Speculation regarding East Midlands Franchise 2019:

[Jozhua]

Link to previous thread:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/east-midlands-franchise-2019.163487/

Hi all,

Unfortunately topic on the last EMT franchise thread went off topic was closed, however I still see a use for discussion and updates around rolling stock and new routes for the franchise as well as other elements of day to day operation that might change!

Currently the government is in the process of allowing TOCs to bid for the franchise and it will run from August 18th 2019.

If anyone has any updates regarding the governments decision on which TOC to tender the franchise to, please post it here!

Also if anyone wants to discuss the rolling stock and services run by the current franchise, and how this may change with the coming franchise.

Does anyone know if there is a plan regarding the replacement of HSTs with bi-modes? It has also been rumoured that Bombardier has proposed a newer DMU capable of 125mph for the XC and MML route.

Do the different bidders have different ideas on upgrading/refurbishing the fleet?

Any updates and information would be greatly appreciated!

 

[Kneedown]

The winning bid is due to be announced in April. I very much doubt any solid info will be released into the public domain before that due to commercial sensitivities.
As for future MML rolling stock, Bombardier have proposed a bi-mode with 222-esque performance. My money would be on that or an uprated 802.

 

[_toommm_]

Let's hope any new stock is longer than 5 carriages - the MML is an important route for many, and relying on 2x 5 carriage trains turning up isn't going to work. Not only that, it would mean only half of a 2x5 carriage could stop at some stations meaning people could end up in the wrong part of a train...

 

[jw]

I think it's a shame that the CrossCountry services won't transfer over to the EM franchise. This would have perhaps allowed new rolling stock to be procured for services from Nottingham and Stansted to Birmingham. We could also have seen extensions to Lincoln from Birmingham and potentially portion working on the Stansted service to give Norwich a direct Birmingham link.

Likewise, cutting the Manchester link means nothing for Cambridge or Stansted, and the 3rd Hope Valley fast path won't likely serve Derby or Leicester.

All of these services were envisaged in a EM Councils document some time ago.

The pattern for new franchises recently has been overwhelmingly in favour of new rolling stock, including diesels, so I hope there is good news there.

 

[ChrisC]

The pattern for new franchises recently has been overwhelmingly in favour of new rolling stock, including diesels, so I hope there is good news there.

If the Nottingham to Liverpool section of the Norwich to Liverpool route is lost, it will leave what is left of the local part of the franchise, away from the MML, quite small. EMT have done a fantastic job of refurbishing and looking after the 153’s, 156’s and 158’s, which makes me wonder if with 158’s released from Nottingham to Liverpool there will once agan be no new stock for local East Midlands Services. When you look back at the state of the stock EMT inherited from Central Trains and elsewhere, it seems very unfair to East Midlands passengers if once again they have to continue with the same old rolling stock when most other areas are at least getting some new trains.

 

[TheBigD]

43467 & 43480 had a trip to Skegness today. 1001 ex Nottingham and 1325 return calling at all stations except Radcliffe, Elton & Orston and Grantham.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Admittedly we can but hope that the new Intercity rolling stock is half decent. As much as people seem to hate the idea, the sensible thing is to punch the Corby services onto the XX22 and XX52 peak trains from Bedford to Gatwick (Luton, St Albans and St Pancras only). Next up, we need mostly 8 car units with 24/25m bodies and a half-decent load of catering and First Class. A small add-on of 4 cars to be used at peak in portions is equally acceptable. But yeah, let's hope for new regional stock for the Norwich - Nottingham and whatever other suitable routes. Extending the Derby - Crewe services to the Airport would be handy; and these in turn could extend back from Nottingham.

 

[43074]

Admittedly we can but hope that the new Intercity rolling stock is half decent. As much as people seem to hate the idea, the sensible thing is to punch the Corby services onto the XX22 and XX52 peak trains from Bedford to Gatwick (Luton, St Albans and St Pancras only).

