Sleaford East (and other similar?)

[takethegame]

I recently travelled on the Joint Line to Doncaster via Sleaford and would like to propose the less than 0.5 mile single track section from Sleaford East junction the most ridiculous and unnecessary rationalisation on the network. Would it really cost that much to double track that section or even have two single track sections to the station? Whatever the cost would be, the benefit would massively outweigh the delays caused from conflicts between any late running trains on either the Nottingham to Skegness or Lincoln to Spalding routes. No doubt, it would also improve capacity should they wish to run more services at any stage.

Any words of wisdom, known plans to address this pinchpoint, or other similar locations to propose that are even more ridiculous?

 

[Dr Hoo]

Isn’t the basic challenge that the North<>South ‘Joint’ line flow has to cross the East<>West Skegness line flow?
So you have to have a significant conflict regardless of the layout (short of building a flyover).

 

[LowLevel]

On the network? It serves a comparative backwater of a passenger service on a glorified freight loop which whilst occasionally busy is hardly of network wide significance, especially now the diverted long distance services run via the avoider rather than the station.

 

[takethegame]

Isn’t the basic challenge that the North<>South ‘Joint’ line flow has to cross the East<>West Skegness line flow?
So you have to have a significant conflict regardless of the layout (short of building a flyover).

I don't think the issue is north-south conflicting with east-west services, the issue is the short section of single track to Sleaford East junction.

With a bit of rearranging, you could connect the 'new 0.5 mile section of joint line track' to the LL platform 3, so there would only be one conflict would be when crossing the east/west lines at the west end of the station to the west/north loop. For better resilience, full double tracking with crossovers to Sleaford East would be better.

The reason I raised this was after being stuck on the south to east curve for ages until a late running west to east service had pass Sleaford East. With a second track my train could have arrived on time at Sleaford.

 

[Bald Rick]

Whatever the cost would be, the benefit would massively outweigh the delays caused from conflicts between any late running trains on either the Nottingham to Skegness or Lincoln to Spalding routes.

Do you mean the stretch from Sleaford East Junction to Sleaford East signalbox?

What do you estimate the benefit would be from the double tracking, in annual financial terms?

 

[OxtedL]

The reason I raised this was after being stuck on the south to east curve for ages until a late running west to east service had pass Sleaford East. With a second track my train could have arrived on time at Sleaford.

There's an example from this morning of a Peterborough to Doncaster train delayed by 5 minutes in a scenario like you describe - perhaps your delay was similar?

Realtime Trains | 2K02 0734 Peterborough to Doncaster | 04/01/2025

Real-time train running information for 2K02 0734 departure from Peterborough to Doncaster on 04/01/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

The reality is it's only ever going to save a few minutes delay to a small number of trains, so isn't going to be changed until Sleaford is completely resignalled at some stage - and it might not be justifiable even then.

 

[takethegame]

Do you mean the stretch from Sleaford East Junction to Sleaford East signalbox?

What do you estimate the benefit would be from the double tracking, in annual financial terms?

I have no way of being able to quantify any financial benefit of being able to offer more paths/less delays, but the joint line is an important freight and diversionary route, and delays to passenger services could impact on freight paths and vice-versa. They keep threatening to make the Lincoln-Peterborough services clockface hourly, which would likely also need to tie in with the new LNER timetable and require more resilience at any pinch points. My original point is why would three tracks to one single line, before diverging into two separate routes, for the sake of 0.5 mile of double track (or two single tracks) between the signalbox and junction?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jan 2025 ==

There's an example from this morning of a Peterborough to Doncaster train delayed by 5 minutes in a scenario like you describe - perhaps your delay was similar?

Realtime Trains | 2K02 0734 Peterborough to Doncaster | 04/01/2025

Real-time train running information for 2K02 0734 departure from Peterborough to Doncaster on 04/01/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

The reality is it's only ever going to save a few minutes delay to a small number of trains, so isn't going to be changed until Sleaford is completely resignalled at some stage - and it might not be justifiable even then.

