Increasing Sheffield Station Capacity

[eastdyke]

Exactly... So why even try run them through Sheffield.

Only some, not all will route Sheffield. Sheffield is the fifth largest city in the whole of the UK.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Only some, not all will route Sheffield. Sheffield is the fifth largest city in the whole of the UK.

Sorry my comment should state on the existing network. I am not arguing that Sheffield shouldn't get HS2. I am born and bred there.

 

[eastdyke]

Sorry my comment should state on the existing network. I am not arguing that Sheffield shouldn't get HS2. I am born and bred there.

And although born in East Anglia, I like Sheffield a lot. Especially Kelham Island (Fat Cat)!!

I think it is routed into Sheffield Midland for connectivity reasons. Creation of a new hub would be both difficult and very expensive.
I am all in favour of proper connectivity, even at the expense of a little speed.

 

[Starmill]

People discussing the post HS2 service pattern should probably hold their horses for 13-14 years, the requirements then are what we would be basing the timetable on, not the requirements now.

You have absolutely no idea what frequency, capacity and demand will be like between Sheffield and Derby 14 years from now.

 

[RichmondCommu]

You have absolutely no idea what frequency, capacity and demand will be like between Sheffield and Derby 14 years from now.

No harm in guessing though.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

So HS2 have announced that Sheffield Station will be a stop on HS2 using existing rail tracks.

However it was my understanding that Sheffield was near to capacity and of course for HS2 the station will need to be extended.

Does Sheffield Station have the capacity for extra trains or could Sheffield be looking at a reduction of services?

I don't know what the answer to that is, but I'd be very certain that there won't be any reduction of services. The arrival of HS2 and the new connection opportunities it gives is certain to increase demand on just about every other line into Sheffield, as new passengers from such places as Rotherham, Dore, Meadowhall, Worksop and so on travel into Sheffield in order to connect to HS2 - and that will almost certainly force in increase in services on many lines into Sheffield. And that's even before you consider the new easy Sheffield-Leeds commuting that HS2 will open up, or that the electrification of Chesterfield-Meadowhall that HS2 brings might easily itself attract more passengers if the usual 'sparks' effect happens.

If there are capacity issues, then I don't know what the best approach to sorting them out is, but I think it's fairly safe to assume that something will be done - because it will have to be done. Besides, HS2 won't arrive at Sheffield for over 15 years, and if there are capacity issues now, then those are going to become even more acute during the next 15 years, with or without HS2.

 

[Starmill]

No harm in guessing though.

I will guess that there will still be at the very very least 2 direct services an hour to Leicester. I foresee no situation in which this goes down.

There will also need to be at least two truly fast (and probably therefore non-stop) services an hour from Leicester to London, as this flow will not gain from HS2.

Now, who was talking about Kettering, Wellingbrough, Bedford and Luton?

On weekdays, there are only 4 trains from Sheffield that call at Kettering and Wellingbrough, all of them before 0700 and one of them overtaken. The 1549 and 1649 call at Kettering, but nowhere else, between Leicester and London.

There is just one single train to Bedford - the 0600, and one to Luton, the 1629. The 0530 and 0600 call at Luton Airport Parkway.

Market Harborough was not mentioned, but the 0530 and 0724 call there.

I rather doubt anyone would even notice at all if those were cut, much less complain!

 

[edwin_m]

I don't think any HS2 trains will terminate Sheffield. They will all be too and from further north.

As it stands the proposal is for two HS2 trains per hour to terminate at Sheffield. It does not include any connection further north for trains via Sheffield to re-join HS2 towards Leeds or York. From an HS2 point of view the Sheffield proposal makes sense without this connection.

They do discuss a northern connection in their report and there are some advantages from being able to run HS2 services through Sheffield. However the main benefit would be realising the Northern Powerhouse Rail target of 30min Sheffield-Leeds journeys. Therefore they are basically leaving NPR to pursue (and presumably to pay for) the connection and the necessary electrification between it and Sheffield.

 

[edwin_m]

I will guess that there will still be at the very very least 2 direct services an hour to Leicester. I foresee no situation in which this goes down.