These effectively replace fast EMT services from Bedford in the peak, with Corby electrification these will be reinstated - I would expect the fast TL services will revert to calling at Leagrave and Harpenden as per the original proposal. Extending the TL services to Corby is not particularly sensible given Harpenden in particular had fewer services as a consequence of the decision to run them fast in the first place, and it's a significant downgrade in service quality from a HST/222 to a 700 where customers are already paying a premium at Kettering and Wellingborough for instance.

 

[LowLevel]

Therein lies the DfT's problem. Kettering and Wellingborough in particular pay a big premium for an IC service as opposed to the likes of Northampton - without significant fare cuts it would never be politically acceptable to absorb it into Thameslink with class 700s, no matter how sensible.

 

[whhistle]

As for future MML rolling stock, Bombardier have proposed a bi-mode with 222-esque performance. My money would be on that or an uprated 802.

I hope not!
I've said elsewhere, bored of seeing the IETs now and they haven't exactly had the best reviews on GWR.

I'd have thought as the MML is more like the GEML instead of the WCML/ECML/GWML, having similar performing stock. It'll help the line get away from the "doign what everyone else does... only later" (thinking about the HST introduction - wasn;t the MML last to get them?).
I just hope the new franchise holder doesn't rush into a decision, nor do they think Bombardier is the only choice.

 

[sprinterguy]

I hope not!
I've said elsewhere, bored of seeing the IETs now and they haven't exactly had the best reviews on GWR.

I'd have thought as the MML is more like the GEML instead of the WCML/ECML/GWML, having similar performing stock. It'll help the line get away from the "doign what everyone else does... only later" (thinking about the HST introduction - wasn;t the MML last to get them?).
I just hope the new franchise holder doesn't rush into a decision, nor do they think Bombardier is the only choice.

Bombardier aren't the only choice; there's also the Hitachi product that you don't seem keen on, if Hitachi can provide assurances that they can provide a variant that matches class 222 timings.

The Stadler class 745 being ordered for the GEML, if that's what you're suggesting, would be entirely inappropriate for the MML as they are electric only units (and 100mph max), not bi-mode, so no chance of them getting north of Kettering!

You're correct about the Midland Mainline HSTs; they received their fleet in the early eighties only as a result of sets becoming spare from the East Coast, Great Western and Crosscountry as a result of a tightening of diagrams in the face of the economic downturn at the time.

 

[38Cto15E]

I believe that Stadler have a Class 755 Bi Mode lined up for the GEML, but I have a feeling that the maximum speed maybe only 100mph.

 

[sprinterguy]

I believe that Stadler have a Class 755 Bi Mode lined up for the GEML, but I have a feeling that the maximum speed maybe only 100mph.

The class 755s are primarily regional units, and four carriages in length. They are indeed also 100mph max. They will reportedly see some use on the GEML but the class 745s will be the primary traction. Neither would be appropriate for MML inter-city services in their current formations.

 

[A0]

Therein lies the DfT's problem. Kettering and Wellingborough in particular pay a big premium for an IC service as opposed to the likes of Northampton - without significant fare cuts it would never be politically acceptable to absorb it into Thameslink with class 700s, no matter how sensible.

Quite - and the fact which is often overlooked is Wellingborough and Kettering have lost out in terms of connectivity north as a result of Corby - so where before Corby, both stations had a half-hourly service to Leicester and beyond that's down to 1 an hour and nothing towards Derby or Sheffield (except in peaks).

So whilst London is the prime destination, connectivity into the midlands has also been downgraded.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

There isn’t a huge premium on Wellingborough vs Northampton and I’d argue Northampton would be my choice if I lived half way between because there’s a plethora of trains including non-stop to London at peak with 12 coaches and lots of capacity.

Moreover, there is nothing to suggest Class 700s would be a significant downgrade for Corby, Kettering and Wellingborough. Assuming the seating stays the same, and assuming that pathing will naturally change as a result of the East Mids franchisee using a combination of longer trains and the odd split / join at Leicester you would be able to get down to 4tph in/out St Pancras using a regular timetable. Faster 700s could start/terminate at Corby and off-peak yes they would stop all shacks Bedford - St Albans but the benefit is a half-hourly service with fast connections at Kettering or direct trains to Farringdon, Blackfriars etc.

