Midland Main Line, 125 mph from 8 December 2013

[Martin222002]

It has three minutes' pathing allowance in total - one minute approaching Leicester (following 1B18?) and two approaching Carlton Road Jn (seemingly to allow 1W06 to cross to the Down Fast in front of it).

Thanks for pointing out 1W06. I hadn't noticed that.

 

[38Cto15E]

Maybe EMT could revert back to the past and run the Master Cutler via the Erewash, Sheffield-Chesterfield-Leicester-St Pancras, I have included Leicester to increase revenue.
The down train in the evening should be able to do 1 hour 50/55 from St Pancras to Sheffield.

 

[shinkansen1966]

The group of East Midlands councils suggest 1h54 to Sheffield after electrification.
http://www.emcouncils.gov.uk/write/Upgrading-and-electrifying-the-Midland-Main-Line.pdf

• Improvements to enable higher line speeds scheduled to be delivered by 2014;
• Line speed improvements and electrification of the line from Nottingham to Chesterfield via Langley Mill;
• Line speed improvements and additional electrification to ‘in-fill’ the gaps on selected routes between Sheffield and Leeds;
• Accommodating train lengthening for high speed services (up to 11 car formations), which will be realised through procuring an extra 13 train units;
• Derby station track re-modelling;
• Dore Junction re-doubling;
• Further line speed improvements at Market Harborough;
• Upgrading Sheffield Station, including track remodelling;
• platform extensions to enable longer trains;
• Re-signalling and track remodelling in the Leicester area; and
• Electrification of the line from Bedford to Sheffield via Leicester and Derby, Trent Junction to Nottingham, plus Kettering to Corby.

 

[edwin_m]

The group of East Midlands councils suggest 1h54 to Sheffield after electrification.
http://www.emcouncils.gov.uk/write/Upgrading-and-electrifying-the-Midland-Main-Line.pdf

• Improvements to enable higher line speeds scheduled to be delivered by 2014;
• Line speed improvements and electrification of the line from Nottingham to Chesterfield via Langley Mill;
• Line speed improvements and additional electrification to ‘in-fill’ the gaps on selected routes between Sheffield and Leeds;
• Accommodating train lengthening for high speed services (up to 11 car formations), which will be realised through procuring an extra 13 train units;
• Derby station track re-modelling;
• Dore Junction re-doubling;
• Further line speed improvements at Market Harborough;
• Upgrading Sheffield Station, including track remodelling;
• platform extensions to enable longer trains;
• Re-signalling and track remodelling in the Leicester area; and
• Electrification of the line from Bedford to Sheffield via Leicester and Derby, Trent Junction to Nottingham, plus Kettering to Corby.

I think you'd get a lot more than 6-7min out of that lot.

 

[Kettledrum]

The group of East Midlands councils suggest 1h54 to Sheffield after electrification.
http://www.emcouncils.gov.uk/write/Upgrading-and-electrifying-the-Midland-Main-Line.pdf

• Improvements to enable higher line speeds scheduled to be delivered by 2014;
• Line speed improvements and electrification of the line from Nottingham to Chesterfield via Langley Mill;
• Line speed improvements and additional electrification to ‘in-fill’ the gaps on selected routes between Sheffield and Leeds;
• Accommodating train lengthening for high speed services (up to 11 car formations), which will be realised through procuring an extra 13 train units;
• Derby station track re-modelling;
• Dore Junction re-doubling;
• Further line speed improvements at Market Harborough;
• Upgrading Sheffield Station, including track remodelling;
• platform extensions to enable longer trains;
• Re-signalling and track remodelling in the Leicester area; and
• Electrification of the line from Bedford to Sheffield via Leicester and Derby, Trent Junction to Nottingham, plus Kettering to Corby.

The aspirational target quoted in the document is 100 minutes to Sheffield which is better than the 1hr 54 quoted above.

I assume after IEP there would be sufficient Mk4 formations to make up the 11 car units, but wouldn't these be too long for some of the platforms (e.g. Long Eaton, Loughborough, and Beaston and also Ilkeston when opened.)

