MML Electrification: progress updates

[LLivery]

What we don't know is whether the OLE south of Bedford is being upgraded, which would allow the bi-modes to use electric power all the way from London to Kettering. The logical answer would be to use some of the money saved to do this, then again there's not a lot of logic in this announcement...

They said they were "looking into it" a while ago, I thought they would have mentioned something by now :roll:

 

[LLivery]

I don't think HS2 will make the MML remotely defunct, and I don't think that HS2 is to blame for the cancellation of electrification.

HS2 is just one line - it was never intended to solve everything and there will be plenty of markets unserved by it.

It'd be naive to expect a two track railway to cater to providing a direct link between London and the centre of every major conurbation. But people like to use arguments like "what will HS2 do for London to Leicester journeys" as a stick to beat it with.

The original plans for HS2 would have seen it compliment the MML, catering for a different market (Toton and Meadowhall, instead of central Derby/ Nottingham/ Sheffield), competing with the M1. By giving a "fast" service between London and the East Midlands/ South Yorkshire you've got scope for more MML services to stop at underserved station (e.g. Loughborough) or for new stations on the MML (e.g. Clay Cross), since there may be less focus on headline "fast" services on the existing network.

I think that "we cancelled MML electrification because HS2 will deliver some benefits to the region in twenty years time" is as disingenuous an excuse as "we cancelled Windermere electrification because we suddenly remembered how ugly masts would look in the Lake District" - the slippery words of dishonest politicians eager to find some justification for cutting back due to the Network Rail over-spend.

To be mildly optimistic for a moment (whilst I'm pro-electrification, I've got to accept that when the facts change, we need to change our minds)...

... we now have a chance to order MML stock that maximises platform space at St Pancras...

...we now have a chance to cascade 125mph Bombardier DMUs to Cross Country...

...we now have a chance to order sufficient new trains to accommodate desired extensions (e.g. beyond Sheffield) or enough to extend the "InterCity" level of service to some of the ex-CentralTrains services...

... we now have a chance to build a proper timetable between London and Leicester that gives Nottingham/Derby/Sheffield at least one relatively fast London service per hour whilst trying to keep the two services from running within a few minutes of each other and providing the local stations south of Leicester with a fairly clock face timetable (not an easy circle to square!)...

...we now have a chance to marry the need for long London trains with something short enough to stop at short platforms (e.g. Loughborough).

It's certainly not the result that I would have wanted, but at least this gives us a fresh sheet of paper on which we can try to design a sensible MML (rather than the awkward timetable we currently have where insertion of the Corby service messed up a fairly sensible timetable that Midland Mainline had introduced).

This would absolutely be the best outcome

 

[DarloRich]

I hope the local authorities of the East Midland counties and South Yorkshire will fight against it as strongly as they can and not just sit back once more and make the best of it. In electrification terms Sheffield has been dealt with very badly indeed since the first suggestions of schemes in the early 1980s (when the Leicester MAS scheme was immunised in preparation for an envisaged electrification).

But practically what can be done? Have the councils the cash to drive this forward? Yes they need to bring political pressure to bear but they are going to fight a losing battle if they focus only on wires.

In my mind they need to fight the battle on the runners up prize and make that the best they can. They can win that fight. They need to push for more investment in the infrastructure and back up that investment with their local tax payers cash where needed to help fund schemes that deliver a faster MML service

 

[Sceptre]

Wasn't the price tag for MML electrification about a billion pounds?

It looks like we've found Theresa's Magic Money Tree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Chester1]

Wasn't the price tag for MML electrification about a billion pounds?

It looks like we've found Theresa's Magic Money Tree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Except Network Rail's budget has not changed. Its funny to watch people blame their pet hate when its simply due to massive overspend on the electrification projects. Its that not the DUP/Brexit/HS2 etc. Electrification is not dead it has been scaled back to reflect overspends and rising costs. It anoys me but it is understandable that the government thinks continuing all the schemes would be throwing good money after bad.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

OK, I am mistaken.

Andrew Adonis approved the original GW project (London-Bristol/Cardiff/Oxford/Newbury), and the Lancashire Triangle (Liverpool-Manchester-Preston-Blackpool) in 2009.
He didn't authorise TP/MML/East-West/Electric Spine, that was Philip Hammond and Justine Greening in 2011/12.
Patrick McLoughlin subsequently got caught in the fatuous debates about further extensions (Thames Valley branches, Windermere, Bolton-Wigan), and Cardiff-Swansea.
Can you believe he was being bullied by MPs to approve Newbury-Pewsey?

