Midland Main Line Electrification

[Bald Rick]

It would be pleasing to some people if St Albans City was to become 'Intercity' again. Currently to get North of Bedford you are compelled to change at Luton or Bedford. In 1975 there were some 12 Intercity connections from St Albans to Sheffield, Derby, Nottingham etc. and 12 in the reverse direction.

To be fair John that was about half the MML long distance service in those days!

 

[Tomnick]

I definitely remember some Kettering services. Perhaps back in the Midland Mainline days, around 1800. Perhaps I just happened to use them more often but without a timetable for reference hard to say whether I remember rightly.

Either way I don't think extending FCC trains with their existing calls is a workable idea. If TL were to provide extra services with some calling points omitted, that would be workable, but you'd essentially end up with what the Corby services already provide but under another operator.

It's hardly as if EMT serve stations on the southern half of the MML for free. They get their share of ticket revenue via ORCATS and via their own AP fares. It makes good economic sense for them to serve where there is demand and they have to maintain a minimum level of service.

Whether there were a couple of peak Kettering turnbacks, or even an interim regular service pending the completion of Corby station (did it open later than planned?). I'd agree that extending existing FCC services wouldn't be sufficient - if nothing else, it'd really slow down journeys from Wellingborough, Kettering and Corby if there was nothing else to replace the calls by the current Corby service. Yes, an additional fast(-ish) service by FCC wouldn't provide much difference from the EMT offering (other than possibly an increased frequency), but it'd surely be a better fit with FCC?

 

[RichmondCommu]

It would be pleasing to some people if St Albans City was to become 'Intercity' again. Currently to get North of Bedford you are compelled to change at Luton or Bedford. In 1975 there were some 12 Intercity connections from St Albans to Sheffield, Derby, Nottingham etc. and 12 in the reverse direction.

I'm guessing that Luton has priority over St Albans City because of the airport. Back in 1975 how did St Albans City compare against Luton? I'm assuming here that MML Intercity services alternated between the two stations?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Being realistic we won't find out what stock will operate on the MML until June 2017 because that's when the next EMT franchise is awarded. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa..._data/file/301976/rail-franchise-schedule.pdf

That doesn't give the TOC much time to order new trains (and of course have them delivered) before the wires reach Corby and Leicester though. Surely the DfT would have to make a procurement decision before then?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I like the idea of serving Oakham and Melton - better to Leicester, proper service to London, Luton Airport and locally to Corby.

I must be missing something here because I understood that the line was only being electrified as far as Corby. Surely once the electrification of the MML is completed the only diesel powered services running south of Leicester will be freight?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If the 225 sets end up on the MML they are likely to be on the Nottingham fasts, where acceleration is a bit less critical than on the other services hence the use of HSTs rather than 222s. Possibly the Sheffield fasts too.

The problem is you would then have a split fleet. Now I appreciate that we have that at the moment but surely going forward the TOC will want to have a single fleet of trains as will be the case on the ECML?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

That doesn't give the TOC much time to order new trains (and of course have them delivered) before the wires reach Corby and Leicester though. Surely the DfT would have to make a procurement decision before then?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I must be missing something here because I understood that the line was only being electrified as far as Corby. Surely once the electrification of the MML is completed the only diesel powered services running south of Leicester will be freight?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If it's only being electrified as far north as Corby then I would expect the current TOCs that currently run on the MML to keep using diesel, as they'd probably want to run trains further north from St Pancras

 

[AndyW33]

If it's only being electrified as far north as Corby then I would expect the current TOCs that currently run on the MML to keep using diesel, as they'd probably want to run trains further north from St Pancras

I think you've missed something fairly major.
The MML electrification that's been announced is for the whole line from Bedford via Market Harborough to Sheffield and Nottingham, plus Kettering to Corby. The Bedford-Kettering-Corby section will be ready first in 2017 which is why people are discussing what will run on it given that the EMT franchise also runs out in 2017. Obviously trains to Leicester and points north by either route will have to be diesel until the whole scheme is completed which is scheduled for 2019/2020.

 

[edwin_m]

The problem is you would then have a split fleet. Now I appreciate that we have that at the moment but surely going forward the TOC will want to have a single fleet of trains as will be the case on the ECML?

In an ideal world the TOC will want this but if there is cost saving from leasing a mix of older and newer trains then they will want to look at that option too. A common fleet would allow interworking at St Pancras, but with the current timetable structure the scope for this is rather limited.

 

[nottsnurse]

Are there plans to increase platform availability at St Pancras for MML services? If not aren't these speculations about increased services pretty much moot?

