When MML electrification reaches Leicester, what service patterns could operate?

[Bletchleyite]

It'll all work better when the wires eventually make it to Leicester, which is a far better change point to longer distance services from Bedford etc than Market Ketteringborough are.

 

[Ianno87]

It'll all work better when the wires eventually make it to Leicester, which is a far better change point to longer distance services from Bedford etc than Market Ketteringborough are.

Why? How will services change as a result of further electrification?

 

[g22]

It'll all work better when the wires eventually make it to Leicester, which is a far better change point to longer distance services from Bedford etc than Market Ketteringborough are.

I would say so as well but doesn't this timetable work by shuffling the stopping services off the main line at Corby?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why? How will services change as a result of further electrification?

Getting speculative, but there's potential for EMU services to Leicester and ICs running non-stop.

 

[Ianno87]

Getting speculative, but there's potential for EMU services to Leicester and ICs running non-stop.

So what would serve Corby?

 

[Ianno87]

Er, more EMU services.

Do they fit south of Bedford?

 

[Bletchleyite]

From https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...gborough-to-london.215166/page-3#post-5079912

My suggestion is whether electrification to Leicester could allow a more LNR-like service pattern, with most or all ICs running non-stop London to Leicester, and an EMU service running all mainline stations to both Corby and Leicester, either by way of two separate services, or by way of portion working?

 

[JonathanH]

I don't think you are the first to suggest that but:
a) Does Leicester to London warrant 4tph fast and a 2tph stopper?
b) There isn't any room south of Bedford for 8tph EMR services, not that there is room between Kettering and Leicester for 6tph either.
c) Portion working at Kettering is a hard sell for Market Harborough passengers.
d) It slows up the service from Kettering as well.

I think the only justification seems to be to move the changing point north from Kettering to Leicester.

This usually gets brought up in the context of running Thameslink trains to Corby which is equally daft.

I guess that what is being suggested is

4tph fast EMR London to Leicester - half Sheffield, half Nottingham
2tph EMR London to Leicester calling Luton Airport Parkway, Luton, Bedford and all stations to Leicester
Extending 2tph Thameslink Bedford terminators to Corby.

Is it reasonable to put Corby on the slow line to London?

 

[A0wen]

From https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...gborough-to-london.215166/page-3#post-5079912

My suggestion is whether electrification to Leicester could allow a more LNR-like service pattern, with most or all ICs running non-stop London to Leicester, and an EMU service running all mainline stations to both Corby and Leicester, either by way of two separate services, or by way of portion working?

No capacity - the soon to be launched EMR timetable will suffice hence ordering bi modes to replace the Meridians.

And there really isn't the demand for a "suburban" service to Leicester.

 

[WideRanger]

How about a 'stopping' train with a southern terminus at Bedford?

 

[JonathanH]

How about a 'stopping' train with a southern terminus at Bedford?

No platform capacity at Bedford for a terminator from the north. As explained in the EWR threads, there isn't likely to be demand for a Leicester to Oxford via Bedford service either but clearly it would help with connections for a handful of people.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And there really isn't the demand for a "suburban" service to Leicester.

What there is is very poor connections (unlike on the WCML) between stations south of Bedford and stations north of Leicester. Many such journeys will require three changes. This is a potential way to improve that.

No platform capacity at Bedford for a terminator from the north.

Though if EWR is about to rebuild it, time to get your requests in...

 

[Bald Rick]

I think this is entirely possible, but with more electrification.

Then you’d have 2 fasts to Sheffield, one fast to Nottingham (calling at Kettering and Harboro’), one Electric ‘stopper’ to Nottingham, and then either two to Corby or one to Corby and one to Leicester; if the latter it would be overtaken somewhere between Bedford’s and Kettering.

Basically the same pattern as from next month, perhaps with a variation for the second Corby.

 

[A0wen]

What there is is very poor connections (unlike on the WCML) between stations south of Bedford and stations north of Leicester. Many such journeys will require three changes. This is a potential way to improve that.



