East Midlands Railway Dec 2025 recast

[70014IronDuke]

...
There's some new development on the former industrial sites round Spondon, and some around Attenborough too, but I'm a little skeptical of whether an hourly train will be attractive when compared to much more frequent (though slower) bus services.

Well, in terms of journies to central Derby (for Spondon) and central Nottingham (for Attenborough) you may well be correct, I can see that. But there have certainly been folk complaining of the miserable service post-Covid for Spondon, and I remember a general complaint re Attenborough by one poster, so perhaps passenger growth from these stations may grow for longer journies.

Whatever, personally I'm pleased to see that EMR management appear to know they have services other than the flagship inter-city routes to London where services deserve to be improved, if only for a trial period.

For comparison, both Dunston and Blaydon, formerly poorly served stations on the Tyne Valley route, have both seen passenger figures shoot up from merely the low 1,000s over the past six-seven (?) years since their service enhancements were introduced.

 

[A S Leib]

Speaking of EMR's intercity routes, is there currently any expected date for seat reservations working again?

 

[LowLevel]

Speaking of EMR's intercity routes, is there currently any expected date for seat reservations working again?

This week coming I think.

 

[QSK19]

Can’t help but think that curtailment of the Leicester-Lincoln/Grimsby Town services is a slow move towards axing the Ivanhoe service entirely and hence ceasing calls at Barrow, Sileby and Syston.

I get the impression it’s not a really important part of the EMR Regional network since the original franchise agreement promised Sunday services. And now here we are with a potential abandonment of the Leicester-Nottingham route?

 

[LowLevel]

Can’t help but think that curtailment of the Leicester-Lincoln/Grimsby Town services is a slow move towards axing the Ivanhoe service entirely and hence ceasing calls at Barrow, Sileby and Syston.

I get the impression it’s not a really important part of the EMR Regional network since the original franchise agreement promised Sunday services. And now here we are with a potential abandonment of the Leicester-Nottingham route?

I don't think they're going anywhere - they're busy. The actual figures for usage would be far higher if it was worth the effort to get the huge numbers of schoolkids who go Sileby to Barrow and back to pay, not to mention the large flows into Leicester, Loughborough and Nottingham for commuters which are largely paid for! For stations with an hourly service they aren't badly used at all.

 

[43074]

Can’t help but think that curtailment of the Leicester-Lincoln/Grimsby Town services is a slow move towards axing the Ivanhoe service entirely and hence ceasing calls at Barrow, Sileby and Syston.

I get the impression it’s not a really important part of the EMR Regional network since the original franchise agreement promised Sunday services. And now here we are with a potential abandonment of the Leicester-Nottingham route?

It has been done for performance reasons, extending Matlock services to Lincoln (and Cleethorpes) provides longer turnarounds at Lincoln and Cleethorpes than are possible with the current Leicester service.

The local Nottingham to Leicester service also complements the intercity services by providing (a well-used) second train per hour from Nottingham and Beeston to Loughborough etc, and they are well used in their own right from Syston, Sileby and Barrow so that's quite a cynical take on things! Doesn't stack up given the Regional service increases elsewhere.

 

[Class 170101]

Can’t help but think that curtailment of the Leicester-Lincoln/Grimsby Town services is a slow move towards axing the Ivanhoe service entirely and hence ceasing calls at Barrow, Sileby and Syston.

I get the impression it’s not a really important part of the EMR Regional network since the original franchise agreement promised Sunday services. And now here we are with a potential abandonment of the Leicester-Nottingham route?

I don't see it that way. By separating Leicester to Nottingham from the other routes potentially means it could operate with pure electric trains in future.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Feb 2025 ==

It has been done for performance reasons, extending Matlock services to Lincoln (and Cleethorpes) provides longer turnarounds at Lincoln and Cleethorpes than are possible with the current Leicester service.

But how much turnaround time will there be at Matlock?

 

[Kite159]

I don't see it that way. By separating Leicester to Nottingham from the other routes potentially means it could operate with pure electric trains in future.

Now that is long-long term planning

EMR wouldn't get rid of the Ivanhoe stopping service, there would be massive uproar if they did. It isn't like the 1980s with BR being unaccountable when they decided for various reasons to axe services on some routes to turn them into zombies [Morpeth - Chathill, Knottingley - Goole etc]. Heck by separating Leicester - Nottingham stoppers from other routes might mean they could run a couple of peak time extra services giving those smaller stations 2tph during the morning/afternoon peak.

 

[QSK19]

Heck by separating Leicester - Nottingham stoppers from other routes might mean they could run a couple of peak time extra services giving those smaller stations 2tph during the morning/afternoon peak.

Putting it that way, yes it could very much work in the route’s favour as opposed to against it. Let’s hope that such a benefit does materialise.

 

[Nottingham59]

Heck by separating Leicester - Nottingham stoppers from other routes might mean they could run a couple of peak time extra services giving those smaller stations 2tph during the morning/afternoon peak.

