East Midlands Franchise 2019-

[cactustwirly]

Is Corby currently half hourly or hourly?

And does it make specifications such as 'half hourly EMU service to Corby on completion of electrification'?

It's hourly, forgot about that.
So it's the same except Corby, Doncaster & Grimsby.

 

[Domh245]

See it includes the all important word Railway which most generic franchises seem to include these days

It's a shame though that it is East Midlands Railway, I was secretly hoping that it'd be midland railway, with a nice maroon livery

 

[Kettledrum]

So not hugely different from today then with the biggest exception of the half hourly Corby??

That's the minimum service level of course - there are possibilities of enhancing this. For example, the current franchisee runs some additional services from St Pancras to places like Melton Mowbray and Lincoln. I'm expecting both of these to disappear, but it would be good if there were steps to expand the network of services beyond the bare minimum.

In terms of the tender evaluation, isn't there normally a big weighting put on the financials, so incentives to invest in additional services are not really there - particularly if any infrastructure improvements are needed to support any service expansion. No chance of any line speed enhancements from Derby to Crewe coming out of these tenders that I can see.

This really defeats the whole idea of the railways being privatized. Originally it was all about innovation and private sector investment. Now it's all about maximising the short term financial return to the treasury.

 

[cactustwirly]

That's the minimum service level of course - there are possibilities of enhancing this. For example, the current franchisee runs some additional services from St Pancras to places like Melton Mowbray and Lincoln. I'm expecting both of these to disappear, but it would be good if there were steps to expand the network of services beyond the bare minimum.

In terms of the tender evaluation, isn't there normally a big weighting put on the financials, so incentives to invest in additional services are not really there - particularly if any infrastructure improvements are needed to support any service expansion. No chance of any line speed enhancements from Derby to Crewe coming out of these tenders that I can see.

This really defeats the whole idea of the railways being privatized. Originally it was all about innovation and private sector investment. Now it's all about maximising the short term financial return to the treasury.

The current Melton Mowbray services are effectively there to maintain route knowledge via Corby.
It's much quicker to change at Leicester rather than get the direct service.

 

[louis97]

For example, the current franchisee runs some additional services from St Pancras to places like Melton Mowbray and Lincoln. I'm expecting both of these to disappear, but it would be good if there were steps to expand the network of services beyond the bare minimum..

A service in each direction between Melton Mowbray and London is specified in the next franchise.

 

[Kettledrum]

The current Melton Mowbray services are effectively there to maintain route knowledge via Corby.
It's much quicker to change at Leicester rather than get the direct service.

The one direct train per day does offer quicker journeys from the intermediate stations though. e.g. Kettering to Melton Mowbray.
It's clearly not well used. A more regular service might be a service enhancement, encourage more passengers to use and improve overall network connectivity.....but at a cost. It's not in the minimum service level in the ITT, so I strongly doubt it's going to happen.

 

[Kettledrum]

A service in each direction between Melton Mowbray and London is specified in the next franchise.

Good spot - I had missed that. I had expected it would get pulled.

 

[Ianno87]

The current Melton Mowbray services are effectively there to maintain route knowledge via Corby.
It's much quicker to change at Leicester rather than get the direct service.

The AM southbound/PM northbound workings are presumably what would otherwise just be Etches Park<>Corby ECS workings

 

[thenorthern]

Compared to most cities rail services in the East Midlands always seem rather poor as Nottingham, Leicester and Derby seem to all have one principal station with several stations in the suburbs served by semi-rural regional services usually every hour or sometimes less.

For example with the three urban areas

• Nottingham - served by the main Nottingham station as well as Beeston which is served regularly by long distance trains, Bulwell, Carlton, Attenborough are served mostly ever hour and Netherfield is served irregularly. There is also a tramway serving parts of the city. Many parts of the city such as Arnold, Mapperley and West Bridgeford are not served by and rail services.
• Leicester - Served by the main Leicester railway station and Syston which is served hourly and South Wigston which is served two hourly.
• Derby - served by the main Derby station as well as Spondon and Peartree both of which have a very limited service.