Andrew (as boss of the Infrastructure Strategy unit) was vocal in his support for the award of HS2 contracts this week, and the Phase 2b route decisions.
I haven't heard his reaction to the Grayling electrification cuts.
The DfT professionals, of course, always opposed electrification, and never trusted Network Rail to deliver.

The agenda has unwound about 10 years to the Ruth Kelly/Rod Eddington era of "self-powered" trains, and John Armitt's view that electrification is "just another interface to go wrong".

 

[HSTEd]

So has Corby been axed as well or just the main line scheme? I thought work on piling had started?

 

[ChiefPlanner]

So has Corby been axed as well or just the main line scheme? I thought work on piling had started?

No - Corby remains , rest "paused" .......not about Corby but about Wellingborough and Kettering (Bedford and Luton) - dare I say it , a commuter electrification. ?

 

[snowball]

No - Corby remains , rest "paused"

Despite the impression given by your quote marks, I don't think any of the government documents use the word "paused".

 

[edwin_m]

Despite the impression given by your quote marks, I don't think any of the government documents use the word "paused".

As I understand it not paused as it was last year, cancelled outright.

Thanks to this new technology disruptive electrification works between Cardiff and Swansea, Kettering, Nottingham and Sheffield, and between Windermere and Oxenholme, will no longer be needed.

Passengers will benefit sooner and experience less disruption compared with putting up intrusive wires and masts along routes where they are no longer required.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...assengers-in-wales-the-midlands-and-the-north

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Despite the impression given by your quote marks, I don't think any of the government documents use the word "paused".

I am sure the Civil Servants would have used that term in their "lines to take" briefing to the Minister.....

Bit like the Second Coming may happen - but we don't know when....

 

[Senex]

In my mind they need to fight the battle on the runners up prize and make that the best they can. They can win that fight. They need to push for more investment in the infrastructure and back up that investment with their local tax payers cash where needed to help fund schemes that deliver a faster MML service

But the runners-up prize is such a poor one -- we've seen over recent years just what an unpleasant environment 125-mph diesels powered under all vehicles are. Does anywhere else use diesel at that speed?

As to investment in the infrastructure, what more is to be done? Yes, the layouts of the Midland's major stations are dreadful and there are some minutes to be saved if Leicester, Derby, and Sheffield are decently modernised (Nottingham now being a lost cause, having been done for very low speeds so recently), and yes, Market Harborough brings a saving. But on the open line best speeds have already been squeezed out of the Midland route and there is very little more to be gained without major re-alignments like the one that until recently would have been possible at Wellingborough or perhaps opening out Ambergate tunnel.

Local authority money would be a help if they had any, but this is England and they don't have either the money or the powers (outside a very few areas). Local investment as you see it in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, etc just can't happen in this retarded and over-centralised country. All they can do is make a lot of noise, keep up making a lot of noise, and make sure electorates know what London-orientated government is doing.

Meanwhile, in Scotland electrification still forges ahead ..... What it is to have devolution (and the Barnett Formula)!

 

[Alfie1014]

No - everything calls at St Albans - with some limited calls north of the city.

Many years ago there was a solitary peak (4 car) , which was first stop Flitwck.

Ah the 'Flitwick Flyer', when planning that particular Thameslink timetable, we only had one 4 car 319 left to resource this train, (that left Kings Cross Thameslink around 18:00) and knew if it called at the busier stations such as St Albans or Harpenden it would be grossly overcrowded. It was therefore decided to run it as fast as possible to Bedford but we estimated it could just accomodate a Flitwick stop too! The rest became history until such time as more units became available and it could run as an 8 car with extra stops.

 

[47802]

I'm actually shocked by this announcement. Pushing MML electrification out into the future I might have expected, but cancelling it altogether is extraordinary.

Electorally this could be a disaster for the Tories in the East Midlands and the North, after all the effort by Cameron and Osborne to at least look as if they cared about rebalancing the country's growth away from the south east, I can't imagine Tory backbenchers will take this news well

Why are you shocked given the staggering cost increase of GWR electrification, if was up to me I doubt I would authorise another mile of electrification.

There is some electrification and new Bi-mode trains with the possibility of extension of electrification at some point in the future if perhaps network rail can prove they can deliver on time and on budget and of course HS2 eventually.