Decoupling that service from the constraints of crossing the ECML means that it could be timed to better intersect with mainline services, giving, for instance, extra connections from Sheffield-bound services towards Attenborough and Beeston.

 

[DDB]

Well, in terms of journies to central Derby (for Spondon) and central Nottingham (for Attenborough) you may well be correct, I can see that. But there have certainly been folk complaining of the miserable service post-Covid for Spondon, and I remember a general complaint re Attenborough by one poster, so perhaps passenger growth from these stations may grow for longer journies.

Whatever, personally I'm pleased to see that EMR management appear to know they have services other than the flagship inter-city routes to London where services deserve to be improved, if only for a trial period.

For comparison, both Dunston and Blaydon, formerly poorly served stations on the Tyne Valley route, have both seen passenger figures shoot up from merely the low 1,000s over the past six-seven (?) years since their service enhancements were introduced.

Spondon has recently gone from a handful of peak only services to a regular 2 hourly service and hourly in the peaks. If you look at the most recent figures you will see numbers have shot up. (8k to 24k).

As always it will complicated by discounts and the fare cap but I believe at one time Spondon Derby was cheaper by train than bus.

There are now quite a few kids boarding at Spondon each morning. I assune they are going to Derby College's campus right by Derby station.

The 2 hourly service was achieved by taking out Attenborough stops so outside the peaks they stopped at one or the other. Sounds like they will now all stop at both.

If there is retiming of services I wonder if it can be made so that from Attenborough people can change at East Midlands Parkway for London rather than having to double back at Beeston or Nottingham.

 

[Class 170101]

Decoupling that service from the constraints of crossing the ECML means that it could be timed to better intersect with mainline services, giving, for instance, extra connections from Sheffield-bound services towards Attenborough and Beeston.

But all thats happened is the ECML constraints have now moved to the Matlock route. I query whether this route will be reliable due to the single line from Ambergate Jn to Matlock.

 

[Llandudno]

But all thats happened is the ECML constraints have now moved to the Matlock route. I query whether this route will be reliable due to the single line from Ambergate Jn to Matlock.

Indeed, what is the minimum amount of time required from leaving the MML to Matlock and back along the single track before rejoining the MML?

Presumably there is a loop just south of Ambergate in both directions where a Matlock train can wait until the single line is clear?

 

[Failed Unit]

But all thats happened is the ECML constraints have now moved to the Matlock route. I query whether this route will be reliable due to the single line from Ambergate Jn to Matlock.

I still am unsure what the problem is the ECML. Currently in my opinion as a regular user timekeeping is fine. 2-3 mins late but nothing to get upset about. The biggest cause of delay in my experience is either freight trains on the Barnetby - Lincoln section or overcrowding

Am I lucky? I know I can download the statistics but I don’t see the timekeeping issues in Lincolnshire.

 

[43074]

But how much turnaround time will there be at Matlock?

They have longer turnarounds at Matlock than now, plus westbound trains will dwell at Nottingham to absorb any delay coming from the east. It was explained in their Track Access application last year, link to thread below:

EMR applies to run more Nottingham to Lincoln trains from December 2025

EMR have applied to the Office and Rail and Road to extend the Crewe to Newark Castle services to Lincoln from December 2025. They also appear to be proposing retimings to other EMR Regional routes in Lincolnshire to improve connections with long distance services at Peterborough, Lincoln and...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[eastwestdivide]

It may be possible to divert the oil train via Brigg (but this may present other issues with pathing).

Or run at night? Or via Doncaster (avoider), Old Road etc, which the return empties do on Sundays

 

[70014IronDuke]

Spondon has recently gone from a handful of peak only services to a regular 2 hourly service and hourly in the peaks. If you look at the most recent figures you will see numbers have shot up. (8k to 24k).

Yes, I was under the impression it was still suffering from a Covid-infected appalling service. Hadn't realised it had improved in the meantime.

If there is retiming of services I wonder if it can be made so that from Attenborough people can change at East Midlands Parkway for London rather than having to double back at Beeston or Nottingham.

Wouldn't they also be able to change at Long Eaton?

 

[DDB]

Yes, I was under the impression it was still suffering from a Covid-infected appalling service. Hadn't realised it had improved in the meantime.

Wouldn't they also be able to change at Long Eaton?

That would also be a double back but in the other direction!

 

[43074]

Spondon has recently gone from a handful of peak only services to a regular 2 hourly service and hourly in the peaks. If you look at the most recent figures you will see numbers have shot up. (8k to 24k).

Worth pointing out the figure in 2019/2020 was 20k with the peak only service, will be interesting to see what an hourly service does for the usage now things have settled into a "new normal" after the pandemic.

 

[Class 170101]

I still am unsure what the problem is the ECML. Currently in my opinion as a regular user timekeeping is fine. 2-3 mins late but nothing to get upset about. The biggest cause of delay in my experience is either freight trains on the Barnetby - Lincoln section or overcrowding

Am I lucky? I know I can download the statistics but I don’t see the timekeeping issues in Lincolnshire.