Yes, that was a similar scenario, which could be avoided with a short section of additional track. A study I read recommended enhancing Sleaford so trains could reverse, to offer a Peterborough to Boston service. That would certainly require a second track in this area.

 

[Bald Rick]

I have no way of being able to quantify any financial benefit of being able to offer more paths/less delays

Ah, ok, in which case the statement in your opening post was a guess, and not a statement of fact.

Whatever the cost would be, the benefit would massively outweigh the delays caused…

I can tell you that the extra half mile of track, along with the necessary additional pointwork and signalling alterations would cost several million pounds, probably as much as £10m or so.

The value of saving delays (financial and socio-economic) might be a few tens of thousands of pounds a year.

There is no value in additional passenger capacity on that line - every single train through Sleaford (with the exception of Summer weekend services to Skeggy) costs more to provide in staff and fuel costs than the revenue they generate, let alone the costs of the unit and infrastructure etc. Therefore providing more passenger capacity would cost more money on top of the costs of sorting this out.

 

[Failed Unit]

When it was rationalised, the majority of services terminated at Sleaford, so it wasn’t really problem as the same unit was going out and back. There were a small number of services that went onwards to Skegness / Peterborough from Lincoln but they tended to cross between Spalding and Peterborough.

In December 2025, hopefully the Peterborough - Lincoln - Doncaster will be hourly clock face. I suspect the timetable planners should be able to fix this conflict when they re-work the timetable as the random interval currently seen isn’t helping. I suspect the timetable re-write is cheaper then infrastructure (when you are really only ever going to get 1 train per hour per direction on this line)

Hopefully hourly clockface will also increase passenger on the route.

 

[Taunton]

I think Sleaford has done quite well for investment, the refurbishing and reopening (10 years ago) of the direct avoiding line took most freight services on the Joint Line out of this section and the station. It must have cost quite a bit, there was bridge replacement etc, so freights no longer have to run through here

What do you estimate the benefit would be from the double tracking, in annual financial terms?

I suspect we are thinking along the same lines. Any attempt at financial justification of the slightest investment upgrading of the East Lincolnshire passenger lines would very rapidly plunge into deep red ink territory.

 

[takethegame]

Does half a mile of track really cost THAT much?

 

[norbitonflyer]

As long as trains from the south waiting for a path can do so without fouling the junctiuon on the joint line, they won't delay any following freight so the only issue would be timekeeping of the passenger service.
It seems to be a common problem though - a few months back I was travelling from Peterborough to Lincoln (I prefer changing at Peterborough to doing so at Newark) and my train was held at Sleaford East to let a Skeg-Grantham train through first. Of course in that case doubling from Sleaford East to the station would not have helped unless it was signalled for bidiectional running.

 

[30907]

I can tell you that the extra half mile of track, along with the necessary additional pointwork and signalling alterations would cost several million pounds, probably as much as £10m or so.

Does half a mile of track really cost THAT much?

Had it been made two parallel single lines from the start, with the points adjacent a la York (Scarborough branch), the cost would have been much lower.

The fact that it wasn't done might suggest penny-pinching, or it might reflect the parlous financial state of Regional Railways infrastructure.

Meanwhile, the existing layout has a nominal capacity of around 6tph each way, which would be ample to accommodate a Peterborough-Boston (or, more realistically IMO) a Lincoln-Boston if the connections can't be made to work.

 

[Failed Unit]

Maybe taking this off at a tangent, is it possible to run Doncaster - Peterborough in 1h45 - 1h50 region? The timetable hasn’t really changed since the infrastructure improvements? If that is possible then an hourly service with 4 units could be possible. If it arrives at Doncaster at 0.25 past hour and leaves at 0.35 mins past hour then it would provide good connections from the new 2025 timetables to Hull, Leeds and Edinburgh. Not sure if that would remove the issue at Sleaford?