 

[Kettledrum]

Why are you shocked given the staggering cost increase of GWR electrification, if was up to me I doubt I would authorise another mile of electrification.

There is some electrification and new Bi-mode trains with the possibility of extension of electrification at some point in the future if perhaps network rail can prove they can deliver on time and on budget and of course HS2 eventually.

The MML electrification has been killed by a combination of factors, particularly the over-ambitious plan to do the GW line first, with the consequent cost and time over-runs, the development of bi-mode technology, and possible even HS2.

I'd still cling to a hope that money could be found in the future for creeping electrification, perhaps Kettering to Market Harborough, then Leicester, then East Midlands Parkway, then Nottingham. This would still mean bi-modes, but with more electric running.

Doing things in incremental stages seems eminently more sensible, given the lessons of the GW electrification. It also enables the skills to be retained, rather than our traditional start - stop approach to electrification

 

[HSTEd]

How much time would be lost if you simply ran intercity trains at 100mph between St Pancras and Bedford?

 

[NotATrainspott]

The IEP programme is the reason for the '100mph' limit, as that was originally as fast as the bi-mode trains would ever need to be away from the wires. By relaxing the reliability requirements, Hitachi can and will reach a higher speed on diesel power.

In addition, the MML is not like the ECML where there are long stretches of uninterrupted 125mph running. While it might be faster than 100mph, the actual end-to-end journey time difference caused by being limited to 110mph or 115mph will be relatively small. And that brings us onto the next thing:

By ensuring that Corby still gets its wires, the MML timetable south of Kettering can be redone slightly so that there are fewer calls by InterCity services heading to Nottingham and Sheffield. That immediately means a significant journey time saving as there will no longer be as many decelerations, station stops and accelerations. This is where any performance reduction of an AT300 compared to a 222 would probably be seen, so reducing them will narrow the gap further or remove it entirely. On top of that, the improved acceleration of the Corby electric sets may allow slightly tighter timings for fast services, resulting in a few more minutes journey time saved.

Increasing the number of seats into St Pancras by such a significant amount would be eminently achievable by a combination of using 12x20m EMU rakes for the Corby services as well as using AT300s for the InterCity ones. AT300s are people munchers, especially in high-density form. The MML train fleet could be optimised for the fact that Sheffield is only about two hours away, so densities can be slightly higher than for the ECML or the West Country services.

The other factor to remember when it comes to the wires south of Bedford is that much of the OHLE upgrade needed for 125mph running is useful for reliability purposes anyway. NR have gone around duly upgrading the Heathrow Express wires simply because any OHLE problems would wipe out the GWML and Elizabeth Line timetable. The need for reliability on Thameslink, especially now that there will be the Corby EMUs too sharing the wires, will make the case for upgrading the wires south of Bedford pretty strong regardless of anything else. These works can, just like the HEx wires, be done incrementally as part of asset improvement and replacement works rather than new investment.

 

[kevjs]

Does anywhere else use diesel at that speed?

125mph / 201km/h nope - however 200km/h / 124mph

Under Construction in California is the Brightline, and in Saudia Arabia is the Riyadh-Qurayyat line.

The ill fated IC4 in Denmark and ICE TD are also designed for 200km/h running, not sure what they achieved in service.

 

[Senex]

By ensuring that Corby still gets its wires, the MML timetable south of Kettering can be redone slightly so that there are fewer calls by InterCity services heading to Nottingham and Sheffield. That immediately means a significant journey time saving as there will no longer be as many decelerations, station stops and accelerations.[

Most Sheffield trains already call only at Leicester, Derby, and Chesterfield on the way, so there will be no benefit for them.

AT300s are people munchers, especially in high-density form. The MML train fleet could be optimised for the fact that Sheffield is only about two hours away, so densities can be slightly higher than for the ECML or the West Country services.

Cram the passengers in, as each generation of modern stock has more andmore been doing, and sacrifice even further comfort, which is (still just about) one of the principal selling-points of rail against road.

 

[Tobbes]

I was thoroughly disappointed by this news, and it is telling that the responsible minister felt sufficiently embarrassed that this had to be sneaked out on the last day of term and tried to avoid the Commons. This, far more than the stupid spin, tells you that it is bad news all round.

But....