Compare this to other urban areas such as Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, Glasgow, Cardiff and Tyne and Wear all of which have more frequent services at stations and services that operate within the urban area. Maybe its time for an East Midlands PTE.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Is Corby currently half hourly or hourly?

And does it make specifications such as 'half hourly EMU service to Corby on completion of electrification'?

I believe it makes specifications for it to be half-hourly electric in TSR2; however this malarky about a daily train each way Melton + Oakham <> Corby (although no time caveat is given) means a bi-mode will need to go up and down once a day.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Compared to most cities rail services in the East Midlands always seem rather poor as Nottingham, Leicester and Derby seem to all have one principal station with several stations in the suburbs served by semi-rural regional services usually every hour or sometimes less.

For example with the three urban areas

• Nottingham - served by the main Nottingham station as well as Beeston which is served regularly by long distance trains, Bulwell, Carlton, Attenborough are served mostly ever hour and Netherfield is served irregularly. There is also a tramway serving parts of the city. Many parts of the city such as Arnold, Mapperley and West Bridgeford are not served by and rail services.
• Leicester - Served by the main Leicester railway station and Syston which is served hourly and South Wigston which is served two hourly.
• Derby - served by the main Derby station as well as Spondon and Peartree both of which have a very limited service.

Compare this to other urban areas such as Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, Glasgow, Cardiff and Tyne and Wear all of which have more frequent services at stations and services that operate within the urban area. Maybe its time for an East Midlands PTE.

I agree, an East Mids PTE or even just a ‘Eureka’ timetable with more regular stops and station upgrades could do the trick.

 

[tbtc]

The AM southbound/PM northbound workings are presumably what would otherwise just be Etches Park<>Corby ECS workings

True, but if Corby - London services will be EMU in the new franchise then there won't need to be any ECS from Corby to Etches Park.

Compared to most cities rail services in the East Midlands always seem rather poor as Nottingham, Leicester and Derby seem to all have one principal station with several stations in the suburbs served by semi-rural regional services usually every hour or sometimes less.

For example with the three urban areas

• Nottingham - served by the main Nottingham station as well as Beeston which is served regularly by long distance trains, Bulwell, Carlton, Attenborough are served mostly ever hour and Netherfield is served irregularly. There is also a tramway serving parts of the city. Many parts of the city such as Arnold, Mapperley and West Bridgeford are not served by and rail services.
• Leicester - Served by the main Leicester railway station and Syston which is served hourly and South Wigston which is served two hourly.
• Derby - served by the main Derby station as well as Spondon and Peartree both of which have a very limited service.

Compare this to other urban areas such as Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, Glasgow, Cardiff and Tyne and Wear all of which have more frequent services at stations and services that operate within the urban area. Maybe its time for an East Midlands PTE.

I'm not 100% about Sheffield being on your list. Other than the one central station you've got:

• A station to serve a shopping centre (Meadowhall), so not a common-or-garden "suburban" station
• Dore & Totley, which gets a train every two hours into Sheffield
• Darnall, which gets a train every hour into Sheffield (the improved frequency from Worksop to Sheffield won't affect the frequency of services stopping here)
• Woodhouse, which gets a train every hour into Sheffield (the improved frequency from Worksop to Sheffield won't affect the frequency of services stopping here)
• Chapletown, which gets a half hourly service into Sheffield, but did get three trains an hour under BR/ ATN (before the semi-fast services saw cuts to local stations on the Barnsley line)
• Brightside was closed in about 1990 (shortly after Meadowhall opened - you can still see the platforms)
• Attercliffe Road was closed in about 1995 (one to get off the books before privatisation?)

Grass is always greener, and all that, but it feels odd to someone living in Sheffield to see the East Midlands envying our heavy rail stations (we have light rail, but no new lines/stations have opened since it was built in the mid '90s and we've only had additional trams in the last few months - Nottingham has seen a lot more in the way of new trams/ new lines/ new stations in recent times).

 

[thenorthern]

With Lincoln Central to Doncaster a couple of years ago there was planning permission granted for a station at Doncaster Sheffield Airport in 2008 although the station hasn't been built as more services on the line would be needed to make the station viable. If Lincoln Central to Doncaster services were increased to hourly it will be interesting to see if a station is built there. I doubt it in the short to medium term given that the airport itself is relatively small but anything could happen.