 

[High Dyke]

I think Sleaford has done quite well for investment, the refurbishing and reopening (10 years ago) of the direct avoiding line took most freight services on the Joint Line out of this section and the station. It must have cost quite a bit, there was bridge replacement etc, so freights no longer have to run through here

Not entirely correct. Whilst some freight services ran through Sleaford station, in the Down direction (Spalding - Lincoln) the majority of freight that runs on the GN/GE Joint line has been taken off the East Coast Main Line. Before the avoider was fully reopened it could still accommodate Up services.

One of the main delays to trains approaching Sleaford from Spalding or Boston is the slotting arrangements over the single line sections. For example, a train from Skegness must have arrived at Sleaford station before a slot release can be granted for a train from Spalding at Sleaford East Junction. Slot releases from Sleaford West SB affect trains approaching from the east.

Equally, the close scheduling of arrivals can have a detrimental effect during any late running.

Historically, the lines were two separate double tracks throughout, with the additional line to/from Bourne.

 

[30907]

Maybe taking this off at a tangent, is it possible to run Doncaster - Peterborough in 1h45 - 1h50 region? The timetable hasn’t really changed since the infrastructure improvements? If that is possible then an hourly service with 4 units could be possible. If it arrives at Doncaster at 0.25 past hour and leaves at 0.35 mins past hour then it would provide good connections from the new 2025 timetables to Hull, Leeds and Edinburgh. Not sure if that would remove the issue at Sleaford?

Current time is just over 2hr. A nonstop Azuma can be timed at just over 90m but without the Sleaford loop, which would add 8min without considering the other stops. 1hr 55min might be possible at a guess.

 

[Failed Unit]

Current time is just over 2hr. A nonstop Azuma can be timed at just over 90m but without the Sleaford loop, which would add 8min without considering the other stops. 1hr 55min might be possible at a guess.

It is, however the this hasn’t changed since the 153 operated the route, the speed limit was increased and the route was re-signalled.

 

[Taunton]

If there's such concern about service clashes on this section, the easiest solution is surely to divert Joint Line passenger services by the avoiding line . This also has a benefit of stopping the costs of no less than four junctions. Any resulting trivial loss of revenue pales into insignificance compared to spending money on the current routing. I'm sure if SWR was operating the service today they would seize the chance to do this if any passenger service was more than say 10 minutes late, anyway. How much of the Joint Line usage at Sleaford cannot be handled by changing at Grantham instead?

 

[LowLevel]

If there's such concern about service clashes on this section, the easiest solution is surely to divert Joint Line passenger services by the avoiding line . This also has a benefit of stopping the costs of no less than four junctions. Any resulting trivial loss of revenue pales into insignificance compared to spending money on the current routing. I'm sure if SWT was operating the service today they would seize the chance to do this if any passenger service was more than say 10 minutes late, anyway. How much of the Joint Line usage at Sleaford cannot be handled by changing at Grantham instead?

The main reason the Joint line passenger service has survived is to get several hundred college students every morning to/from Sleaford and the local shacks into Lincoln, and a lesser number in the opposite direction into Sleaford for schools. You'd struggle to reasonably divert them via Grantham. There's also significant leisure traffic between Sleaford and Lincoln.

The main traffic flows are between Peterborough and Spalding, and Sleaford and Lincoln.

This thread is a pretty impressive mountain being made out of a molehill I must say!

 

[takethegame]

This thread is a pretty impressive mountain being made out of a molehill I must say!

When I started this thread, not only did I was to find our more about this issue but wondered if others might put forward similar issues elsewhere?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Jan 2025 ==

It is, however the this hasn’t changed since the 153 operated the route, the speed limit was increased and the route was re-signalled.

