Ivanhoe line (via Coalville) - potential reopening?

[Dr Hoo]

This is really good. Odd no-one else has said anything about this?

I wonder what the Passenger Train only Max Gradient is as this seems quite steep but if it's a passenger only curve then it might pass. From what I can see it would pass looking at a post from 2014 from Planner saying Lickey is 1 in 37 while this states it would be 1 in 40.

It feels like for this to happen it needs to be part of a larger Leicester railway project which might be coming. With Electrification and a new Up and Down Slow it feels like Leicester station needs a serious redesign in the coming years to accommodate both so allowing more capacity.

I never managed to get the map to open and still can’t.
Given that there already stone trains that have to run round at Knighton it seems madness to think about an ‘impossible-for-freight’ curve.

 

[Bartsimho]

I never managed to get the map to open and still can’t.
Given that there already stone trains that have to run round at Knighton it seems madness to think about an ‘impossible-for-freight’ curve.

The idea has a realigned Wigston to Coalville curve which would be at a similar gradient. It just has a curve and flyover facing Leicester which is steep so it doesn't change gradients of existing tracks severely.

Also try opening in incognito/private mode as sometimes that helps. You'd want Existing Lines, Future, Contours and High Level Line ticked if you can.

I don't know if this helps but it also has the gradients

 

[zwk500]

This is really good. Odd no-one else has said anything about this?

I wonder what the Passenger Train only Max Gradient is as this seems quite steep but if it's a passenger only curve then it might pass. From what I can see it would pass looking at a post from 2014 from Planner saying Lickey is 1 in 37 while this states it would be 1 in 40.

For reference, the maximum normal design gradient for railways carrying freight is 1 in 100, and you'd need to justify anything steeper (although being built between two existing alignments is quite a good justification!).

 

[NoRoute]

I would love to see Network Rail's costings for how they arrive at £271M to run a basic passenger service along an existing route, with some basic halt type stations thrown up along the route.

At these kind of sums the railway industry is pricing itself out of any new public transport schemes, better to spend the £271M on a mix of good quality, fast buses and some improvements to the road network to get them into and out of the town centers more quickly. A bus service between Burton and Leicester train stations, to provide onward rail connectivity would be the better investment.

 

[zwk500]

I would love to see Network Rail's costings for how they arrive at £271M to run a basic passenger service along an existing route, with some basic halt type stations thrown up along the route.

At these kind of sums the railway industry is pricing itself out of any new public transport schemes, better to spend the £271M on a mix of good quality, fast buses and some improvements to the road network to get them into and out of the town centers more quickly. A bus service between Burton and Leicester train stations, to provide onward rail connectivity would be the better investment.

The £271m is the additional cost on top of the Derby-Coalville section to provide Coalville-Leicester with a new chord.

 

[Mikw]

I'd be amazed if this every happens, it's been talked about for decades now.

 

[NoRoute]

The £271m is the additional cost on top of the Derby-Coalville section to provide Coalville-Leicester with a new chord.

Yes I can see the figure, £271M, what I would be interested to see is how that figure breaks down into the various elements and work packages of the scheme and whether they provide value for money.

It would be interesting to see the financial justification for doubling the track from Burton to Coalville because currently the amount of freight traffic appears to be very minimal and infrequent, doubling the track to accommodate what is likely to be an equally infrequent passenger service seems like gold-plated engineering of the worst kind.

Then when you add the suggestion that phase 1 will just get to Burton on Trent, with a connection to Leicester at some uncertain future date, the whole rationale for the scheme collapses because for Ashby and certainly for Coalville, it is Leicester which is the major local town that much of the potential passenger traffic will be travelling to. One of the fundamentals in any passenger service is whether passengers actually want to travel to the destination you are offering, in sufficient numbers to make it viable, and for Ashby and Coalville to Burton and Derby, it's likely the answer will be no.

 

[zwk500]

Yes I can see the figure, £271M, what I would be interested to see is how that figure breaks down into the various elements and work packages of the scheme and whether they provide value for money.

I expect land acquisition and signalling changes to the MML are a substantial part of the costs.

It would be interesting to see the financial justification for doubling the track from Burton to Coalville because currently the amount of freight traffic appears to be very minimal and infrequent, doubling the track to accommodate what is likely to be an equally infrequent passenger service seems like gold-plated engineering of the worst kind.

Yes it'd be interesting to see that, but then a half-hourly service with heavy freight at random times might well drive something even if not full redoubling.