Though if EWR is about to rebuild it, time to get your requests in...

The number of people travelling north from Bedford or Wellingborough to Leicester and beyond was minimal - EMR did the sums when the timetable was cast.

And for the main stations (Bedford and the Lutons) it'll be 2 changes - Kettering, for Leicester & Nottingham, and again at Leicester for Derby and Sheffield. The other stations between Bedford and Luton aren't important, south of Luton it would be just as quick to go via London.

 

[JonathanH]

I guess diversion of one Corby service to Leicester and a Corby to Kettering shuttle on the opposite side of the hour to the through Corby service might work. It depends on how established the half-hourly Corby service becomes.

HS2 Eastern Leg is also a factor, particularly if Nottingham got a through service to Kings Cross out of the changes. Then a Nottingham electric stopper might be more of a reasonable proposition.

 

[Bald Rick]

HS2 Eastern Leg is also a factor, particularly if Nottingham got a through service to Kings Cross out of the changes. Then a Nottingham electric stopper might be more of a reasonable proposition.

Yep. I’d say Nottingham is more likely to get a through fast service to Euston, in just over the hour. That would free up the Nottingham fast path for a second Nottingham slower path or similar.

 

[A0wen]

I guess diversion of one Corby service to Leicester and a Corby to Kettering shuttle on the opposite side of the hour to the through Corby service might work. It depends on how established the half-hourly Corby service becomes.

HS2 Eastern Leg is also a factor, particularly if Nottingham got a through service to Kings Cross out of the changes. Then a Nottingham electric stopper might be more of a reasonable proposition.

You'd screw the timetable up. Kettering - Corby and back can be done in under 30 mins. Kettering - Leicester is at least 20 mins each way.

I think if paths became available on the ECML due to HS2, there are probably better (more deserving) options for their use than running from Nottingham. Putting Lincoln and York hourly would be one, Grimsby would possibly be another.

 

[JonathanH]

I think if paths became available on the ECML due to HS2, there are probably better (more deserving) options for their use than running from Nottingham. Putting Lincoln and York hourly would be one, Grimsby would possibly be another.

Nottingham to Kings Cross might allow the Norwich service to be diverted somewhere more useful for onward connections (and running a Nottingham stopper on the MML helps with the turnaround issue you have indicated).

You'd screw the timetable up. Kettering - Corby and back can be done in under 30 mins. Kettering - Leicester is at least 20 mins each way.

Not if St Pancras - Corby - Kettering - Corby - St Pancras takes the same amount of time as St Pancras - Leicester - St Pancras which it seems like it might.

 

[edwin_m]

HS2 Eastern Leg is also a factor, particularly if Nottingham got a through service to Kings Cross out of the changes. Then a Nottingham electric stopper might be more of a reasonable proposition.

Nottingham to Kings Cross is a solution in search of a problem. If HS2 goes to Toton then the existing London-Nottingham service needs to continue in close to its present form, as may people will prefer a through journey to the city centre over one that might be ten minutes quicker but involves a change.

Yep. I’d say Nottingham is more likely to get a through fast service to Euston, in just over the hour. That would free up the Nottingham fast path for a second Nottingham slower path or similar.

Nottingham to Leicester deserves two fast trains per hour and this is another reason to continue the London service moreoreless as now, even if HS2 provides a through fast Nottingham service. The MML Nottingham trains might then pick up some more intermediate stops.

 

[HST43257]

Nottingham to Kings Cross is a solution in search of a problem. If HS2 goes to Toton then the existing London-Nottingham service needs to continue in close to its present form, as may people will prefer a through journey to the city centre over one that might be ten minutes quicker but involves a change.

There’s also things like enhanced Peterborough and Cambridge (if you did St Neots Interchange) connections to consider, as well as direct services to other places for those of, say, Bingham. Hourly via MML and hourly via ECML seems good enough for me.