I'm not 100% about Sheffield being on your list. Other than the one central station you've got:

• A station to serve a shopping centre (Meadowhall), so not a common-or-garden "suburban" station
• Dore & Totley, which gets a train every two hours into Sheffield
• Darnall, which gets a train every hour into Sheffield (the improved frequency from Worksop to Sheffield won't affect the frequency of services stopping here)
• Woodhouse, which gets a train every hour into Sheffield (the improved frequency from Worksop to Sheffield won't affect the frequency of services stopping here)
• Chapletown, which gets a half hourly service into Sheffield, but did get three trains an hour under BR/ ATN (before the semi-fast services saw cuts to local stations on the Barnsley line)
• Brightside was closed in about 1990 (shortly after Meadowhall opened - you can still see the platforms)
• Attercliffe Road was closed in about 1995 (one to get off the books before privatisation?)

Grass is always greener, and all that, but it feels odd to someone living in Sheffield to see the East Midlands envying our heavy rail stations (we have light rail, but no new lines/stations have opened since it was built in the mid '90s and we've only had additional trams in the last few months - Nottingham has seen a lot more in the way of new trams/ new lines/ new stations in recent times).

With the cities I was thinking more about the urban area than the city proper so with Sheffield I would include stations like Rotherham Central and Kiveton Bridge same with Nottingham I mentioned Carlton, Attenborough, Beeston and Netherfield which aren't in the City of Nottingham as such. I take your point though about Sheffield.

 

[atraindriver]

Bulwell, Carlton, Attenborough are served mostly ever hour and Netherfield is served irregularly.

Bulwell is served by the tram, which has the advantage of serving Nottingham city centre so is probably more attractive for local journeys. I believe the reason Bulwell only has hourly stops is because somewhere had to take the hit when the RHL was singled for the tram to be built, and being so close to the city it was felt it would suffer the least by only having hourly heavy rail.

Attenborough is not, I think, that large a traffic generator so probably doesn't justify more frequent calls on what is a fairly heavily trafficked two-track railway (by provincial standards. I know it's almost empty by Southern Region standards!). Netherfield I don't know about, although it is very close to Carlton so probably isn't felt to be a traffic generator towards Nottingham.

I do personally feel that Carlton should have two trains an hour, but the current service patterns mean that they wouldn't be half-hourly so probably wouldn't be wonderfully attractive.

Many parts of the city such as Arnold, Mapperley and West Bridgeford are not served by and rail services.

Those parts of Nottingham have no rail lines which could have any rail services running on them, so they're not going to be served by passenger trains...

Syston which is served hourly and South Wigston which is served two hourly.

Syston is awkward because it's on a single track section and it's location means that any train serving it blocks Syston South curve because of the signalling layout. I'm not totally sure there is justification for more frequent service off-peak for Syston or any of the other Ivanhoe stations, nor am I sure how additional peak journeys could be introduced.

Spondon and Peartree both of which have a very limited service.

It's ten years since I last woked trains that way, but I seem to recall that Spondon was almost purely an industrial area with the residential area being some distance away and well served by local buses. Given that even then the factories seemed to be closing down, and assuming they haven't been replaced with new residential build, and that it's on a fairly congested two-track section of line I don't see any justification for an increased service at Spondon.

Peartree was I believe intitally provided with a regular service but loadings were always disappointing. I don't know the current state of the area, but given again that (as with Spondon and Attenborough) that it's on fairly intensely used two-track and it would swallow paths approaching Derby, is there any justification for increasing calls beyond "Werrrllll, it'd be nice to have?"

 

[atraindriver]

With Lincoln Central to Doncaster a couple of years ago there was planning permission granted for a station at Doncaster Sheffield Airport in 2008 although the station hasn't been built as more services on the line would be needed to make the station viable. If Lincoln Central to Doncaster services were increased to hourly it will be interesting to see if a station is built there. I doubt it in the short to medium term given that the airport itself is relatively small but anything could happen.

The planning permission required a station as a condition of the airport opening, so it's more than a couple of years ago.