The Flat Crossing at Newark is the ECML constraint I was referring to. Now of course this remains but the single track Matlock route adds to it. I think it adds to the risk of poor timekeeping.

 

[duffield]

They have longer turnarounds at Matlock than now, plus westbound trains will dwell at Nottingham to absorb any delay coming from the east. It was explained in their Track Access application last year, link to thread below:

EMR applies to run more Nottingham to Lincoln trains from December 2025

EMR have applied to the Office and Rail and Road to extend the Crewe to Newark Castle services to Lincoln from December 2025. They also appear to be proposing retimings to other EMR Regional routes in Lincolnshire to improve connections with long distance services at Peterborough, Lincoln and...

www.railforums.co.uk

I've looked at the track access document but unless I'm missing something I can't find any references to Matlock in it or to the dwell times at Nottingham.

Do you know how long the turnaround time will be at Matlock (and the dwell at Nottingham), or is it just implied these will be longer without specifics?

 

[43074]

I've looked at the track access document but unless I'm missing something I can't find any references to Matlock in it or to the dwell times at Nottingham.

Do you know how long the turnaround time will be at Matlock (and the dwell at Nottingham), or is it just implied these will be longer without specifics?

Section 4.2 of the Track Access Application makes this reference to dwell times at Nottingham.

There is no increase to quantum of service at Nottingham, and the removal of a long turnround has increased available capacity. This has enabled extended dwell times on through services.

Section 4.3 expands on this in relation to dwell times on services via Newark Castle specifically, and extended turnaround times albeit I concede Matlock specifically isn't mentioned.

Dwell times (currently typically 2 minutes) on through Castle Line services at Nottingham is increased, to avoid delay being imported to Newark Flat Crossing from the west of Nottingham.

Average turnround time at Lincoln significantly increased, and reduced interworking between service groups at Lincoln.

The Flat Crossing at Newark is the ECML constraint I was referring to. Now of course this remains but the single track Matlock route adds to it. I think it adds to the risk of poor timekeeping.

I think you're overplaying performance on the Matlock line, worth pointing out the Leicester service has single line constraints at both Loughborough platform 3 and on the bi-directional slow between Syston and Leicester.

 

[Llandudno]

What is the maximum possible turnaround time at Matlock -15 minutes?

 

[Trainman40083]

What is the maximum possible turnaround time at Matlock -15 minutes?

Probably allow 20 minutes each way from Broadholme to Matlock, so maybe 20 minutes..

 

[tram21]

(maybe there will be a crew change at Nottingham which would make this more feasible)

There will be.

 

[170UTD]

Through traffic on the Joint line through Lincoln except during East Coast disruption is negligible anyway - usually a tiny handful of things like Metheringham - Doncaster for long distance connection - far more worthwhile to have good connections at Sleaford where there has always been local traffic between Lincoln and Boston, and far more before the current timetable destroyed most of the connections making them 50 minutes each way.

Got to say I'll miss the direct services from Metheringham to Doncaster. It makes going north very easy. Granted there's also the 09:38 to Newark Northgate, but that tends to be more expensive plus it sits in Lincoln for 10 minutes for some reason (presumably pathing?)

 

[Failed Unit]

The Flat Crossing at Newark is the ECML constraint I was referring to. Now of course this remains but the single track Matlock route adds to it. I think it adds to the risk of poor timekeeping.

Ok - The risk of poor timekeeping. Fortunately it doesn’t seem to be a problem compared to other areas of the network.

I think EMR regional has bigger risk points such as Grantham, Sleaford and various pinch points on Norwich - Liverpool (Which can have very mixed bag performance wise)

 

[bunnahabhain]

Ok - The risk of poor timekeeping. Fortunately it doesn’t seem to be a problem compared to other areas of the network.

I think EMR regional has bigger risk points such as Grantham, Sleaford and various pinch points on Norwich - Liverpool (Which can have very mixed bag performance wise)

Grantham is probably the worst place now with 4 trains an hour passing through a single platform and very slow single line section. The place is crying out for an additional platform on the goods lines, even just a 4 car one for the Norwich services.

 

[Killingworth]

The devil is always in the details, pathing, platform availability, unit allocations and crew rostering.

There's to be an earlier train from Nottingham to Manchester on Sundays. It's badly needed as the first of the day is currently 6 car and often standing from Sheffield. That runs to Liverpool.

Apparently the.new train will be 3 car to Piccadilly main shed where there may not be room for 6.

It will be interesting to see how all these changes fit together when the details are all available.

 

[DDB]

It looks to me like lots of these changes reflect the post COVID trend of demand being driven by leisure travel. More Sunday trains and/or calls and later last trains, but as another poster pointed out no sign of the return of the weekday Mansfield Woodhouse extras.

Recently I posted an article from the Stage about the effect of public transport, or lack there off, on theatre recovery. It included the specific example of the Nottingham Playhouse wanting later trains to nearby towns and villages. It sounds like they may be getting their wish depending on the timings and which directions they were thinking of.

A later Matlock service from Nottingham will I assume also plug the large gap in services from Nottingham to Beeston/Attenborough after 10pm