains delivered and working properly.

The time their inter city trains are empty is peak times!
There’s no shortage of passengers who the price is right imho

 

[Adrian1980uk]

Its always an issue, once the die was cast a few years ago (too ambitious with new stock introduction as has happened to many operators), EMR are just left to pick up the pieces. Remember back when Greater Anglia we're introducing the Stadler and to a lesser extent the 720s and look now at the reliability.

Problem is that it gets repeated so many times as the alternative plan (overlap the leasing of old and new train for longer) is expensive.

 

[jthjth]

Would it be feasible for the Sheffield services to include a call at Market Harborough? Passengers using this station have little alternative. Their service has suffered the intended cancellations, but are also suffering extra ad-hoc cancellations.

 

[IrishDave]

It's been proven many times on the forum that this isn't true.

Here are two different posts detailing how services could be run with fixed formation units:

Neither of those proposals would work during a Thameslink core block where Thameslink need to borrow one of the EMR platforms (or during disruption, for that matter). With a 5-car fleet, the platforming can be re-jigged to allow a spare platform for Thameslink without cancelling any EMR trains. With a fleet of full-length units, that would be impossible, and you'd then be in the unenviable position of having to choose which trains can remain.

 

[STINT47]

Neither of those proposals would work during a Thameslink core block where Thameslink need to borrow one of the EMR platforms (or during disruption, for that matter). With a 5-car fleet, the platforming can be re-jigged to allow a spare platform for Thameslink without cancelling any EMR trains. With a fleet of full-length units, that would be impossible, and you'd then be in the unenviable position of having to choose which trains can remain.

Thameslink can terminate short of London. MML passengers shouldn't have to suffer any more to accommodate London passengers who already have a far superior railway experience.

 

[Merle Haggard]

Would it be feasible for the Sheffield services to include a call at Market Harborough? Passengers using this station have little alternative. Their service has suffered the intended cancellations, but are also suffering extra ad-hoc cancellations.

That situation at Market Harboorugh also apples to Kettering. Kettering is also the railhead for Inter City passengers from Luton, Bedford and Wellingborough

 

[STINT47]

That situation at Market Harboorugh also apples to Kettering. Kettering is also the railhead for Inter City passengers from Luton, Bedford and Wellingborough

I don't think the Sheffield trains have enough capacity to accommodate extra passengers from stations south of Leicester.

 

[Merle Haggard]

I don't think the Sheffield trains have enough capacity to accommodate extra passengers from stations south of Leicester.

I was pointing out that the situation raised at Market Harborough applied to Kettering - with more usage , but not supporting the solution.
Until the recent service reduction I travelled fairly frequently on EMR Inter City, usually starting out after mid-day, and every train - Nottingham and Sheffield - that I caught had passengers travelling in the entrance vestibules.

 

[sh24]

Thameslink can terminate short of London. MML passengers shouldn't have to suffer any more to accommodate London passengers who already have a far superior railway experience.

An alternative view is you have very efficiency people moving 12 coach trains and relatively inefficient 5 coach InterCity trains. Chuck off all the MML passengers at Bedford so they can use Thamelink which makes best use of platform space and line capacity.

 

[Taunton]

I suspect the original St Pancras rebuild envisaged traffic to Luton Airport (especially) and Bedford would be on Thameslink. EMR have just mounted a competitive operation on this traffic from the main line platforms, which were presumably designed thinking all services from there would be to Leicester and beyond.

However poor planning is nothing new on this line, as I have discussed here from long ago. 5-car trains through from Sheffield, packed, run every hour just ahead of a full length HST from Nottingham, mostly empty. You could see the HST sat waiting at Leicester North signals as everyone on the platform for the "Next London train" tried to squeeze into the Meridian.

 

[dosxuk]

So it's basically because their franchise bid put forward a train plan that would work in theory* and were probably cheaper than anyone else's. If they'd tried to be more lavish, another bidder would probably have undercut them.

*and might still work if they can get all the trains delivered and working properly.

Remember they had planned to keep the 180's at one stage because the 810's weren't going to provide enough capacity, even though that was what they bid on. And also remember they were the only approved bidder for the franchise after the whole pensions-risk fiasco got the other bidders rejected.

I suspect the original St Pancras rebuild envisaged traffic to Luton Airport (especially) and Bedford would be on Thameslink.

The original St Pancras rebuild would have been based on the traffic at the time, with a bit of expansion possibility. That service level was basically one train per hour to Sheffield and one to Nottingham - four platforms would have seemed an extravagance when they were specified. It's important to remember just how much traffic growth the route has seen since it was originally privatised and put the decisions that were made in the early 90's in context. It was only in the late 70's when it was being seriously proposed to close and demolish the station because of it's lack of use.

 

[WesternLancer]

Remember they had planned to keep the 180's at one stage because the 810's weren't going to provide enough capacity, even though that was what they bid on. And also remember they were the only approved bidder for the franchise after the whole pensions-risk fiasco got the other bidders rejected.


The original St Pancras rebuild would have been based on the traffic at the time, with a bit of expansion possibility. That service level was basically one train per hour to Sheffield and one to Nottingham - four platforms would have seemed an extravagance when they were specified. It's important to remember just how much traffic growth the route has seen since it was originally privatised and put the decisions that were made in the early 90's in context. It was only in the late 70's when it was being seriously proposed to close and demolish the station because of it's lack of use.