At the time Central Trains stated publicly that even if a station was opened, they would not serve it, and SYPTE did not then (and certainly does not now) have the funding available to pay for a local Doncaster - Finningley (airport) service; in fact, when CT was split back in 2007 and the EM franchise announced, SYPTE were trying to get the Lincoln - Doncaster service completely withdrawn so that they could use the funding released for a Finningley service.

Peel Airports are now proposing a brand new loop line from the ECML into DSA, so it is highly unlikely that they would be interested in a station on the GN+GE Joint Line which would still require a bus link to DSA.

 

[Class 170101]

Without having read the ITT (I may get a chance at some point)
I can still see Peterborough to Doncaster being operated as one service for the same reasons Leicester to Lincoln is - a lack of DMUs or in the future a means of saving on the leasing costs of units.
If Liverpool to Nottingham is removed from EMT then running the Norwich - Liverpool service to Crewe instead of Liverpool may well be a good compromise particularly with Toton and Crewe HS2 Hubs going forward.
The Grimsby service will almost certainly come from the extension of the forementioned Leicester to Lincoln service - again to save on leasing costs of units though I wonder why Cleethorpes wasn't considered suitable for an hourly EMT service. I also also suspect that a second EMT path across Newark Flat Crossing won't happen. North - South paths are more valuable to the DfT / Treasury.

 

[LowLevel]

Bulwell is served by the tram, which has the advantage of serving Nottingham city centre so is probably more attractive for local journeys. I believe the reason Bulwell only has hourly stops is because somewhere had to take the hit when the RHL was singled for the tram to be built, and being so close to the city it was felt it would suffer the least by only having hourly heavy rail.

Attenborough is not, I think, that large a traffic generator so probably doesn't justify more frequent calls on what is a fairly heavily trafficked two-track railway (by provincial standards. I know it's almost empty by Southern Region standards!). Netherfield I don't know about, although it is very close to Carlton so probably isn't felt to be a traffic generator towards Nottingham.

I do personally feel that Carlton should have two trains an hour, but the current service patterns mean that they wouldn't be half-hourly so probably wouldn't be wonderfully attractive.

Those parts of Nottingham have no rail lines which could have any rail services running on them, so they're not going to be served by passenger trains...

Syston is awkward because it's on a single track section and it's location means that any train serving it blocks Syston South curve because of the signalling layout. I'm not totally sure there is justification for more frequent service off-peak for Syston or any of the other Ivanhoe stations, nor am I sure how additional peak journeys could be introduced.

It's ten years since I last woked trains that way, but I seem to recall that Spondon was almost purely an industrial area with the residential area being some distance away and well served by local buses. Given that even then the factories seemed to be closing down, and assuming they haven't been replaced with new residential build, and that it's on a fairly congested two-track section of line I don't see any justification for an increased service at Spondon.

Peartree was I believe intitally provided with a regular service but loadings were always disappointing. I don't know the current state of the area, but given again that (as with Spondon and Attenborough) that it's on fairly intensely used two-track and it would swallow paths approaching Derby, is there any justification for increasing calls beyond "Werrrllll, it'd be nice to have?"

Spondon - some inbound traffic for various factories. Fairly solid outbound commuter traffic heading towards Nottingham. Gets a pretty frequent peak service and next to no off peak service given it's location both locally and from a railway perspective and that seems about right to me.

Peartree - forget it. Handful of regulars but the area served is no longer attractive to rail traffic.

Syston - could use a more frequent service. For an hourly unmanned halt with a 6 day service it's pretty well used and peak trains load extremely heavily.

Attenborough - mostly Nottingham bound commuting and a fair bit of leisure traffic for the nature reserve. Hourly seems about right with the extra peak trains it gets.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Bulwell is served by the tram, which has the advantage of serving Nottingham city centre so is probably more attractive for local journeys. I believe the reason Bulwell only has hourly stops is because somewhere had to take the hit when the RHL was singled for the tram to be built, and being so close to the city it was felt it would suffer the least by only having hourly heavy rail.