There will also need to be at least two truly fast (and probably therefore non-stop) services an hour from Leicester to London, as this flow will not gain from HS2.

Now, who was talking about Kettering, Wellingbrough, Bedford and Luton?

On weekdays, there are only 4 trains from Sheffield that call at Kettering and Wellingbrough, all of them before 0700 and one of them overtaken. The 1549 and 1649 call at Kettering, but nowhere else, between Leicester and London.

There is just one single train to Bedford - the 0600, and one to Luton, the 1629. The 0530 and 0600 call at Luton Airport Parkway.

Market Harborough was not mentioned, but the 0530 and 0724 call there.

I rather doubt anyone would even notice at all if those were cut, much less complain!

I agree with most of this.

I'd also add that MML also provides an opportunity to create better links between the East Midlands and further north via HS2. A HS2 to classic link at Toton was suggested to provide this, but a link north of Sheffield would seve a similar role (slower but serving Sheffield on the way). Since this connection is about intermediate stations rather than London, one or both of the MML semi-fast services still needs to extend to Sheffield and potentially onto HS2 but there is less need for fast Sheffield-London trains. Conversely there is less need for fast London-Sheffield trains, and Toton removes much of the benefit of EM Parkway. A solution based on the existing 4TPH could be something like:

0000 London-Leicester-Nottingham
0003 London-Luton AP-Kettering-Mkt Harborough-Leicester-Loughborough-EM Parkway-Derby-Chesterfield-Sheffield-Leeds
0030 London-Leicester-Loughborough-Derby
0033 London-Luton AP-Kettering-Mkt Harborough-Leicester-Nottingham-Toton

Bedford and Wellingborough would be served by Corby services, with connections both ways at Kettering.

 

[eastdyke]

As it stands the proposal is for two HS2 trains per hour to terminate at Sheffield. It does not include any connection further north for trains via Sheffield to re-join HS2 towards Leeds or York. From an HS2 point of view the Sheffield proposal makes sense without this connection.

They do discuss a northern connection in their report and there are some advantages from being able to run HS2 services through Sheffield. However the main benefit would be realising the Northern Powerhouse Rail target of 30min Sheffield-Leeds journeys. Therefore they are basically leaving NPR to pursue (and presumably to pay for) the connection and the necessary electrification between it and Sheffield.

Thanks! Yes

That will teach me not to rely on incorrect press reports and lines on maps without reading the source statements.

 

[GingerSte]

It looks like there might be room for a pair of terminating platforms at Meadowhall. HS2 trains could thus continue on through Sheffield Midland station to terminate at Meadowhall and avoid long dwells at Midland. That might avoid any need for extra platforms and would deliver a regional parkway station after all, as well as the desired city centre access. Some trains might also continue on through Sheffield to Leeds via the suggested additional connection back onto the HS line, also with minimal dwells at Sheffield.

I agree that extending the service to Meadowhall would free up scarce platform capacity at Sheffield. It would also address the issues raised by the pro-Meadowhall lot (ie good access from the M1 etc). However, as Grimsby Town has alluded to, it uses up capacity north of Sheffield. You would have two paths per hour in each direction, plus two conflicting moves (as terminating services cross the line towards Sheffield in order to access their platform. You are also a bit constrained for concourse space, as there is a massive (and presumably expensive-to-move) substation immediately adjacent to the existing station. With the current situation, I'm not sure that's tenable. So...

As others have already mentioned, hs2 services could run through to avoid the need for new platforms. I think the much bigger issue is fitting the number of trains in on the approaches from the south and north. Therefore, I think the following should be implemented.

Remodelling of the junction between the Hope Valley and MML at Dore to avoid flat crossings as well as quadruplling to boost capacity. I think the difficulty is what shape quadrupling should take. Running the MML and Hope Valley Line as separate two track railways from Sheffield station itself will reduce conflicts but would make it harder to reopen stations and introduce new stopping services. Perhaps creating 3 platforms at Dore on the hope valley line would allow trains that currently terminate in Sheffield to run through providing a stopping service to reopened stations and reducing the time trains are waiting in Sheffield thus freeing up capacity.