The other option is TL only and ‘Any Permitted’ fares. EM would be able to run any Kettering and Wellingborough peak stoppers fast from Wellingborough to St Pancras; passengers for Bedford and Luton using the half-hourly service from either Kettering or Wellingborough up to town. Luton Airport might be a sod but, if we’re honest, that’s not the biggest priority when only a small number of people go there on the grand scheme of things and peak calls are a waste of valuable capacity.

 

[cactustwirly]

There isn’t a huge premium on Wellingborough vs Northampton and I’d argue Northampton would be my choice if I lived half way between because there’s a plethora of trains including non-stop to London at peak with 12 coaches and lots of capacity.

Moreover, there is nothing to suggest Class 700s would be a significant downgrade for Corby, Kettering and Wellingborough. Assuming the seating stays the same, and assuming that pathing will naturally change as a result of the East Mids franchisee using a combination of longer trains and the odd split / join at Leicester you would be able to get down to 4tph in/out St Pancras using a regular timetable. Faster 700s could start/terminate at Corby and off-peak yes they would stop all shacks Bedford - St Albans but the benefit is a half-hourly service with fast connections at Kettering or direct trains to Farringdon, Blackfriars etc.

The other option is TL only and ‘Any Permitted’ fares. EM would be able to run any Kettering and Wellingborough peak stoppers fast from Wellingborough to St Pancras; passengers for Bedford and Luton using the half-hourly service from either Kettering or Wellingborough up to town. Luton Airport might be a sod but, if we’re honest, that’s not the biggest priority when only a small number of people go there on the grand scheme of things and peak calls are a waste of valuable capacity.

So basically a downgrade then, Kettering & Wellingborough lose their direct connection to Nottingham, and loose their Intercity DMUs (with tables and plug sockets)


I think we should go back to the pre May 2018 timetable, and with longer trains, that works really well.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

So basically a downgrade then, Kettering & Wellingborough lose their direct connection to Nottingham, and loose their Intercity DMUs (with tables and plug sockets)


I think we should go back to the pre May 2018 timetable, and with longer trains, that works really well.

Not necessarily. Peak journeys fast from Wellingborough (e.g. stopping at Kettering as well) to London will connect to relatively frequent trains to Bedford and Luton; and off-peak journeys could happily run as they are. Admittedly, the big issue here is the loss of the Corby path and how to deal with that. Both Nottingham trains become slow? Decelerate a Sheffield? Market Harborough has lost out as well due to only having an hourly service to the likes of Bedford and Luton. In future, the East West will make this even more acute.

 

[whhistle]

The Stadler class 745 being ordered for the GEML, if that's what you're suggesting, would be entirely inappropriate for the MML as they are electric only units (and 100mph max), not bi-mode, so no chance of them getting north of Kettering!

As others have said, the Class 755 varient is bi-mode though.
And I'm sure it wouldn't take too much to improve the engines ability - especially through the learning of Greater Anglia. Perhaps Stadler could build a faster version but GEML only needs 100mph.

You're correct about the Midland Mainline HSTs; they received their fleet in the early eighties only as a result of sets becoming spare from the East Coast, Great Western and Crosscountry as a result of a tightening of diagrams in the face of the economic downturn at the time.

Which makes me wonder what they could have had if there were no spare HSTs?
Or perhaps they would have just built more HSTs anyway?
I can't imagine diesel and coaching stock until when the Voyagers were built. Perhaps train builders would have offered something like a Voyager earlier if the request was there (that isn't a 7/8 coach Turbostar!).


You must remember, MML isn't a prestigious intercity route in comparable terms like the ECML/WCML or GWML. It is more like a regional operator, the likes of Chiltern or GEML, no matter how many people don't want it to be. The service offering is completely different to that of a true Intercity operator.