 

[cle]

Even in the electrification plans, aren't some more line speed improvements between Bedford and Kettering planned?

The MML is being pretty comprehensively overhauled, and surprisingly without the huge song and dance of other revamps.

 

[edwin_m]

I assume after IEP there would be sufficient Mk4 formations to make up the 11 car units, but wouldn't these be too long for some of the platforms (e.g. Long Eaton, Loughborough, and Beaston and also Ilkeston when opened.)

I don't think you'd get 11 Mk4s into St Pancras even if you count the DVT as one of them, so there's not much point in trying to fit them anywhere else on the route. I presume the linked note is referring to 11 by 23m which is probably about the longest St Pancras could take.

 

[swt_passenger]

The latest NR enhancements draft is somewhat different, in that it refers to increasing train lengths on the MML by allowing for the use of 10 x 26m vehicles, or for St Pancras to Corby it will be '12 car 377s'. Extending the platforms at St Pancras at the country end is implied, because they point out that the buffer stops cannot be resited...

 

[Eagle]

Extending the platforms at St Pancras at the country end is implied, because they point out that the buffer stops cannot be resited...

Is that because they're connected up to the hydraulics that work the lifts in the Midland Hotel? :P

(It's one of those old and silly railway myths, like the strategic steam reserve in Woodhead.)

 

[Bald Rick]

Is that because they're connected up to the hydraulics that work the lifts in the Midland Hotel? :P

(It's one of those old and silly railway myths, like the strategic steam reserve in Woodhead.)

That is ridiculous.

They were taken out when the station was rebuilt, the hydraulics now pushes the Doom Bar out of the pumps in the Betjeman.

 

[Edvid]

I don't think you'd get 11 Mk4s into St Pancras even if you count the DVT as one of them, so there's not much point in trying to fit them anywhere else on the route. I presume the linked note is referring to 11 by 23m which is probably about the longest St Pancras could take.

The latest NR enhancements draft is somewhat different, in that it refers to increasing train lengths on the MML by allowing for the use of 10 x 26m vehicles, or for St Pancras to Corby it will be '12 car 377s'. Extending the platforms at St Pancras at the country end is implied, because they point out that the buffer stops cannot be resited...

A copy of the Sectional Appendix* lists the MML platforms at StP as being 260m long; in light of the above the usable length is certainly not that long.

As they are, the platforms can accommodate 9-car MkIIIs (sandwiched by 43s), but not an 11-car 222 or two shorter 222s together. I think 9-car MkIVs (sandwiched by a 91 & DVT) are a close call either way.

[* I mean the version available on the Network Rail website [see page 369]; as an 'outsider' I cannot access the internal version.]

 

[cle]

Might Corby end up on Thameslink? I read that it's being doubled too - will that include a second platform?

 

[joeykins82]

I thought the 222s were 23m cars which would make an 11 car set ~253m long?

 

[Edvid]

That's right. In any case, my best guess is the usable length at StP is not much more than 245m, which is why platform extensions have been suggested.

 

[swt_passenger]

Might Corby end up on Thameslink?

Highly doubtful. It's a regularly mentioned proposal in forums, but there's no evidence that I can find that it's ever been officially considered. The relevant section of the NR draft enhancements plan doesn't imply through running, it just refers to 'London - Corby', no mention of Thameslink.

 

[cle]

Highly doubtful. It's a regularly mentioned proposal in forums, but there's no evidence that I can find that it's ever been officially considered. The relevant section of the NR draft enhancements plan doesn't imply through running, it just refers to 'London - Corby', no mention of Thameslink.

Me too, but I wonder why it's worth doubling unless an increase is planned. And an increase to Corby would only come through splitting/joining at Kettering, which I doubt - or by extending some Bedford Thameslinks.

As they wouldn't remove any services through Leicester.

Unless it's all for freight - very plausible too. OR an extension of an East/West Bedford terminating service!