Good point yet decision makers now or recently must not have learned the lessons of history and presumably don’t foresee that yet further growth is possible or actually happening now.
Many people on this forum talk about empty MML trains.
I just don’t see them whatever random time I choose to travel really

 

[Llandudno]

Good point yet decision makers now or recently must not have learned the lessons of history and presumably don’t foresee that yet further growth is possible or actually happening now.
Many people on this forum talk about empty MML trains.
I just don’t see them whatever random time I choose to travel really

Indeed, could someone provide a list of empty MML trains to/from Derby so that I can book on them and have a chance of seat, especially as EMR have got rid of seat reservations….

 

[The Planner]

Thameslink can terminate short of London. MML passengers shouldn't have to suffer any more to accommodate London passengers who already have a far superior railway experience.

It doesn't work like that. Have a look at the Network Code, Part D, section 4.6

 

[edwin_m]

And also remember they were the only approved bidder for the franchise after the whole pensions-risk fiasco got the other bidders rejected.

They could hardly turn round and say to DfT "we noticed we're the only bidder now, we're going to up the price".

The original St Pancras rebuild would have been based on the traffic at the time, with a bit of expansion possibility. That service level was basically one train per hour to Sheffield and one to Nottingham - four platforms would have seemed an extravagance when they were specified. It's important to remember just how much traffic growth the route has seen since it was originally privatised and put the decisions that were made in the early 90's in context. It was only in the late 70's when it was being seriously proposed to close and demolish the station because of it's lack of use.

The service to Sheffield and Nottingham doubled to 2TPH each around ten years before the St Pancras rebuild.

 

[dosxuk]

The service to Sheffield and Nottingham doubled to 2TPH each around ten years before the St Pancras rebuild.

Yes, but the plans for the rebuild were made long before the works actually started. It was around the time of the start of privatisation when the initial plans were being sized up, and even then 4 platforms would be seen as plenty for 4 long distance tph.

 

[222001]

Indeed, could someone provide a list of empty MML trains to/from Derby so that I can book on them and have a chance of seat, especially as EMR have got rid of seat reservations….

A few months ago, I got the 0609 CHD-STP. 5 car 222 on a Saturday morning. I had coach A to myself Leicester to London! I do accept that is not the norm though.

 

[RGM654]

Discussed on Green Signals

 

[SamW1998]

At least two diagrams missing this afternoon in addition to the temporary reduced timetable. 1F40 cancelled at Derby and the diagram starting 1D08 0635 STP - NOT didn’t start today

 

[Merle Haggard]

The reduced service doesn't seem to have reduced the number of trains failing in service. Perhaps the intention was that, with fewer trains out, more could be worked on.at the depot.
However, the revised service does mean that, when a train is cancelled because of a failure, the wait for the next one could be an hour instead of half an hour.

 

[Llandudno]

The reduced service doesn't seem to have reduced the number of trains failing in service. Perhaps the intention was that, with fewer trains out, more could be worked on.at the depot.
However, the revised service does mean that, when a train is cancelled because of a failure, the wait for the next one could be an hour instead of half an hour.

And resulting in having even less room to stand on the train….!

 

[hozza94]

Another 810 diagram disappeared today resulting in 1200 SHF - STP being cancelled.
2 train loads being wedged onto the 1235 which is also running closed to 30 mins late.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Another 810 diagram disappeared today resulting in 1200 SHF - STP being cancelled.
2 train loads being wedged onto the 1235 which is also running closed to 30 mins late.

The rest of service has run reasonable well so far so not sure its the complete meltdown thats being portrayed by media. Theres a lot of railway folk in the background trying to keep the show on the road and they need some help from Hendy/Hymes to stop anymore 222's leaving the fleet for a few months.

 

[westcoaster]

Not sure which one but an 810 passed my north bound running on diesel under the wires.

just checked and it was 810018

 

[Trainfan2019]

On the EMR app just now, no mention of any cancelled London trains. It just shows the trains with no accessible toilet in first class.

Regarding the trains that are all 'needing repairs at the same time ' though, are they major/minor repairs? Are there delays in obtaining replacement parts? Is it a staffing issue causing repairs to take longer than usual?

 

[Starmill]

RMT strike action over safety at East Midlands Railway

RMT members working at East Midlands Railway (EMR) plan to take strike action on Saturday, August 1, and the following two Saturdays over growing safety concerns that the company has failed to address.

www.rmt.org.uk

Train Managers taking strike action over the summer.

The dates appear to have been confirmed today as 1/8/15 August for a first round. Very few EMR trains to and from London St Pancras all day.

 

[43096]

The dates appear to have been confirmed today as 1/8/15 August for a first round. Very few EMR trains to and from London St Pancras all day.

That should help improve the fleet reliability stats then...

A train that doesn't leave the depot doesn't fail.

 

[Mugby]

The dates appear to have been confirmed today as 1/8/15 August for a first round. Very few EMR trains to and from London St Pancras all day.

Indeed.

Last train from Sheffield to London on Saturday is at 1600. That's truly awful!