Then when you add the suggestion that phase 1 will just get to Burton on Trent, with a connection to Leicester at some uncertain future date, the whole rationale for the scheme collapses because for Ashby and certainly for Coalville, it is Leicester which is the major local town that much of the potential passenger traffic will be travelling to. One of the fundamentals in any passenger service is whether passengers actually want to travel to the destination you are offering, in sufficient numbers to make it viable, and for Ashby and Coalville to Burton and Derby, it's likely the answer will be no.

I'm fairly sure the initial phase is proposed to be a Derby service.

 

[Mr. SW]

This is really good.

Thank you.

The high level line was really just a bit of crayon fun to see if it fitted. The steep gradients and excruciatingly sharp curve (125m) is just a metro-style solution. I wouldn't put a freight over it.

 

[The exile]

As a resident of Coalville, I say let’s get on with it. There is an extraordinary amount of complaining in local Facebook groups about how it will ‘kill the town’ or ‘bring in undesirables’, yet the railway (and huge amounts of coal) built this town. The Stephensons even lived here briefly!

To judge from those reactions, there are plenty of undesirables there already.

 

[Shred Metal]

A few flat pack stations, a simple back n forth service and (probably a fair amount of) track renewal and it’s overcome the biggest hurdle the campaign faces - getting a single operation train running on the line is the priority for now. Not the chord. Not to Leicester. Just a few stations between Coalville and Burton, and a basic service. The rest can follow.

 

[InTheEastMids]

A few flat pack stations, a simple back n forth service and (probably a fair amount of) track renewal and it’s overcome the biggest hurdle the campaign faces - getting a single operation train running on the line is the priority for now. Not the chord. Not to Leicester. Just a few stations between Coalville and Burton, and a basic service. The rest can follow.

Agree with this, get something running between Coalville and Burton asap.

If you're determined to reach Leicester, then terminating at the park & ride on Ratby Lane at least provides some semblance of integrated transport. Of course being the UK we would mess this up (e.g. by not rejigging the P&R so that the bus stops are by the station exit).

Apologies for the next bit, been doing some DIY with solvent-based paints:
If HS2 2b hadn't been cancelled there may have been half a thought about a direct London service, e.g. could join a Nottingham train at Kettering as the Oakham/Melton service does.

If it had the good fortune to be elsewhere in Europe, a city the size of Leicester might well have a tram scheme, and you might consider a tram train where somewhere East of the P&R you transition to on-street running on the A47 Hinckley Road and maybe terminate in Jubilee Square.

 

[overthere 2]

According to the article below it seems that the Leicester problem has been solved (presume temporarily), because it looks like trains will terminate at the King power stadium, home of Leicester city football club.

I'm guessing if the re-opening proves successful then the industrial units will be compulsory purchased, demolished and the connection reinstated?

www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/local-news/fesh-hope-derbyshire-town-regain-11083354

Fresh hope for Derbyshire town to regain its railway station​

Government support for the Ivanhoe Line's reinstatement through South Derbyshire was spiked by Labour but a new group has its backing​

View Image
The Ivanhoe Line has been closed to passengers since the 1960s(Image: Geoff Bell)

There may be fresh hope for a Derbyshire town that appears on an infamous list of large English settlements without a train station or close to one.

The former Ivanhoe Line from Burton, Staffordshire, to Leicester, which had involved a railway station in Castle Gresley, closed in the 1960s and long-held plans to reinstate it were spiked in 2024.

Now a new Ivanhoe Line parliamentary group has been formed....

There is also this Hansard link:
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons‏/2026-01-28/debates/CC8FCD0C-DA96-4CCA-B643-1BBEE90EA02C/IvanhoeLineRestoration

I read an article a little while ago and while it was not about the Ivanhoe line, it did mention it and said that the reason that it has been so stop/start to try and get it reopened to passengers is that it passes through lots of different local authorities.

Also, it passes through various different constituencies with MPs from different parties so either they want the good publicity for themselves and their party or don't want to be seen working with the "Enemy" by their voters.

So having a cross-party committee in Westminster can only be a good thing, also Ashby, Coalville etc will be top targets for Reform at the next election so I could see this being fast tracked so when an election is called then you will get the labour MPs/Candidates saying "Vote for me as I am bringing back your railway".

 

[70014IronDuke]

According to the article below it seems that the Leicester problem has been solved (presume temporarily), because it looks like trains will terminate at the King power stadium, home of Leicester city football club.