 

[swt_passenger]

Perhaps the increase in capacity would be just by lengthening trains, but leaving them hourly? But if they were thinking of extending Thameslinks surely they'd have included '700s', rather than 377s...

 

[Bald Rick]

The capacity increase is for additional freight (electric spine) and an additional 'long distance' path. This latter could be to Corby, and could enable Kettering / Wellingboro' / Bedford / Luton stops to be taken out of the other long distance paths thus speeding them up. Pure speculation on my part though.

But they are definitely, definitely, NOT going down the Thameslink tunnel.

 

[Eagle]

No chance of Corby going into the core itself, but is there a possibility that London to Corby services might yet transfer to the TSGN franchise? It'll be kind of similar to the London to King's Lynn services in TSGN, and the suggestion of 12-car Electrostarrish things seems like it wouldn't really fit into the intercity part of EMT.

 

[Bald Rick]

Not this time around.

 

[edwin_m]

A copy of the Sectional Appendix* lists the MML platforms at StP as being 260m long; in light of the above the usable length is certainly not that long.

As they are, the platforms can accommodate 9-car MkIIIs (sandwiched by 43s), but not an 11-car 222 or two shorter 222s together. I think 9-car MkIVs (sandwiched by a 91 & DVT) are a close call either way.

[* I mean the version available on the Network Rail website

That should be accurate, and will be the useable platform length although somebody has posted elsewhere that 12-car 377s are restricted to one platform due to signal sighting. I'm pretty sure 5-car 222s split and join there but less sure about whether an 11-car would actually fit.

 

[RichmondCommu]

The group of East Midlands councils suggest 1h54 to Sheffield after electrification.
http://www.emcouncils.gov.uk/write/Upgrading-and-electrifying-the-Midland-Main-Line.pdf

• Improvements to enable higher line speeds scheduled to be delivered by 2014;
• Line speed improvements and electrification of the line from Nottingham to Chesterfield via Langley Mill;
• Line speed improvements and additional electrification to ‘in-fill’ the gaps on selected routes between Sheffield and Leeds;
• Accommodating train lengthening for high speed services (up to 11 car formations), which will be realised through procuring an extra 13 train units;
• Derby station track re-modelling;
• Dore Junction re-doubling;
• Further line speed improvements at Market Harborough;
• Upgrading Sheffield Station, including track remodelling;
• platform extensions to enable longer trains;
• Re-signalling and track remodelling in the Leicester area; and
• Electrification of the line from Bedford to Sheffield via Leicester and Derby, Trent Junction to Nottingham, plus Kettering to Corby.

I have to say it's very hard to see how anything could be done to improve things re the bottle neck at Derby station. There simply isn't enough space for the obvious solution which would be a grade separated junction.

 

[edwin_m]

I have to say it's very hard to see how anything could be done to improve things re the bottle neck at Derby station. There simply isn't enough space for the obvious solution which would be a grade separated junction.

I haven't seen any official plans but have done various sketches myself over the years. I think the solution would probably involve slewing the goods lines from where they emerge under London Road so they become passenger lines feeding into the high-numbered platforms, keeping a couple of freight loops east of P6. The curve from Spondon would then be realigned to start further southeast and merge into these new tracks instead of going right across to line up with P1/2 as it does now. This would take a slice off Etches Park but not affect any of the buildings.

With a new right-handed ladder beyond London Road all platforms would have relatively fast access to/from the Birmingham lines. Access to/from Spondon would probably still be slower (but still faster than now), and P1/2 might have no connection to this route. However these two platforms would be dedicated to through trains between Birmingham and the north plus perhaps the Crewe terminators. The Nottingham reversers and trains between the north and the Spondon lines woud use P3-6. These two flows would be separated/merged by a new higher-speed throat layout at the north end, which is relatively straight and has fewer trains. The goods lines might be taken over to feed the high-numbered platforms at this end too, recognising that with much less freight these days there is no need for continuous goods lines right through.