 

[sprinterguy]

The Class 755 varient is bi-mode though.
And I'm sure it wouldn't take too much to improve the engines ability - especially through the learning of Greater Anglia.

It is, as noted above. I don't reckon you could pack more than the existing four engines into the 'power pack' though, or that engine efficiency will improve sufficiently in the next three or four years to permit an inter-city length Stadler bi-mode with performance to match a class 222 on the Midland Mainline.

 

[cactustwirly]

You must remember, MML isn't a prestigious intercity route in comparable terms like the ECML/WCML or GWML. It is more like a regional operator, the likes of Chiltern or GEML, no matter how many people don't want it to be. The service offering is completely different to that of a true Intercity operator.

What is a 'true intercity' service?
It's no less an intercity service than the GWML (ignoring the WofE services)
It's arguably more 'intercity' than the ECML as it serves places of importance, which the ECML doesn't except Leeds and Edinburgh!

 

[thenorthern]

The trains used on the local services may change as even the newest ones (Class 158s) are approaching 30 years old.

It's not just the age of the stock as East Midlands Trains local services seem to lack many things that have been fitted by other operators to old stock such as automated announcements, information screens, disabled friendly toilets, WiFi and at seat power outlets.

 

[mallard]

You must remember, MML isn't a prestigious intercity route in comparable terms like the ECML/WCML or GWML. It is more like a regional operator, the likes of Chiltern or GEML, no matter how many people don't want it to be. The service offering is completely different to that of a true Intercity operator.

The MML is the primary route connecting London with Sheffield (3rd largest city in England), Leicester (8th) and Nottingham (11th). That's of far greater importance than the GEML (Norwich is the largest city on the route at 32nd) or the Chiltern route (which isn't the primary route to any city of note).

The only reason it's been treated as a "secondary" route is because the DfT/Government don't want to invest in it. Personally, I think they're deliberately suppressing rail demand in the East Midlands by not providing good, connected, services (e.g. how the franchise spec explicitly bans connections to Birmingham, the plan to strip the franchise of Manchester/Liverpool services) and downgrading existing services (e.g. the recent timetable slowdown to accommodate Thameslink commuters) to justify a lack of investment. If/when HS2 phase 2 comes about, I strongly suspect that most of the East Midlands will lose direct connections to London (apart from maybe a token few services). That will mean longer journeys for many (everyone between Kettering and Derby/Nottingham at least).

 

[Jozhua]

The MML is the primary route connecting London with Sheffield (3rd largest city in England), Leicester (8th) and Nottingham (11th). That's of far greater importance than the GEML (Norwich is the largest city on the route at 32nd) or the Chiltern route (which isn't the primary route to any city of note).

The only reason it's been treated as a "secondary" route is because the DfT/Government don't want to invest in it. Personally, I think they're deliberately suppressing rail demand in the East Midlands by not providing good, connected, services (e.g. how the franchise spec explicitly bans connections to Birmingham, the plan to strip the franchise of Manchester/Liverpool services) and downgrading existing services (e.g. the recent timetable slowdown to accommodate Thameslink commuters) to justify a lack of investment. If/when HS2 phase 2 comes about, I strongly suspect that most of the East Midlands will lose direct connections to London (apart from maybe a token few services). That will mean longer journeys for many (everyone between Kettering and Derby/Nottingham at least).

Funnily enough the East Midlands network seems pretty efficient and actually seems to attract people who would otherwise consider driving. The local services that do exist don't compare to unreasonably to journey times by car and sometimes even beat them! (Especially in rush hour.) Considering the investment in Derby and Nottingham stations in recent years, I'd say the DFT aren't neglecting the area that badly. After Stagecoach has done a (slighty uninspiring) but pretty reliable and well run service I'm hoping the new franchise doesn't disrupt what already works!

 

[ag51ruk]

Which makes me wonder what they could have had if there were no spare HSTs?
Or perhaps they would have just built more HSTs anyway?
I can't imagine diesel and coaching stock until when the Voyagers were built.

