Well, only in the context of having a bunch of local stoppers from the north (could do 1 tph Kings Lynn and reallocate a London tph!) - terminate at Ely, would see a lot of people feeding onto the next train to the, then three Cambridge stations.
That was one of the original considerations when the station was constructed in the early 90s but nothing came of it.
Current Ipswich to Stansted Airport journeys are either:
The 745s are already stretched thin (so thin that there aren't enough of them for the intercity diagrams) so continuing them north towards Norwich to serve 3 stations (Cambridge, Ely, Norwich) just isn't worthwhile. This would also require electrification of the Breckland line, which can't really be justified if the purpose is to not serve the stations. 755s aren't available either as there's still not enough of them, and I don't think 720s will ever run further than Cambridge North again, though I can't think of any reason they wouldn't be able to.
720s still reach Ely.
755s cover a daily diagram on the GEML and 720s cover the Stansted Express. Twenty units were never going to realistically cover it.
I never understand how we keep doing this kind of thing, ordering not quite enough units to do the job.
Realistically they needed 12 minimum for the intercity alone, there were 15 90s and mark 3 sets, for Stansted they probably needed 12 as well so 25 would probably have a been the right number. Past is past though and until there is need for more InterCity services (not far off at peak now) there won't be any change - given they're publicly owned they will just cover Stansted with more 720s and switch the 745s to IC as there won't be any care about the consistency of product.
If you go back to 2016 then it has been stated internally that Hitachi would’ve been the preferred bidder but couldn’t deliver in the timescale due to existing commitments to other new train orders namely GWR and LNER. For this reason Stadler was chosen for bimodes but the order wasn’t big enough. To satisfy this the StanEx & Intercity build was awarded to them.
Hadn’t that build stopped years before? What good would that be for the bimodal fleet?
Given the feedback, the Stadlers were the best option anyway, just not enough ordered.
We are absolutely blessed to have them now
It makes a huge difference. Let me remind you of some key features of the Stansted Express.
My understanding is that, when the class 745 order was placed, there was supposed to be sufficient acceleration in the Liverpool Street-Norwich schedules to run the basic 2tph serve with 8 units, not 9.
Covering 9 StanEx diagrams and 10 IC diagrams with 20 units with 2 different interiors was always rather enthusiastic.
This is correct, however would require the long awaited recast to actually happen, even though there has been ample time for it.
What I find interesting is that Cambridge to Norwich figures are 7 times greater than Cambridge to Leicester. Leicester is slightly further but also significantly larger than Norwich, but both have direct trains.
I find that interesting that a quarter of passenger from Cambridge travel to Manchester Victoria rather than Manchester Piccadilly. I often do it because it’s actually quite straightforward with a change at York or Leeds but I’m surprised it’s as many as it is as a proportion.
If Stansted ever were to have direct access east, I wouldn’t imagine it would make much sense to have trains running through it other than clearing platform space. But having the Stansted Express trains there means the platforms can be cleared quickly.
I agree with you but presumably the opposite happens with Gatwick where trains do continue on to Gatwick. Does that set up course problems or is the Stansted situation more preferable? Obviously Gatwick has double the passengers of Stansted by rail, and Brighton is about 50% busier than Cambridge
Interesting, is this a peak time-only thing? That would explain why I've never noticed. I wish they still ran all the way to King's Lynn so I could avoid GN as much as possible, as much as I dislike the 720s.
Maybe a few more could be ordered with some 755/3 to 4 upgrades. All the designs and software are ready, just need to actually build them.
Ipswich doesn't really have the platform space either, certainly not for an extra 720 (single unit or double) service. It'd still be decently faster than the existing routes, so it would be preferable to changing at Liverpool Street, Cambridge, or Norwich.
Yes it’s peak times only. I can’t even see GBR a few years down the line operating to Lynn. The GN services were always far busier.
That is an interesting suggestion, if you can extend them by four cars each that would be a net increase in platform capactiy. Though I dread to imagine what a 20-car platform looks like!
Up to the 1980s Kings Lynn-London trains ran/to from Liverpool Street, and it was also the primary route for Cambridge. Between 1978 and 1988 there were no through trains Cambridge-Kings Cross, never mind Kings Lynn.
This neatly demonstrates my point that the shorter distance East Anglia flows are far more important than the longer distance flows. Many more people want to travel within East Anglia than to get in or out.
I was intrigued by this too, and have been trying to work out what is going on. I suspect that the data is for "Manchester BR" and there is a simple %age split between Piccadilly, Victoria and Oxford Road. The same is possibly happening in Liverpool with Lime Street and Central.
This is definitely not simple. Much of the old trackbed is now the Flitch Way, and in Dunmow the route has disappeared, partly through road construction and partly through demolition of the viaduct over the River Chelmer. That's without even thinking about how to get into the airport from that side.
You make a valid point about Gatwick. Fortunately the Thameslink class 700s are 8tph to the core and particularly well designed for airport traffic, plus another 8tph to Victoria. Whereas Gatwick has separate options for the City and West End, both at 8tph, at Stansted everyone for London is on the same train, and it is only 4tph.
I can understand to a point, but Cambridge is not some insular rural bumpkinshire local trains for local people place. I don't see why people travelling to or from Cambridge are 7x more likely to want to go to Norwich than Leicester - so it's probable that people going to Norwich are much more likely to choose rail than people going to Leicester. Why?
I suspect links between the universities of Cambridge and UEA in Norwich, as well as the various research institutes, cause stronger links between those two than with Leicester*
You are looking at it only from one end, and the wrong end.
Norwich-Cambridge rail journey times do not compete with road either. Getting to Cambridge from Norwich or Leicester are quite similar in that in both cases the road route is about 15-20% shorter than the rail route.
Also Norwich has very limited options for destinations compared with Leicester given that travelling east is not an option from Norwich, you get very wet in the north sea.