I'm guessing if the re-opening proves successful then the industrial units will be compulsory purchased, demolished and the connection reinstated?

www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/local-news/fesh-hope-derbyshire-town-regain-11083354



There is also this Hansard link:
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons‏/2026-01-28/debates/CC8FCD0C-DA96-4CCA-B643-1BBEE90EA02C/IvanhoeLineRestoration

I read an article a little while ago and while it was not about the Ivanhoe line, it did mention it and said that the reason that it has been so stop/start to try and get it reopened to passengers is that it passes through lots of different local authorities.

Also, it passes through various different constituencies with MPs from different parties so either they want the good publicity for themselves and their party or don't want to be seen working with the "Enemy" by their voters.

So having a cross-party committee in Westminster can only be a good thing, also Ashby, Coalville etc will be top targets for Reform at the next election so I could see this being fast tracked so when an election is called then you will get the labour MPs/Candidates saying "Vote for me as I am bringing back your railway".

A little surprised this has not caused a few comments on here - perhaps everyone is a little cynical that this is only prompted by the chance of political capital?

I guess this would be my favourite choice of line for potential reopening, but can it happen under the current financial-economic conditions?

"Government support for the Ivanhoe Line's reinstatement through South Derbyshire"​

Ha ha! I like the way the journo calls it the Ivanhoe Line as if it was always called that. Rather like the term "Varsity Line", I think both terms were only coined in the 1990s - nobody called them these names when they were open.

 

[stevieinselby]

It doesn't feel like a line that terminates at a new station about 1½ miles from the city centre and the existing mainline station is the best way to show demand – while there is a high frequency bus service into the city centre, that adds another 15 minutes plus connection time, and it doesn't serve Leicester station so a new service would be needed to provide connections there ... but the time penalty is likely to make it uncompetitive and unappealing for most passengers. Yes, from Coalville and beyond it will be slightly quicker than the direct bus but the need to change to a bus for the last leg and the uncertainty of that connection (especially on the way home when you are catching a bus to connect with a train that is probably only every hour) will put a lot of people off compared to a single-seat ride. And for passengers travelling all the way from Burton to Leicester, changing trains at Derby would be a more attractive option.

 

[2001olib]

IMO the Ivanhoe line is ripe for light rail or tram train. Light enough to negate significant strengthenong work to be done to the alignment to mitigate the mining subsidence in the area. But heavy enough to be able to run at decent speeds and to be a comfortable enough replacement for the Burton - Leicester bus.

 

[zwk500]

IMO the Ivanhoe line is ripe for light rail or tram train. Light enough to negate significant strengthenong work to be done to the alignment to mitigate the mining subsidence in the area. But heavy enough to be able to run at decent speeds and to be a comfortable enough replacement for the Burton - Leicester bus.

I disagree. The demand profile will be trips aggregating along the line to the terminus, or everything starting from origin and then distributing along the corridor. That's a profile better suited to heavy rail, light rail is for people hopping on and off frequently, making lots of overlapping short trips rather than collecting everybody for the run to the city center.

Light Rail is for linking different bits of an urban area together, and a tram train is for when you need more capacity on certain sections than a normal tramway can provide. Both should have a high density of stops and not run significantly beyond the end of the greater urban area. Also, given how the alignment doesn't really serve Swadlincote, if you're building something capable of street-running, I'd leave the existing alignment for significant lengths to better serve the potential demand.
The Burton-Leicester line travels between distinct towns with clear rural areas separating them, and often is quite far from the town centers. And all of this is before you start to address the operational & regulatory issues of integrating a tram-train or light rail system on to the national heavy rail network that may carry freight.

 

[Johnnie2Sheds]

I was there on the day of opening the stations at Barrow, Sileby and Syston. I still have the guff being handed out on that day. On topic: Chances of a reopening of the rest of it? Nil. AFAIR neither the city or county council wants it.

 

[DJGREW999]

All pipe dream stuff. The line from Burton to Leicester will never open for passenger trains.

 

[InTheEastMids]

All pipe dream stuff. The line from Burton to Leicester will never open for passenger trains.

Certainly agree at this point. The various statements are all in the "supportive but non-commital" mode. To see any signs of optimism, I'd expect to see EMCA (which does not include Leicestershire), Leicester City and the new Leicestershire unitary authority to come together to form a partnership to effectively lobby for funding and drive things forward (the EWR local authorities did this from 1995 and yet, here we are!)

Also might benefit from rail works that future-proof/preserve the option to reopen, reduce the cost or enhance the benefits. Two examples might be any future Leicester remodelling/capacity/signalling, and whether gradual programmes of gauge clearance increase the attractiveness of an intermodal terminal to serve all the sheds up at Bardon.