No reason why not - Cross Country were still running lots of locomotive hauled coaches until replaced by Voyagers - routes to Manchester and the West Coast were almost all loco and coaches (electric where possible, and class 47 latterly for the rest).

 

[jfowkes]

Taking the long view and with reference to the EWR thread, I'd actually be in favour of running the Corby services with class 700s if it frees up some platform space at Bedford.

 

[tbtc]

If you assume that Nottingham - Manchester (Liverpool) will go to TPE/Northern then there's not much to do with the remaining "Provincial" EMT services - other than longer trains. Capacity problems (e.g. the flat crossing at Newark, single line up to Matlock and on bits of the Robin Hood) and the rural nature of Lincolnshire mean that the issue is more about capacity on existing services than about increased frequency.

As for the "Intercity" services... my question would be whether to focus on maximising the length of trains in line with platforms at St Pancras or trying to have shorter trains able to cope at places like Beeston (possibly involving portion working) - I'm not a huge fan of much selective door operating when it comes to Intercity length trains - okay if there's just one carriage unavailable but not great when it comes to a two hundred metre train where passengers may have to walk through several carriages.

There's also the problem that nobody has solved - how to obtain these four objectives with one timetable

• A roughly half hourly London - Sheffield service
• A roughly half hourly London - Nottingham service
• A roughly half hourly London - service for intermediate stations like Market Harborough
• Not making all of the Sheffield services slow south of Leicester/ not making all of the Nottingham services slow south of Leicester

One way or another you either end up disappointing one of the big cities by making all of their services "slow" south of Leicester or you end up with some 15/45 minute frequencies (instead of simpler half hourly ones). Not an easy square to circle (and I don't think going back to the Turbostar days where services waited ten minutes at Leicester to be overtaken is the answer - the ECML/ WCML/ GWML have relatively similar journey times on the regular off-peak services to Leeds/ Manchester/ Bristol, so I don't think it'd be popular to go back to Sheffield/ Nottingham having just one proper London service per hour, plus a stopper that runs within a few minutes of it and then waits ages at Leicester to be overtaken by a service to the other city).

The current InterCity timetable isn't great (partly due to the need to accommodate Corby) but I don't think that there is a "perfect" one - the question is who you inconvenience to try to balance timings and loadings?

The MML is the primary route connecting London with Sheffield (3rd largest city in England)

Much as I love Sheffield, I'd be hard pressed to find much agreement that it's the third largest city in England. That's the kind of skewed maths that thinks Nottingham/ Manchester/ Bristol are relatively small (because their city boundaries don't go far out before you reach Nottinghamshire/ Trafford/ South Gloucestershire etc - hence both Nottingham Forest and Manchester United not playing within "their" city boundaries). Let's not pretend that Sheffield is more important than Birmingham/ Leeds/ Manchester.

 

[swt_passenger]

Taking the long view and with reference to the EWR thread, I'd actually be in favour of running the Corby services with class 700s if it frees up some platform space at Bedford.

Which service(s) are you cutting to get the stock?

 

[Cavan]

What is a 'true intercity' service?
It's no less an intercity service than the GWML (ignoring the WofE services)
It's arguably more 'intercity' than the ECML as it serves places of importance, which the ECML doesn't except Leeds and Edinburgh!

What a ridiculous post - York, Newcastle, Doncaster, Darlington are of no importance then?

 

[Killingworth]

What a ridiculous post - York, Newcastle, Doncaster, Darlington are of no importance then?

Peterborough has a population of about 200,000 Doesn't it count?

 

[NoOnesFool]

A roughly half hourly London - service for intermediate stations like Market Harborough

That's really not necessary IMO. The current set up is about right, a roughly hourly service for south of Leicester EM stations, considering these places are towns, not cities. The one fast, one "semi" fast Nottingham -London services are just the right amount of coverage.

As mentioned up thread, what stations like Kettering, Market Harborough are some local services to places around the Midlands. EMT don't have the stock or resources to provide this, but perhaps a neighbouring operator i.e. Greater Anglia, West Midlands Trains could provide connections to Leicester, Birmingham or even Norwich.