St Pancras - Leeds?

[Bald Rick]

What could help is tweaking the timetables. If the XX32 Leeds train arrives at Sheffield just a couple of minutes earlier and the XX35 St. Pancras train leaves Sheffield just a couple of minutes later, that gives you an official connection, and therefore a much-improved service from West Yorkshire to the East Midlands.

If the London train leaves later, you end up rewriting Thameslink…

 

[cle]

If capacity on XC is the play, then 810s are really the solve, and should replace the new Leeds-Wakefield-Sheffield in time.

Doesn't address Birmingham, and the Derby-Chesterfield-Sheffield pairs are fine due to the St Pancras service already - but it might free up a few more seats on those services if it flighted just beforehand.

It's not necessarily for London-Leeds (but could be) - similar to Euston-Brum-Scotland, it's threading two services and opens new pairs, but also has an alternative end to end purpose. A Bedford call would also mop up that aspiration for the longer term (esp with Universal and EWR in future)

 

[43096]

In fairness they tended to be at the extremes of the day being first thing in the morning to get HSTs from Neville Hill to the MML and then in the evening to get them from MML back to Neville Hill.

Looking back to 2007 there were no less than six MML HSTs that came off Neville Hill every morning. Three went ECS to Sheffield, and three were in service: 0614 (Pullman set)/0726/0828 off Leeds. In the down direction, two were ECS from Sheffield and the 1655 (Pullman)/1745/1825/1925 from St Pancras in service to Leeds.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Reroute all Bradford/Harrogate services via Hambleton once an hour, thus removing the reverse at Leeds and avoiding Wakefield. EMR then should have the space from the vacated LNER platforms? The Leeds starter for LNER continuing to run via Wakefield. I’m aware there’s a few paths of starters that come from Bradford and Harrogate rather than the consistent hourly pattern I’m proposing. Some changes would be needed on this part.

That causes more problems than it solves, especially as the reversal isn't something that needs "solving" in the first place. You're putting more pressure on the through platforms at Leeds, and on the two-track approaches from the east, while removing services from Wakefield disadvantages not just Wakefield itself, but also large parts of West Yorkshire who "railhead" at Westgate for London- for whom a slower service to St Pancras is far less appealing. That's quite the egg to break for a not particularly desirable omelette.

 

[stevieinselby]

Could the capacity issue actually be solved really easily here? 897’s come in to play for this to work.

Reroute all Bradford/Harrogate services via Hambleton once an hour, thus removing the reverse at Leeds and avoiding Wakefield. EMR then should have the space from the vacated LNER platforms? The Leeds starter for LNER continuing to run via Wakefield. I’m aware there’s a few paths of starters that come from Bradford and Harrogate rather than the consistent hourly pattern I’m proposing. Some changes would be needed on this part.

The line east of Leeds is already at capacity. There are no spare paths between Leeds and York, finding a spare path between Leeds and Hambleton sounds pretty close to impossible without disrupting the local service, unless passing loops are added at Thorpe Park or Cross Gates.

Via Pontefract Baghill? Misses Leeds but you'd still have the connection to the fast Northern at Sheffield

So we're extending the EMR service to Leeds but not calling at Leeds? Interesting plan...
In which case it won't be replacing the new fast Leeds to Sheffield service but adding another train from Sheffield to Moorthorpe, which is pretty crowded already, but might be able to accommodate more, I'm not sure.

 

[WAO]

The reasoning for through St Pancras - Leeds services must be partly the wish to compete with the ECML on price not speed and partly to give the south and east midlands not served by XC a better Leeds link. Perhaps, in the course of time, it might be better to fuse the XC and EMR operating units, i.e go back a Midland Railway, rather like with the current GWR which now includes both IC and regional routes. That would encourage a number of synergies.

WAO

 

[stevieinselby]

The reasoning for through St Pancras - Leeds services must be partly the wish to compete with the ECML on price not speed and partly to give the south and east midlands not served by XC a better Leeds link.

Under a nationalised operator, there is no incentive or rationale for poaching passengers from one line to another by offering cheaper fares, so it wouldn't be about "competing" on price. (On the other hand, if the ECML can't meet demand and there is the potential for the MML to actually grow the market using surplus capacity to draw price-sensitive passengers away from overcrowded EC services then that might be a valid plan).