 

[70014IronDuke]

It doesn't feel like a line that terminates at a new station about 1½ miles from the city centre and the existing mainline station is the best way to show demand –

Clearly opening at new, terminal platform near or at King Power is far from ideal. My feeling - and I think this is speculated up thread - this would be a sort of 'Royston' compromise. That is to say, the story goes as I've read, the BR planners realised that they could not get the full Hitchin to Cambridge electrification project past the economists, so they tried first for Royston, got that done, then managed the full line electrification through some years later.

Not a very efficient way to get the job done, but if Burton to King Power could be done, then there would soon be loud demands for through running to Leicester London Road (as was).

 

[ox_chap]

Clearly opening at new, terminal platform near or at King Power is far from ideal. My feeling - and I think this is speculated up thread - this would be a sort of 'Royston' compromise. That is to say, the story goes as I've read, the BR planners realised that they could not get the full Hitchin to Cambridge electrification project past the economists, so they tried first for Royston, got that done, then managed the full line electrification through some years later.

Not a very efficient way to get the job done, but if Burton to King Power could be done, then there would soon be loud demands for through running to Leicester London Road (as was).

That also sounds a bit like reopening the Waverley line. Open up the first bits of it, show it to be a major success, and then folk start asking about extensions etc.

 

[HSTEd]

I disagree. The demand profile will be trips aggregating along the line to the terminus, or everything starting from origin and then distributing along the corridor. That's a profile better suited to heavy rail, light rail is for people hopping on and off frequently, making lots of overlapping short trips rather than collecting everybody for the run to the city center.

Light Rail is for linking different bits of an urban area together, and a tram train is for when you need more capacity on certain sections than a normal tramway can provide. Both should have a high density of stops and not run significantly beyond the end of the greater urban area. Also, given how the alignment doesn't really serve Swadlincote, if you're building something capable of street-running, I'd leave the existing alignment for significant lengths to better serve the potential demand.
The Burton-Leicester line travels between distinct towns with clear rural areas separating them, and often is quite far from the town centers. And all of this is before you start to address the operational & regulatory issues of integrating a tram-train or light rail system on to the national heavy rail network that may carry freight.

I'd argue that the tram-train has demonstrated an ability to operate in interurban environments in Germany as part of extended S-Bahn networks. I doubt this line, as an example, would be a particularly high speed operation at the best of times, and 60mph/100km/h of off-the-shelf tram trains may easily match heavy rail timings on it.

Beyond that, I'm not sure we should decide against such solutions on the basis that some indeterminate freight traffic may resume at some point in the indeterminate future.

 

[Bald Rick]

That is to say, the story goes as I've read, the BR planners realised that they could not get the full Hitchin to Cambridge electrification project past the economists, so they tried first for Royston, got that done, then managed the full line electrification through some years later.

That‘s not why the 1970s electrification stopped at Royston.

 

[quantinghome]

Not a very efficient way to get the job done, but if Burton to King Power could be done, then there would soon be loud demands for through running to Leicester London Road (as was).

I'd agree with that. Let's say the King Power station location would get the demand equivalent to a much smaller town of say 20 to 30,000 people. Even with that you would have a pretty large population along the line as a whole of around 100,000 - much larger than the borders railway, or Okehampton for example. Just get the thing up and running at minimal viable spec then worry about connecting to Leicester station later.

 

[stevieinselby]

Clearly opening at new, terminal platform near or at King Power is far from ideal. My feeling - and I think this is speculated up thread - this would be a sort of 'Royston' compromise. That is to say, the story goes as I've read, the BR planners realised that they could not get the full Hitchin to Cambridge electrification project past the economists, so they tried first for Royston, got that done, then managed the full line electrification through some years later.

Not a very efficient way to get the job done, but if Burton to King Power could be done, then there would soon be loud demands for through running to Leicester London Road (as was).

Alternatively, the line to Aylestone Gate turns out to be a huge flop because no-one wants to get a train to 1½ miles from where they want to be, and fails to provide any momentum or financial justification for what would be a much more useful service to Actual Leicester.

 

[yoyothehobo]

The amount of works required to the earthworks alone makes this a non-starter. The amount of money this would require to do would be far far better spent on the operational railway

 

[Bald Rick]

Even with that you would have a pretty large population along the line as a whole of around 100,000 - much larger than the borders railway, or Okehampton for example.

Both Okehampton and Borders have the double advantage of a) having one end of the line being a major station offering country-wide connections, and b) quite a bit of inbound tourism traffic.

 

[HSTEd]

That‘s not why the 1970s electrification stopped at Royston.

Wasn't that just where suburban services ended at the time?

 

[Bald Rick]

Wasn't that just where suburban services ended at the time?

Yep.