At the northern end, adding an extra track to separate the Worksop line from other traffic would reduce all conflicts upto Meadowhall but will be difficult and expensive to engineer. After this a flyover to allow southbound traffic from the Hallam Line to avoid flat crossings at Meadowhall and increasing Meadowhall station to 4 platforms on the Doncaster line should provide a significant boost to capacity.

I agree that separating out the Worksop tracks is getting more and more critical. It would be a heavy piece of engineering (widening the cutting between Gibert Street and Cricket Inn Road, and replacing a number of bridges in the process). However, this is over a small area, and the disruption will be concentrated. Maybe once the works are complete, tunnellising the resulting 4-track section to give land back to the owners (and reduce noise) might be suitable compensation.

Another shot in the arm for capacity would be 4-tracking between Swinton and Rawmarsh, to separate Doncaster and Wakefield flows. Cross-Country services via Donny would stop at Rotherham Central (surely this is large enough to deserve an XC service?), while slow trains to Wakefield/Leeds would either bypass Rotherham or use Rotherham Masborough station. Interchange between the two would be available using either Swinton or Meadowhall stations.

I would also want to see Sheffield-Dore 4-tracked. By simplifying the Sheffield-Chesterfield corridor, freeing up paths and reducing conflicting moves, this would make the world of difference. It would also give you the chance to put in a local railway station (on the new "slows") somewhere between Sheffield and Dore, which might be useful.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I agree that extending the service to Meadowhall would free up scarce platform capacity at Sheffield. It would also address the issues raised by the pro-Meadowhall lot (ie good access from the M1 etc). However, as Grimsby Town has alluded to, it uses up capacity north of Sheffield. You would have two paths per hour in each direction, plus two conflicting moves (as terminating services cross the line towards Sheffield in order to access their platform. You are also a bit constrained for concourse space, as there is a massive (and presumably expensive-to-move) substation immediately adjacent to the existing station. With the current situation, I'm not sure that's tenable. So...



I agree that separating out the Worksop tracks is getting more and more critical. It would be a heavy piece of engineering (widening the cutting between Gibert Street and Cricket Inn Road, and replacing a number of bridges in the process). However, this is over a small area, and the disruption will be concentrated. Maybe once the works are complete, tunnellising the resulting 4-track section to give land back to the owners (and reduce noise) might be suitable compensation.

Another shot in the arm for capacity would be 4-tracking between Swinton and Rawmarsh, to separate Doncaster and Wakefield flows. Cross-Country services via Donny would stop at Rotherham Central (surely this is large enough to deserve an XC service?), while slow trains to Wakefield/Leeds would either bypass Rotherham or use Rotherham Masborough station. Interchange between the two would be available using either Swinton or Meadowhall stations.

I would also want to see Sheffield-Dore 4-tracked. By simplifying the Sheffield-Chesterfield corridor, freeing up paths and reducing conflicting moves, this would make the world of difference. It would also give you the chance to put in a local railway station (on the new "slows") somewhere between Sheffield and Dore, which might be useful.

If you were to reopen Rotherham Masborough, it'd make more sense for the semi-fast services to call there with the locals serving Central- partly due to shared running with the tram-trains, but also the single-track Holmes Chord.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I would also want to see Sheffield-Dore 4-tracked. By simplifying the Sheffield-Chesterfield corridor, freeing up paths and reducing conflicting moves, this would make the world of difference. It would also give you the chance to put in a local railway station (on the new "slows") somewhere between Sheffield and Dore, which might be useful.

Was the Sheffield - Dore section four track at one stage? There appears to be room for four tracks for at least part of the route.

 

[sheff1]

Was the Sheffield - Dore section four track at one stage?

Yes, with four-platform stations at Heeley, Millhouses & Beauchief as well as Dore & Totley itself.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Yes, with four-platform stations at Heeley, Millhouses & Beauchief as well as Dore & Totley itself.

I remember the four platforms at Dore; three of those must have gone in the mid 1980s although I can't ever remember anything stopping at Dore on the Chesterfield lines.