Attenborough is not, I think, that large a traffic generator so probably doesn't justify more frequent calls on what is a fairly heavily trafficked two-track railway (by provincial standards. I know it's almost empty by Southern Region standards!). Netherfield I don't know about, although it is very close to Carlton so probably isn't felt to be a traffic generator towards Nottingham.

I do personally feel that Carlton should have two trains an hour, but the current service patterns mean that they wouldn't be half-hourly so probably wouldn't be wonderfully attractive.

Those parts of Nottingham have no rail lines which could have any rail services running on them, so they're not going to be served by passenger trains...

Syston is awkward because it's on a single track section and it's location means that any train serving it blocks Syston South curve because of the signalling layout. I'm not totally sure there is justification for more frequent service off-peak for Syston or any of the other Ivanhoe stations, nor am I sure how additional peak journeys could be introduced.

It's ten years since I last woked trains that way, but I seem to recall that Spondon was almost purely an industrial area with the residential area being some distance away and well served by local buses. Given that even then the factories seemed to be closing down, and assuming they haven't been replaced with new residential build, and that it's on a fairly congested two-track section of line I don't see any justification for an increased service at Spondon.

Peartree was I believe intitally provided with a regular service but loadings were always disappointing. I don't know the current state of the area, but given again that (as with Spondon and Attenborough) that it's on fairly intensely used two-track and it would swallow paths approaching Derby, is there any justification for increasing calls beyond "Werrrllll, it'd be nice to have?"

Interestingly with Carlton and Netherfield, there's some industrial units next door and it's close to the Colwick Loop Road. If you were to massively improve access including Park & Ride at Netherfield (nice wide platforms, too...), and you could stop trains in on the hourly Skegness to Nottingham and hourly Norwich to Nottingham trains with half-hourly departures from Grantham and Nottingham each way east and west it could be a very attractive proposition. Then again, if you were to close Carlton and Netherfield and have a station before Colwick Jn you'd end up with potentially quarter-hourly services which serves Netherfield, Carlton, Bakersfield, Colwick and Gedling.

Attenborough and Long Eaton are particularly interesting as it could be the case, given that there is a triangle almost as small as Shipley, that you could plot a single rail station at Trent. Half-hourly trains Nottingham <> Birmingham, an additional hourly Nottingham <> Derby, at least an hourly St Pancras <> Sheffield and at least an hourly St Pancras <> Nottingham and then a Leicester <> Nottingham stopper; that's up to 5tph into Nottingham and 3tph to Derby.

 

[londonmidland]

An interesting read.

Not directly to do with the East Midlands franchise but the potential for things to change for XC services in the East Midlands.

More here - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/east-midlands-franchise-2018-invitation-to-tender

 

[Killingworth]

Compare this to other urban areas such as Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, Glasgow, Cardiff and Tyne and Wear all of which have more frequent services at stations and services that operate within the urban area. Maybe its time for an East Midlands PTE.

I spent Saturday on Tyneside and can confirm the old suburban electric lines now forming the Metro are excellent. However Nottingham's tram network is impressive, better it seems than Sheffield's.

On suburban rail I can confirm that 3 trains an hour run between Sheffield and Dore & Totley, but few stop. Last night I arrived from the north about 21.00 hoping to catch the Northern Manchester bound stopping service at 21.14. It doesn't stop at Dore & Totley but rather than wait over an hour for the next train, catch a bus, walk or take a taxi I travelled to Grindleford and got the next train back! It was a lovely evening, but a frequent service out of Sheffield is not what we've got. In the evenings it's more than twice as good coming from Manchester!

 

[whhistle]

Compare this to other urban areas such as Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, Glasgow, Cardiff and Tyne and Wear all of which have more frequent services at stations and services that operate within the urban area. Maybe its time for an East Midlands PTE.

Those cities have much larger urban areas than Nottingham, Leicester and Derby though.
Nottingham has a competitive tram network so there's no incentive for train travel.
Derby has lots of spread out towns/villages but a good road network (in some parts), so driving is much, much easier.
And Leicester doesn't really have the space for stations in it's urban area.

There are local groups trying to get more services stopping at local staions aroun Leicester but it's not an easy task with the train companies involved not playing ball until the DfT tells them to.


I thought there was a strong suggestion that the Derby - Crewe should see some sort of transformation?