It shows the political support for these electrifications is there, and therefore will be fertile ground for the next election as the parties compete for the critical seats in middle England - there must be a bunch of Tory MPs and candidates who are distinctly pi**ed off with Grayling and DfT over this.

I'd expect the Swansea and MML extensions to be carried forward in the later 2020s.

 

[edwin_m]

In addition, the MML is not like the ECML where there are long stretches of uninterrupted 125mph running. While it might be faster than 100mph, the actual end-to-end journey time difference caused by being limited to 110mph or 115mph will be relatively small. And that brings us onto the next thing:

By ensuring that Corby still gets its wires, the MML timetable south of Kettering can be redone slightly so that there are fewer calls by InterCity services heading to Nottingham and Sheffield. That immediately means a significant journey time saving as there will no longer be as many decelerations, station stops and accelerations. This is where any performance reduction of an AT300 compared to a 222 would probably be seen, so reducing them will narrow the gap further or remove it entirely. On top of that, the improved acceleration of the Corby electric sets may allow slightly tighter timings for fast services, resulting in a few more minutes journey time saved.

Increasing the number of seats into St Pancras by such a significant amount would be eminently achievable by a combination of using 12x20m EMU rakes for the Corby services as well as using AT300s for the InterCity ones. AT300s are people munchers, especially in high-density form. The MML train fleet could be optimised for the fact that Sheffield is only about two hours away, so densities can be slightly higher than for the ECML or the West Country services.

The other factor to remember when it comes to the wires south of Bedford is that much of the OHLE upgrade needed for 125mph running is useful for reliability purposes anyway. NR have gone around duly upgrading the Heathrow Express wires simply because any OHLE problems would wipe out the GWML and Elizabeth Line timetable. The need for reliability on Thameslink, especially now that there will be the Corby EMUs too sharing the wires, will make the case for upgrading the wires south of Bedford pretty strong regardless of anything else. These works can, just like the HEx wires, be done incrementally as part of asset improvement and replacement works rather than new investment.

The flipside of the speed profile is the need for repeated accelerations at the top end of the speed range, one of the areas where electric scores over diesel due to the ability to use large amounts of power for short periods. And, while I think it's a good idea to take Bedford and Wellingborough stops out of the faster trains, these are also the places where the wiring would allow better acceleration away from the stop on electric power. The main pressure for shorter journey times on MML relates to the faster Sheffield and Nottingham trains, none of which stop south of Market Harborough in the standard off-peak pattern, so gains would be limited to transferring peak-time extra stops to Corby services.

Agree the upgrade south of Bedford ought to be done - but we haven't had any confirmation on this as far as I know.

 

[Robertj21a]

I was thoroughly disappointed by this news, and it is telling that the responsible minister felt sufficiently embarrassed that this had to be sneaked out on the last day of term and tried to avoid the Commons. This, far more than the stupid spin, tells you that it is bad news all round.

But....

It shows the political support for these electrifications is there, and therefore will be fertile ground for the next election as the parties compete for the critical seats in middle England - there must be a bunch of Tory MPs and candidates who are distinctly pi**ed off with Grayling and DfT over this.

I'd expect the Swansea and MML extensions to be carried forward in the later 2020s.

I wouldn't put money on it.

 

[38Cto15E]

Is there not a case for quadrupling the Sharnbrook to Kettering section for mostly 90/100mph running and having 2 new platforms on the slow lines at Wellingborough.
I wouldn't have thought that would be overly expensive.

 

[Kettledrum]

I'd expect the Swansea and MML extensions to be carried forward in the later 2020s.

The Chesterfield to Sheffield part of the MML would probably have to be done to enable High Speed 2 electric trains to reach Sheffield station.

 

[kevjs]

Most Sheffield trains already call only at Leicester, Derby, and Chesterfield on the way, so there will be no benefit for them.



Cram the passengers in, as each generation of modern stock has more andmore been doing, and sacrifice even further comfort, which is (still just about) one of the principal selling-points of rail against road.

Modern planes with shorter seat pitch can offer more leg room which is rather handy for us tall sods. Anything has got to be comfier than the hideous seating in EMT's HST's - absolutely no leg room on them. At least the Meridians allow you to move your knees apart to gain a few more cms.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Is there not a case for quadrupling the Sharnbrook to Kettering section for mostly 90/100mph running and having 2 new platforms on the slow lines at Wellingborough.
I wouldn't have thought that would be overly expensive.

Are they not doing that already?