 

[KX03HZY]

<pedant> Huntingdon is 58mi 70ch from KGX. Corby is 79mi 28ch from STP.</pedant>

Peterborough is about the same distance from London as Corby. Just 3 mile short

 

[asylumxl]

Are there plans to increase platform availability at St Pancras for MML services? If not aren't these speculations about increased services pretty much moot?

As far as I am aware, there isn't much capacity left there. Which is what happens when you replace lots of platforms with just 4.

 

[ianhr]

The MML electrification that's been announced is for the whole line from Bedford via Market Harborough to Sheffield and Nottingham, plus Kettering to Corby. The Bedford-Kettering-Corby section will be ready first in 2017 which is why people are discussing what will run on it given that the EMT franchise also runs out in 2017.

Travelling over the route yesterday there seems to be quite a lot of serious bridge reconstruction going on between Kettering and Bedford on both the fast and slow lines. If the wiring contracts are let when this preparatory work is finished it should easily be ready by 2017.

 

[IanXC]

Are there plans to increase platform availability at St Pancras for MML services? If not aren't these speculations about increased services pretty much moot?

Given the platform situation at St Pancreas the only way I can see for more services to run is for much tighter turnarounds, which from a previous discussion becomes much harder with a mixed fleet (whether that be 222/HST or 225/EMU). And of course makes the service much less resilient.

 

[Bald Rick]

As far as I am aware, there isn't much capacity left there. Which is what happens when you replace lots of platforms with just 4.

No of trains arriving at 3 platform SE side of St P in high peak hour = 8

No of trains arriving at 4 platform EMT side of St P in high peak hour = 5

I'd say there's plenty of capacity. All you have to do is turn the trains round in a reasonable time. Almost everyone else does it!

 

[asylumxl]

I'd say there's plenty of capacity. All you have to do is turn the trains round in a reasonable time. Almost everyone else does it!

And pigs might fly!

Comparing HS1 and the MML is like comparing apples to oranges for quite a few reasons. You're plenty wise enough to think of the differences yourself though :P.

I'm inclined to say though that on the high speed services at least, SouthEastern is more efficient at cleaning and preparing their trains than East Midlands Trains.

 

[joeykins82]

Isn't the case that the interim plan (since it coincides with franchise handover etc) is that the 387s will operate Corby? From NR CP5 enhancements delivery plan:

The following rolling stock is being assumed;
– Class 377 up to 12 cars, multiple pantographs (London to Corby)

 

[WestCountry]

No of trains arriving at 3 platform SE side of St P in high peak hour = 8

No of trains arriving at 4 platform EMT side of St P in high peak hour = 5

The SE side is a pure commuter operation - no catering, no portion working, every unit identical and interchangeable in case of disruption.
They've got miles of brand-new HSL with no flat junctions or daytime freight, shared only with 1tph Eurostar, so the potential for outside delays is a fraction of that on a crowded route shared with TL, XC, local stoppers and heavy freight with almost no grade separation.

Your comparison is meaningless - even if EMT planning and control was perfect, it still wouldn't be possible to get the same turnarounds as the neighbours.

 

[cle]

EMT turnarounds are quite pathetic, let's not be apologists here. The Corby trains using EMUs should improve this, but it's still a shambles for the modern day.

 

[macka]

It really doesn't help that EMT have 4 different types of trains for its IC services, with each used for a certain number of services, like only 7-car 222s and HSTs used for Sheffield fasts.

Corby EMUs could be a good thing if it allows EMT to keep the shorter 222s coupled almost permanently and allow them to be used interchangeably with the longer 222s and HSTs on the remaining diesel services.

But if you thought EMT's turnaround times were bad, take a look at other IC operators. East Coast trains at Kings Cross usually take a hour between arriving at the station and leaving on another service, same as FGW's HSTs at Paddington. VT's services have half hour turnarounds, but that's the same as EMT's.

 

[Western Lord]

I'm guessing that Luton has priority over St Albans City because of the airport. Back in 1975 how did St Albans City compare against Luton? I'm assuming here that MML Intercity services alternated between the two stations?

For most of the 70's the MML service was an hourly Sheffield fast, non stop to Leicester, alternating between via Derby and via Nottingham. There was an hourly semi fast calling St. Albans, Luton, Bedford, Wellingborough, Kettering, Market Harborough with cross platform connection at Leicester with the fast Sheffield. When the fast went via Nottingham, the semi fast continued to Derby and vice versa. Usually, no Sheffields called at stations south of Derby/Nottingham except Leicester.

 

[cle]

In the 80s, I remember Luton and Kettering used to get more faster services than Bedford or Wellingborough for instance, with very few running non-stop to Leicester.

Of course, Luton Airport Parkway didn't exist, and demand for the airport was tiny back then, so probably not a consideration in the Luton calls.