 

[LowLevel]

Interestingly with Carlton and Netherfield, there's some industrial units next door and it's close to the Colwick Loop Road. If you were to massively improve access including Park & Ride at Netherfield (nice wide platforms, too...), and you could stop trains in on the hourly Skegness to Nottingham and hourly Norwich to Nottingham trains with half-hourly departures from Grantham and Nottingham each way east and west it could be a very attractive proposition. Then again, if you were to close Carlton and Netherfield and have a station before Colwick Jn you'd end up with potentially quarter-hourly services which serves Netherfield, Carlton, Bakersfield, Colwick and Gedling.

Attenborough and Long Eaton are particularly interesting as it could be the case, given that there is a triangle almost as small as Shipley, that you could plot a single rail station at Trent. Half-hourly trains Nottingham <> Birmingham, an additional hourly Nottingham <> Derby, at least an hourly St Pancras <> Sheffield and at least an hourly St Pancras <> Nottingham and then a Leicester <> Nottingham stopper; that's up to 5tph into Nottingham and 3tph to Derby.

There's no interest in developing Netherfield particularly. Poor road access and no disabled access or funding to provide it are usually quoted as issues.

 

[edwin_m]

Compared to most cities rail services in the East Midlands always seem rather poor as Nottingham, Leicester and Derby seem to all have one principal station with several stations in the suburbs served by semi-rural regional services usually every hour or sometimes less.

For example with the three urban areas

• Nottingham - served by the main Nottingham station as well as Beeston which is served regularly by long distance trains, Bulwell, Carlton, Attenborough are served mostly ever hour and Netherfield is served irregularly. There is also a tramway serving parts of the city. Many parts of the city such as Arnold, Mapperley and West Bridgeford are not served by and rail services.
• Leicester - Served by the main Leicester railway station and Syston which is served hourly and South Wigston which is served two hourly.
• Derby - served by the main Derby station as well as Spondon and Peartree both of which have a very limited service.

Compare this to other urban areas such as Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, Glasgow, Cardiff and Tyne and Wear all of which have more frequent services at stations and services that operate within the urban area. Maybe its time for an East Midlands PTE.

Those cities have much larger urban areas than Nottingham, Leicester and Derby though.
Nottingham has a competitive tram network so there's no incentive for train travel.
Derby has lots of spread out towns/villages but a good road network (in some parts), so driving is much, much easier.
And Leicester doesn't really have the space for stations in it's urban area.

Medium-sized cities like these may have had suburban rail in Victorian times but most of it was abandoned in the early 20th century due to competition from the first generation of trams. The urban area just wasn't big enough for the greater speed of the train to win out over the better frequency and more convenient stopping places of the tram. The stations which survive are on services that needed to be retained for longer-distance travel. Now that the original trams are long gone and the roads they used tend to be clogged with cars, the loss of those stations is regretted. But the closed lines are too far gone to reinstate and the busyness of the surviving lines makes it difficult to add extra stations. One consequence is that the surviving stations like Beeston tend to funnel a lot of commuters onto longer-distance trains. Even today for somewhere the size of Nottingham, light rail rather than heavy rail is more suited to be the backbone of the transport network in hte urban area.

It's ten years since I last woked trains that way, but I seem to recall that Spondon was almost purely an industrial area with the residential area being some distance away and well served by local buses. Given that even then the factories seemed to be closing down, and assuming they haven't been replaced with new residential build, and that it's on a fairly congested two-track section of line I don't see any justification for an increased service at Spondon.

Peartree was I believe intitally provided with a regular service but loadings were always disappointing. I don't know the current state of the area, but given again that (as with Spondon and Attenborough) that it's on fairly intensely used two-track and it would swallow paths approaching Derby, is there any justification for increasing calls beyond "Werrrllll, it'd be nice to have?"

The factory alongside Spondon station (Celanese, later Courtaulds and various other names) was flattened not long ago and is to become residential. There may be a case for stopping more trains but as per my response above the bus may be a better answer.