They have definitely tightened the timetable up at the southern end but like with all upgrade schemes they could've gone further with speed increases and signalling improvements had funds been made available. For example, the line is dead straight from Glinton Junction to Spalding and there are still some fairly long block sections throughout. An increase to 90 mph (for example) where possible could allow more services to be routed this way (e.g. Lincoln to Kings Cross), freeing up capacity on the two track section of the ECML.

 

[30907]

An increase to 90 mph (for example) where possible could allow more services to be routed this way (e.g. Lincoln to Kings Cross), freeing up capacity on the two track section of the ECML.

It would be competitive (even with the Sleaford loop) with timings via Newark, but I suspect losing the Grantham and Newark traffic would drop passenger numbers to the point of unviability, even if you didn't have to run an additional train to serve said places (and thus take up the capacity you have gained).

 

[High Dyke]

If there's such concern about service clashes on this section, the easiest solution is surely to divert Joint Line passenger services by the avoiding line . This also has a benefit of stopping the costs of no less than four junctions.

Are you hypothetically suggesting the connections between the Skegness line and Joint Line be removed? There are engineering trains that use the connections at both South and North junctions from Sleaford station. Would they need a circuitous route or different start/finish location to get to the site of work?

How much of the Joint Line usage at Sleaford cannot be handled by changing at Grantham instead?

Possibly some, but if someone wanted to travel by train between Sleaford and Spalding, why should they be expected to go Sleaford - Grantham - Peterborough - Spalding and vice versa? Equally, passengers between Boston and Lincoln; what route should they be expected to use? This is detrimental to rail travel opportunities.

 

[Failed Unit]

It would be competitive (even with the Sleaford loop) with timings via Newark, but I suspect losing the Grantham and Newark traffic would drop passenger numbers to the point of unviability, even if you didn't have to run an additional train to serve said places (and thus take up the capacity you have gained).

If for whatever reason the Lincoln - London train is diverted via Sleaford (because the Grantham route is blocked). It takes the same time, Often surprised they don’t do it more often,suspect that crew knowledge is The issue.

 

[Mag_seven]

I recently travelled on the Joint Line to Doncaster via Sleaford and would like to propose the less than 0.5 mile single track section from Sleaford East junction the most ridiculous and unnecessary rationalisation on the network. Would it really cost that much to double track that section or even have two single track sections to the station? Whatever the cost would be, the benefit would massively outweigh the delays caused from conflicts between any late running trains on either the Nottingham to Skegness or Lincoln to Spalding routes. No doubt, it would also improve capacity should they wish to run more services at any stage.

Any words of wisdom, known plans to address this pinchpoint, or other similar locations to propose that are even more ridiculous?

Thread reopened.

 

[Justin Smith]

Bearing in mind the thread title is "Sleaford East (and other similar?)" ( ! ) can I ask a question about the line from Sleaford West to Sleaford North junctions ?
This line was originally double track (from its construction in 1882 ? ) and still was by the late 60s as it is shown as double track on my OS 1" map and also on my 1979 Baker's. However by 1988 it was singled as my 1988 Quail shows it as such.
Am I right to assume it was singled in 1981 (at the same time as Sleaford to Heckington was singled) ? If not when was it singled ?

 

[Gloster]

Bearing in mind the thread title is "Sleaford East (and other similar?)" ( ! ) can I ask a question about the line from Sleaford West to Sleaford North junctions ?
This line was originally double track (from its construction in 1882 ? ) and still was by the late 60s as it is shown as double track on my OS 1" map and also on my 1979 Baker's. However by 1988 it was singled as my 1988 Quail shows it as such.
Am I right to assume it was singled in 1981 (at the same time as Sleaford to Heckington was singled) ? If not when was it singled ?

According to an article in the Signalling Record Society’s Signalling Record (No.217, Spring 2025) Sleaford West to Sleaford North was singled on 25 June 1978.

 

[Justin Smith]

According to an article in the Signalling Record Society’s Signalling Record (No.217, Spring 2025) Sleaford West to Sleaford North was singled on 25 June 1978.

Thanks