 

[92002]

The flipside of the speed profile is the need for repeated accelerations at the top end of the speed range, one of the areas where electric scores over diesel due to the ability to use large amounts of power for short periods. And, while I think it's a good idea to take Bedford and Wellingborough stops out of the faster trains, these are also the places where the wiring would allow better acceleration away from the stop on electric power. The main pressure for shorter journey times on MML relates to the faster Sheffield and Nottingham trains, none of which stop south of Market Harborough in the standard off-peak pattern, so gains would be limited to transferring peak-time extra stops to Corby services.

Agree the upgrade south of Bedford ought to be done - but we haven't had any confirmation on this as far as I know.

If it really is cash they are trying to save, perhaps they should bite the bullet and cancel the HS2 project. At around £55Bn that should allow for plenty conventional electrification.

However not the monstrosity design which is on GWML.

Obviously the designers have not looked to Europe, where multiple pantographs have been in use in France and Germany at 300kph for many years . No monster catenary there or major loss of wires.

We seem to be reinventing the wheel yet again.

Bi More trains are not really new either. They have been in use for many years in France.

 

[mushroomchow]

This talk of speed restrictions on the wires south of Bedford (or Kettering, once the upgrades to Corby are in place) misses an important point - the IEP units will require an additional stop to change power modes to gain the full benefits of electric traction, or otherwise just stick with the diesel power all the way to St. Pancras, and vice-versa on the way up to Sheffield. Even in the most hopeful scenario, that will add a few minutes onto any schedule.

What will happen to the services that currently run non-stop from Leicester to St. Pancras? Changing power modes while still running is seemingly out of the question to my knowledge - it won't be sanctioned to be done at high speeds and no such testing has yet taken place - or are they proposing that drivers just "chance it" if they hit a TSR or amber signal on the wired section going south? If not, you're left with either a completely redundant electric power mode on pretty much all Sheffield and Derby services or an extra stop to facilitate it. Great for folks in Bedford or Kettering, terrible for anybody north of there.

For the record, in line with the current electrification proposals, to reap full benefits with electrification installed to its full extent, a Leeds to London train would have to:

• Run electric-powered Leeds to Wakefield (11 miles)
• Switch to Diesel at Wakefield
• Run Diesel powered Wakefield to Sheffield (25 miles)
• Switch to Electric at Sheffield
• Run electric-powered Sheffield to Chesterfield (15 miles)
• Switch back to Diesel at Chesterfield
• Run Diesel-powered from Chesterfield to Kettering/Bedford (85/102 miles)
• Switch to electric at Kettering or Bedford
• Run Electric-powered Kettering/Bedford to London St. Pancras (71/54 miles

The Sheffield section, for the record, is not due to be electrified until HS2 phase 2 is completed in 2032/33 at a minimum. The IEP units will already be 10 years old by that point, and if the proposed restriction on HS2 access from "classic rail" is anything to go by, there's no guarantee that they'll be able to use the wires anyway.

So under current proposals, a bi-mode unit using electric traction for the maximum possible length of line would utilise its power modes for the following distance on a Leeds-London run:

Diesel - 110 miles
Electric - 97 miles

In other words, even in a best-case scenario which assumes that the IEPs will be allowed to operate on HS2's Sheffield - Chesterfield wires, under current proposals diesel would be the primary power mode, rather than the backup, for the duration of the IEP's MML career. As the likelihood of every bi-mode train stopping at Kettering to switch is low, Bedford will probably be the location for such a transition, making the figures:

Diesel - 127 miles
Electric - 80 miles

TL;DR - The Bi-modes will use diesel as a primary power source for their whole career. They're pointless. You may as well just buy new DEMUs with better acceleration.

(Disclaimer - these are not 100% accurate milepost readings but approximations based on map data.)

 

[Muzer]

Can the IEPs not do a power change on the move then?

 

[snowball]

This talk of speed restrictions on the wires south of Bedford (or Kettering, once the upgrades to Corby are in place) misses an important point - the IEP units will require an additional stop to change power modes to gain the full benefits of electric traction, or otherwise just stick with the diesel power all the way to St. Pancras, and vice-versa on the way up to Sheffield.

Not true. The entire premise of your post is false. As I've already said a couple of times in the last few days in another thread, the article at the front of the current issue of Rail magazine includes a description of a Hitachi bi-mode switching from electric to diesel on the move at 100mph.