 

[mike57]

Under a nationalised operator, there is no incentive or rationale for poaching passengers from one line to another by offering cheaper fares, so it wouldn't be about "competing" on price.

And that raises the bigger question about how much time, money and resource is wasted through 'competition' between the various ToCs when all the funding and fare box revenue is controlled by the DfT (Apart from open access operators) I think we should have a nationalised rail network, but the current 'neither one nor the other' seems like a total mess.

I also suspect that there isn't a great many spare seats on the London - Liecester leg of MML fast Sheffield services, so the ability of the MML to supplement ECML capacity is probably limited. Since the redevelopment of St Pancras scope for increased MML services seems limited, and thats before you consider the capacity between say London and Bedford.

To be honest I dont see Sheffield - Leeds as flow that urgently needs more capacity, with the exception of XC services, which are always overcrowed, but thats mainly passengers travelling further afield.

 

[30907]

The biggest flow not catered for already must be Leeds/Wakefield to and from Leicester. Perhaps the Leeds-Nottingham could be extended, replacing the Ivanhoe stopper? That said, in most cases it would still be faster to change at Chesterfield/Sheffield.

 

[Halish Railway]

Coming back to this idea, I do think the idea is let down by the fact that the only new destination from Leeds it would create would be Leicester, assuming you used the xx:35 departure from Sheffield towards London.

It would be of much more use as a regional connectivity train if it served Northamptonshire (Kettering) and the broader South Midlands/Home Counties (Bedford), improving their northbound connectivity issues. But alas we need to consider this existing Sheffield to St Pancras service is intended to be a super-fast service.

Had HS2 have been built in full or even with a Birmingham to East Midlands stub the role of the Sheffield super-fast service would have been transferred away from the southern MML, with a Leeds to St Pancras service being intended as more of a regional service.

My alternative suggestion for extending the Leeds to Sheffield would be to extend it to Birmingham Moor Street once the Bordesley chords open, with the current CrossCountry stops at Chesterfield, Burton-on-Trent and Tamworth being transferred onto this service.

 

[D365]

My alternative suggestion for extending the Leeds to Sheffield would be to extend it to Birmingham Moor Street once the Bordesley chords open, with the current CrossCountry stops at Chesterfield, Burton-on-Trent and Tamworth being transferred onto this service.

And Willington?

 

[YorkshireBear]

Looking back to 2007 there were no less than six MML HSTs that came off Neville Hill every morning. Three went ECS to Sheffield, and three were in service: 0614 (Pullman set)/0726/0828 off Leeds. In the down direction, two were ECS from Sheffield and the 1655 (Pullman)/1745/1825/1925 from St Pancras in service to Leeds.

Back in the day I often drank in Sheffield with old school mates while living in Leeds. The evening was a parade of HST options with EMR and XC all having express HST services to Leeds, I think at one point there was 3 in the space of an hour.

Happy times.

 

[Grimsby town]

My alternative suggestion for extending the Leeds to Sheffield would be to extend it to Birmingham Moor Street once the Bordesley chords open, with the current CrossCountry stops at Chesterfield, Burton-on-Trent and Tamworth being transferred onto this service.

I like that idea but the only issue is you're adding another service between Sheffield and Birmingham which might be a struggle. Hopefully NPR will accommodate 3 additional services from Leeds to Sheffield all of which can be extended to the Midlands with one to Nottingham, one to Leicester (and onwards) and one to Birmingham.

I'm hoping the current and future governments recognise the need to improve the line from Sheffield to Birmingham to accommodate more local and intercity services. Leeds only having one train per hour to Birmingham is clearly not a good enough service.

 

[JonathanH]

I'm hoping the current and future governments recognise the need to improve the line from Sheffield to Birmingham to accommodate more local and intercity services.

On a two track railway, which feeds destinations other than Birmingham south of Sheffield, there is always going to be a choice over adding more local and more long-distance services (and maintaining freight capacity).

The Birmingham to Sheffield corridor has to accommodate, just in terms of passenger services:
6tph Birmingham to Water Orton
4tph Water Orton to North Stafford Junction (with varying stopping patterns)
5tph North Stafford Junction to Derby
5tph Derby to Ambergate with intermediate stations
4tph Ambergate to Clay Cross
6tph Clay Cross to Dore
9tph Dore to Sheffield

It is basically a two track railway.

Then going north, Sheffield to Meadowhall is a fairly congested bit of railway too.