 

[cle]

The capacity increase is for additional freight (electric spine) and an additional 'long distance' path. This latter could be to Corby, and could enable Kettering / Wellingboro' / Bedford / Luton stops to be taken out of the other long distance paths thus speeding them up. Pure speculation on my part though.

But they are definitely, definitely, NOT going down the Thameslink tunnel.

The long distance path to Corby makes sense I suppose, in the context of removing stops from something else.

I'm curious though - what would journey times be like to Stockport and Manchester (via Dore) on the new 125mph MML? It would still need to be diesel sadly, due to the Hope Valley. But with stops at Leicester and Derby only, might it be competitive.

I think adding Luton/Bedford on alternate hours might be handy - like the Watford Junction of old. Might mop up some of that custom too, like people going from St Albans to Manchester who probably used to use Watford.

 

[Eagle]

Even with the various upgrades on the Hope line that are part of the Northern Hub, I reckon you'd struggle to get London to Manchester services down to much under three hours. Compared with sub-2h journeys with Virgin.

 

[edwin_m]

Even with the various upgrades on the Hope line that are part of the Northern Hub, I reckon you'd struggle to get London to Manchester services down to much under three hours. Compared with sub-2h journeys with Virgin.

Besides which, with the MML part of St Pancras only having four 10-car platforms it doesn't have the capacity to run to lots of new destinations.

 

[Philip Elliott]

The long distance path to Corby makes sense I suppose, in the context of removing stops from something else.

It is clear that both yourself and Bald Rick haven't even bothered to look at the EMT timetable.

EMT currently four trains per hour to Leicester of which two are completely non-stop, one stops at Market Harborough and then just one is a semi-fast. So you think removing stops off the semi-fast is a good idea? One of the main criticisms of the EMT timetable has always been the loss of the second train per hour to Leicester.

 

[joeykins82]

Based on the "do minimum" baseline used to model other proposed enhancements to the WCML/MML/ECML/XC routes in this NR document (PDF) it's highly likely that Bedford-Kettering will be four tracked and Kettering-Corby will be double tracked during CP6, if not at the same time as the main MML electrification (which would presumably make far more sense).

 

[IKBrunel]

I have to say it's very hard to see how anything could be done to improve things re the bottle neck at Derby station. There simply isn't enough space for the obvious solution which would be a grade separated junction.

I think Derby PSB is due to close in the next few years.
http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=48394
Also NR have applied for planning permission for a new depot further away from Derby station, presumably the maintenance of departmental stock operated by RVEL (formerly by SERCO) would move to the new location.

So in a few years time there would be more space to shuffle things around immediately south of Derby, but not sure if the chronology works..

 

[Bald Rick]

It is clear that both yourself and Bald Rick haven't even bothered to look at the EMT timetable.

EMT currently four trains per hour to Leicester of which two are completely non-stop, one stops at Market Harborough and then just one is a semi-fast. So you think removing stops off the semi-fast is a good idea? One of the main criticisms of the EMT timetable has always been the loss of the second train per hour to Leicester.

That's why I said "pure speculation on my part". Besides I was referring to the peak. As you will know from the EMT timetable, there is only one train arriving STP before 0900 that doesn't call at at least 3 stations south of Kettering inclusive, and that arrives at 0856. Not great if you are on a businesss trip from anywhere Leicester northwards. Compare to the WCML morning peak arriving in Euston.

So putting on an additional 'semi-fast' from Corby, which with excellent acceleration will be quicker than today's service, enables stops to be taking out of a couple of key business trains. Speeding them up by 10-15 mins.

At least that's what I would do. Pure speculation on my part.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I have to say it's very hard to see how anything could be done to improve things re the bottle neck at Derby station. There simply isn't enough space for the obvious solution which would be a grade separated junction.

The plan always was* to remove all pointwork between the Spondon / Willington routes south of the station, save to enable turnbacks in a middle pair of platforms. Straightens it out considerably and raises the speed round the corner. Higher speed point work north of the station to do the sorting there. Saves a couple of minutes for London - Sheffield services

* when it was first looked at in 1995 because the signalling was "life expired"