Nottingham to Leicester deserves two fast trains per hour and this is another reason to continue the London service moreoreless as now, even if HS2 provides a through fast Nottingham service. The MML Nottingham trains might then pick up some more intermediate stops.

Only have 1tph London to Nottingham, send the other from London to Melton Mowbray via Leicester, and divert the 2nd Nottingham to Leicester to Nuneaton (and beyond)

 

[A0wen]

There’s also things like enhanced Peterborough and Cambridge (if you did St Neots Interchange) connections to consider, as well as direct services to other places for those of, say, Bingham. Hourly via MML and hourly via ECML seems good enough for me.


Only have 1tph London to Nottingham, send the other from London to Melton Mowbray via Leicester, and divert the 2nd Nottingham to Leicester to Nuneaton (and beyond)

The first one is absolutely a solution looking for a problem. If somebody is heading to Cambridge, why would you pass through Peterboro to get to St Neots and EWR ? There's already a direct Peterborough to Cambridge service taking 50 mins. Peterboro to St Neots (with one stop at Huntingdon) takes 25 mins. St Neots - Cambridge is about 18 miles (as the crow flies) and EWR will almost certainly have a stop at Cambourne, so that, along with interchange time at St Neots won't make that journey any better.

On the second one, London to Melton via Leicester - assuming the same stopping patterns i.e. a stopper to Leicester then I'm not sure why you'd do it, time wise it's neutral - to compare the current St P - Melton via Corby service takes 1h 48 m with 5 stops en route and a 10 min stop at Kettering (so 1h 38m). A stopper to Leicester with 5 stops takes 1h 20m and Leicester to Melton is about 15 mins further on.

And it's all well and good saying 'send a Nottingham service to Nuneaton and beyond' - where do you have in mind ? You can't head for Coventry unless you try crossing the WCML on the level, so the only alternative to that is Birmingham, but Nottingham already gets 2 tph to Birmingham - and there's no journey time saving running via Leicester and Nuneaton.

 

[swt_passenger]

Hasn’t diverting the Corby EMUs towards Market Harborough and/or Leicester been covered fairly recently in one of the other MML electrification or timetable threads? We seem to keep getting the same proposals that just don’t give up...

 

[A0wen]

Hasn’t diverting the Corby EMUs towards Market Harborough and/or Leicester been covered fairly recently in one of the other MML electrification or timetable threads? We seem to keep getting the same proposals that just don’t give up...

Yup - along with why EMR need to stop at Bedford when EWR is complete, ignoring the fact that pretty much all the journeys from points north on the MML to the EWR destinations can currently be achieved with a single change and at a virtually identical journey time to one via EWR would offer in 10 years time......

 

[Hey 3]

Yup - along with why EMR need to stop at Bedford when EWR is complete, ignoring the fact that pretty much all the journeys from points north on the MML to the EWR destinations can currently be achieved with a single change and at a virtually identical journey time to one via EWR would offer in 10 years time......

And where is that single change at?

 

[A0wen]

And where is that single change at?

Going a little OT, however:

Depends on the journey - but taking 3 of the main places on the northern bit of the MML (Leicester, Derby, Nottingham) and the key destinations on EWR (Cambridge, MK, Oxford)

Leicester - Cambridge (direct now)
Leicester - MK (change at Nuneaton)
Leicester - Oxford (change at Birmingham)

Nottingham - Cambridge (change at Ely)
Nottingham - MK (change at Tamworth)
Nottingham - Oxford (change at Birmingham)

Derby - Cambridge (change at Leicester)
Derby - MK (change at Tamworth)
Derby - Oxford (change at Birmingham)

 

[Hey 3]

Going a little OT, however:

Depends on the journey - but taking 3 of the main places on the northern bit of the MML (Leicester, Derby, Nottingham) and the key destinations on EWR (Cambridge, MK, Oxford)

Leicester - Cambridge (direct now)
Leicester - MK (change at Nuneaton)
Leicester - Oxford (change at Birmingham)

Nottingham - Cambridge (change at Ely)
Nottingham - MK (change at Tamworth)
Nottingham - Oxford (change at Birmingham)

Derby - Cambridge (change at Leicester)
Derby - MK (change at Tamworth)
Derby - Oxford (change at Birmingham)

Some of those changes are arguably better used at Bedford.