 

[Bald Rick]

On a two track railway, which feeds destinations other than Birmingham south of Sheffield, there is always going to be a choice over adding more local and more long-distance services (and maintaining freight capacity).

The Birmingham to Sheffield corridor has to accommodate, just in terms of passenger services:
6tph Birmingham to Water Orton
4tph Water Orton to North Stafford Junction (with varying stopping patterns)
5tph North Stafford Junction to Derby
5tph Derby to Ambergate with intermediate stations
4tph Ambergate to Clay Cross
6tph Clay Cross to Dore
9tph Dore to Sheffield

It is basically a two track railway.

Then going north, Sheffield to Meadowhall is a fairly congested bit of railway too.

You can add 1tph freight to much of that.

 

[Grimsby town]

On a two track railway, which feeds destinations other than Birmingham south of Sheffield, there is always going to be a choice over adding more local and more long-distance services (and maintaining freight capacity).

The Birmingham to Sheffield corridor has to accommodate, just in terms of passenger services:
6tph Birmingham to Water Orton
4tph Water Orton to North Stafford Junction (with varying stopping patterns)
5tph North Stafford Junction to Derby
5tph Derby to Ambergate with intermediate stations
4tph Ambergate to Clay Cross
6tph Clay Cross to Dore
9tph Dore to Sheffield

It is basically a two track railway.

Then going north, Sheffield to Meadowhall is a fairly congested bit of railway too.

So more tracks need to be built, particularly if there isn't going to be an alternative HS2 style route on that corridor. I'm hoping that the early NPR upgrade at Sheffield includes additional track/tracks through to Dore. I think I read that the first phase would allow more trains to run from Manchester to Sheffield, which will likely require additional track between Sheffield and Dore.

 

[317 forever]

Northern 158 units will work through to St Pancras.

Or bring back Pacers for this service

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Feb 2026 ==

Also, some XC services could be curtailed at Sheffield, some EMR services could be extended to Leeds, and LNER could introduce additional services from Leeds to Newcastle or Edinburgh to replace the XC services.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Why not go full-on nostalgia and reinstate the Thames-Clyde Express?

You read my mind! I did it in the early 1970s. Class 45 or peak Haulage. Then via the Settle and Carlisle and then Dumfries and Kilmarnock! ( sorry, OT!)

 

[NCT]

With most sections of the railway operating at bus frequencies, if we still can't get connections to work, then the solution isn't to run even more services, it's to tidy up existing services to make them connect. There isn't the network capacity to run more services.

Thameslink does need recasting. The Peterborough/Cambridge - Horsham - Brighton services are symmetrical. The Bedfords are not. Making Thameslink symmetrical should be the first step.

A symmetrical Thameslink would help defining the symmetry of EMR Inter-cities. Beyond sorting out the symmetry, currently the Sheffields are one fast one slow, half hourly at the London end but closer to 10/20 at the Sheffield end. I'm not sure that's helpful given the number of services on approximately half-hourly patterns the other side of Sheffield. Having non-standard patterns not only mess up passenger connections, but make platforming more difficult - you don't have repeating half-hourly platform patterns.

I think it would be better if 1tph stopped at EMP and the other Loughborough and Long Eaton. This keeps speed differential to an absolute minimum, and with slightly different dwells at Derby and Chesterfield the two paths could arrive and leave Sheffield exactly 30 minutes apart.

Then recast Cross Country for common symmetry. The current Derby - Sheffield pattern (the combined pattern with EMR) is definitely not symmetrical. Have the two paths exactly half-hourly apart at Birmingham. The current pattern of 25/35 at Birmingham then 15/45 at Sheffield in the northbound direction is just silly. Have 1tph call at Tamworth and the other at Burton so they two tph have the same journey time between Birmingham and Sheffield and slot between the EMRs at as even intervals as possible. This skip-stopping is okay as long as the Cardiff/Birmingham - Nottinghams stop at both Tamworth and Burton.

With the combined EMR and XC symmetrical and tidy between Birmingham and Sheffield, there'd be a lot more timetabling clarity in terms of where the 1Ns should go on the graph. You then wouldn't get into the ridiculous situation where despite having 2tph one side and 4tph the other, a Leeds - Birmingham or Leeds - Leicester journey only has one valid opportunity to travel per hour.

 

[Minstral25]

Deleted