Peartree was part of the Sinfin service, an attempt by optimistic factions within BR in the 1970s to make commuter rail work in somewhere as small as Derby (to a large extent inward commuting, to the Rolls Royce factories). This reduced to a couple of trains a day by 1990 and then a rail replacement taxi on demand, eventually becoming one of the few services to undergo closure proceedings post-privatisation. For all the reasons above I can't see Peartree justifying any extra calls.

 

[A0]

The one direct train per day does offer quicker journeys from the intermediate stations though. e.g. Kettering to Melton Mowbray.

Ah yes, that well known traffic flow which is in much demand..... < rolls eyes >

It's clearly not well used. A more regular service might be a service enhancement, encourage more passengers to use and improve overall network connectivity.....but at a cost. It's not in the minimum service level in the ITT, so I strongly doubt it's going to happen.

Erm, no. Heading north from Kettering most people want to go to Leicester.

Melton's about half the size of Kettering and Kettering isn't a pull from those in Melton who have Nottingham or Leicester closer to hand.

The service will almost certainly remain as 1 tpd - and that's justifiable because it also ensures EMT (or their successor) has route knowledge as that's the diversion when there are closures between Kettering and Leicester.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I hope the bidders propose more stock, with little improvements to frequencies on the local and regional routes surely the only improvements could be train lengths.

 

[A0]

I hope the bidders propose more stock, with little improvements to frequencies on the local and regional routes surely the only improvements could be train lengths.

I'd have thought that was pretty much a cert on the East Mids franchise.

The HSTs will need replacing as they're nearly life expired - expect bi-modes.

The Meridians and 158s will probably survive.

The 153s / 156s might be up for replacement - further CAF or Stadler DMUs would seem likely given the routes they cover are unlikely to be electrification candidates in the short or medium term.

 

[pt_mad]

I agree, an East Mids PTE or even just a ‘Eureka’ timetable with more regular stops and station upgrades could do the trick.

Although Liverpool is only served once hourly by London services and that's in the WCML.

 

[BR_Nick1980]

No one has mentioned the 80 odd Traincrew redundancies (approx 40 Drivers 40 Conductors) when the Nottm - Liverpool part goes.
I don't think they will 'walk over' to Northern or TPE either. Northern Traincrew already go to Nottm and TPE Traincrew only need to Route learn Sheffield to Nottingham. A damn sight cheaper than sourcing a Traincrew building + managers and then Traction train all the staff on ' units/trains at Nottingham.

To me the loss of this work is a precursor to the breakup this EM franchise ( like Central trains)
Instead of doing it in 8-10 years time why not do it now and maybe keep the Liverpool - Norwich route as one. Here goes-

Liverpool - Norwich to XC
Worksop-Nottm to Northern
Crewe Derby to Northern
Skegness - Nottingham to East Coast 'Local'
Leicester - Lincoln/Grimsby to East Coast 'Local'
Barton on Humber - Cleethorpes to East Coast 'Local'
Matlock - Newark to East Coast 'Local'

This just leaves the MML - I know - ThamesInterCityLink!!

 

[ainsworth74]

No one has mentioned the 80 odd Traincrew redundancies (approx 40 Drivers 40 Conductors) when the Nottm - Liverpool part goes.

Considering that both Northern and TPE aren't known for being flush with train crew whilst their existing train crew may cover the required routes (or could learn them) it seems extremely unlikely (one might even say impossible) that they would be able to cover the extra services without taking on more staff. Such as by TUPE'ing over EMT train crew...

I would be very surprised if there were any redundancies and if there were I'd be stunned to incoherence if they couldn't be adsorbed by voluntary redundancy/early retirement.

So I imagine no-one has mentioned them as it's extremely unlikely that this change would ever lead to any.

 

[Tomnick]

The ITT document suggests that the proposed implementation date of the 'split' will coincide with the "boost" in local services, specifically referring to the impact on staff. Presumably the increased number of services in Lincolnshire will mean more work for Nottingham depot.

Ripping the franchise, and the depot's work, into little bits - as suggested above - seems entirely contrary to that. What benefits could arise from shifting Notts - Worksop and Derby - Crewe services from a franchise that has traincrew depots convenient for both to a franchise that has depots convenient for neither? Similar for transferring Liverpool - Norwich in its entirety to XC.