 

[A0wen]

Some of those changes are arguably better used at Bedford.

Well, it's academic at present because EWR isn't in place.

But I'm not sure that Bedford is a better place to be stuck waiting for a connection - it's certainly no better than Tamworth.

 

[cle]

If Bedford is rebuilt as fancifully planned, with all the lines and platforms, there might be a case for something.

I'd think Corby could go to hourly, and an EMU could go to Leicester. If hourly to Corby was an issue, maybe a EWR or even a solitary Thameslink train could be extended. I'd think EWR might be more interesting - 1tph Corby - Bedford - Bletchley - Oxford or so. Wellingborough and Kettering would have E/W connections.

If another hourly path out of St P could ever be wrangled, then I'd say add a Leicester EMU. Maybe chop a Market Harboro call off a fast. But 2tph to Sheffield and 2tph to Nottingham is fine. And if HS2 happens, rip it up. Demand will be stronger for outer/South Midlands to London commuting, than more long distance growth. Neither of those cities are booming particularly.

 

[A0wen]

If Bedford is rebuilt as fancifully planned, with all the lines and platforms, there might be a case for something.

I'd think Corby could go to hourly, and an EMU could go to Leicester. If hourly to Corby was an issue, maybe a EWR or even a solitary Thameslink train could be extended. I'd think EWR might be more interesting - 1tph Corby - Bedford - Bletchley - Oxford or so. Wellingborough and Kettering would have E/W connections.

If another hourly path out of St P could ever be wrangled, then I'd say add a Leicester EMU. Maybe chop a Market Harboro call off a fast. But 2tph to Sheffield and 2tph to Nottingham is fine. And if HS2 happens, rip it up. Demand will be stronger for outer/South Midlands to London commuting, than more long distance growth. Neither of those cities are booming particularly.

So you'd entwine EWR with EMR, exactly the opposite of what EWR are *trying* to achieve. For EWR to be successful (i.e. reliable) it needs to be kept separate from the lines it crosses so any problems on those *don't* then create knock on delays on EWR.

If you drop Corby to hourly you'll be reducing its service by 50% (from the new timetable) not sure that'll be popular. As for extending TL to Corby, that's been done to death around here too many times as to why not.

 

[HST43257]

The first one is absolutely a solution looking for a problem. If somebody is heading to Cambridge, why would you pass through Peterboro to get to St Neots and EWR ? There's already a direct Peterborough to Cambridge service taking 50 mins. Peterboro to St Neots (with one stop at Huntingdon) takes 25 mins. St Neots - Cambridge is about 18 miles (as the crow flies) and EWR will almost certainly have a stop at Cambourne, so that, along with interchange time at St Neots won't make that journey any better.

On the second one, London to Melton via Leicester - assuming the same stopping patterns i.e. a stopper to Leicester then I'm not sure why you'd do it, time wise it's neutral - to compare the current St P - Melton via Corby service takes 1h 48 m with 5 stops en route and a 10 min stop at Kettering (so 1h 38m). A stopper to Leicester with 5 stops takes 1h 20m and Leicester to Melton is about 15 mins further on.

This would be post HS2, replacing the 2nd tph fast to Kettering. So MM calling at K, MH, L & MM.

And it's all well and good saying 'send a Nottingham service to Nuneaton and beyond' - where do you have in mind ? You can't head for Coventry unless you try crossing the WCML on the level, so the only alternative to that is Birmingham, but Nottingham already gets 2 tph to Birmingham - and there's no journey time saving running via Leicester and Nuneaton.

Link it with the Leicester slow, just effectively linking 2 services together, but providing better connections for Loughborough, Hinckley and Nuneaton.