Syston is some distance to go just to reverse, are there no crossovers in the Melton area at all?
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
The impact of the new EMR timetable on journeys from Corby, Kettering, Wellingborough to London
- Thread starter johnw
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Aictos
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 10,403
It's a pity that the EMR services can't/won't be timetabled to use the slow lines north of Bedford and run them on the fast lines from Bedford as freight should be able to slot in between the services north of Bedford.
In much the same way that the Bedford bound TL services use the down fast to Harpenden Jcn then slow line to Bedford.
In much the same way that the Bedford bound TL services use the down fast to Harpenden Jcn then slow line to Bedford.
There is a trailing crossover at the west end of Melton Mowbray. However, the turnaround at Melton is 50 minutes, during which time there are several other services that pass through, so the train can't just stand in one of the platforms.
However, that's almost a secondary point - I'm sure they could have planned it with a shorter turnaround if they so desired. The whole point of the service is for traincrew route retention in case of diversions, so crews need to work to Syston to be able to divert in and out of Leicester.
Really, a better question would be "why doesn't the service terminate at Syston?".
edwin_m
Veteran Member
I imagine the platform would be much too short. Also, with the current arrangement it can be turned back at Melton if it's running too late to get to Syston and back.
Oh yes - I didn't really mean it in a serious way - more to explain that Melton Mowbray isn't the "real" terminus of the service.
bunnahabhain
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Jun 2005
- Messages
- 2,070
Its a 2 coach platform, but the issue is that the train cannot reverse at Syston station, it must drop behind the signal on the slow protecting Syston South Jn on the down.
Merle Haggard
Established Member
Hadn't realised that. It's an expensive train to run because it is duplicated between St Pancras and Corby by a pair of 360s running ecs to provide the balances.
Was that also the real reason for the early morning Corby - Derby, lost with Covid?
tbtc
Veteran Member
I can't find the fag packet I wrote it on the back of, but the "simple"/ "simplistic" maths looked something like this when I tried to work it out in my best crayons:
If you assume that the Long Distance High Speed (LDHS) trains effectively work a half hourly Sheffield - London - Nottingham - London - Sheffield diagram let's say that covers a "fast" and a "slow" to both Sheffield and Nottingham then that's *roughly* eight hours (Sheffield - London "fasts" are just over two hours, Nottingham - London "fasts" are just over ninety minutes, but the "slows" obviously take a little longer), plus you'll need maybe fifteen minutes between journeys, so let's call it a nine hour round trip until the train that left Sheffield is back again?
Nine hour diagrams, with trains every half hour... that's eighteen diagrams... there are thirty 810s on order... leave three to one side for spares/ maintenance and the resultant twenty seven units are enough for nine diagrams to be doubled up and nine diagrams to be run as single units.
I'm not saying that the units will be running Sheffield - London - Nottingham - London - Sheffield diagrams, just using it as a shorthand way of counting up the durations. Obviously there are different staff/ depots/ roles etc (or at least there have been during the period of some services being HSTs and some Meridians). BUT, if you did run nine hour diagrams then the trains arriving into London around 08:30 would also be leaving London around 17:30.
So you could arrange it so that the nine diagrams that were doubled up were the nine arriving into London at (say) 07:45 - 10:00 and therefore the nine departing London at 16:45 - 19:00. Doubled up when/ where most needed - that'd mean single 810s at Sheffield and Nottingham during rush hour but I've got to accept that the London demand is greater.
(I'm not guaranteeing anything, but this seems a good way of focussing capacity where it's needed most, rather than complicating things with splits at Leicester or portions or anything like that - the important thing is that there should be enough to double up roughly half of the diagrams - I guess the layovers may need to be longer if the Sheffield and Nottingham services are operationally separate)
43074
Established Member
- Joined
- 10 Oct 2012
- Messages
- 2,017
The diagrams posted on another thread imply there are about 22 diagrams needed to run the service, scope for about 8 pairs for the London peak with 810s. But then we only have to "accept that London demand is greater" for the strengthened services because insufficient units were ordered in the first place, trains like the 08:25 arrival and 17:12 and 18:12 from Nottingham were already full and standing as 5 cars (and in the case of the latter two south of Leicester.)
Don’t forget that a 5 car 810 have nearly 60 seats more than a 5 car 222.
Good question but personally I would like this service extended to Leicester. At Kettering this service would be advertised as Melton Mowbray on the PIS but the point of running to Leicester would that it would provide a more useful service and have full route knowledge for staff.
Also the current return service from Melton at 1315 is not ideal for the 30 minutue regular interval at Wellingborough, Bedford and Luton so I would suggest departing Melton at 1330 then it would run neatly from Corby as the regular 30 minute service rather than having the large gap in service.
As the train sits at St. Pancras for 40 minutues before its next duty I do think it is possible to amend the timings to make it more useful for all.
As someone who lived there the 00s when they had 2tph north and south - off peak direct to London, Leicester, Nottingham, and Derby (lots of connections), served by brand new 170s and then 222s and a free cuppa included with the ticket, I find it rather funny to claim they've never had it so good. Capacity has improved but this timetable is not some wonderful gift to Wellingborough.
Electric trains are great; much better for the planet. But I think you'll find it hard to convince someone they're personally better off because it's now electric.
The clapped out trains comments were silly, but not surprising seeing they've gone from Intercity offerings to 2002 First Great Eastern.
While the fare comments you point out are again, silly, the fares are too high when compared to Northampton.
43074
Established Member
- Joined
- 10 Oct 2012
- Messages
- 2,017
How do you justify the drop from 5tph in the peak to 2tph now then if they have "never had it so good"? More seats yes, but commuters also want plenty of choice, which they had in the previous timetable but have now lost.
It was also relatively rare for the trains from Wellingborough to be full and standing, there were some busier ones but on the whole getting a seat wasn't a problem; it doesn't really work as a justification in this instance.
That is a fair point, but will that be enough extra seats for the 30 year lifespan of the trains?
Maybe, maybe not. But certainly it will be enough for the next few years. As and when it isn’t, some more can be bought.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
Commuters aren't usually bothered about exact time of trains - most employers have a bit of tolerance about start time rather than expecting everyone to turn up at the same moment (which also overloads office lifts and similar). The reason to provide more trains at commuter times is normally that it's the only way of meeting the demand.
The extra seats at commuting times are probably more about providing an alternative to Thameslink for Bedford and Luton than particularly for Wellingborough.
TheBigD
Established Member
- Joined
- 19 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 1,991
And just 38 seats less than a 7 car 222.
Currently London - Sheffield is usually a 5 car on the semis fast and a 7 car on the fasts, around 608 seats per hour.
if both services become 5 car 810s that's around 600 seats, if one of the services is a pair that's around 900 seats per hour.
As you've stated, plenty of capacity.
The base timetable can be run with around 19 or 20 units*, depending on the turn round at Sheffield. Assuming you'd diagram around 28-29 units in service from the 33 x 810s EMR have ordered, that means that between 8-10 diagrams can be pairs.
* 5 units for Sheffield fasts
5 or 6 units for Sheffield semis fasts (either 15/20 minute or 75/80 minute turnarounds at Sheffield)
9 units for the Nottingham services.
Last edited:
Merle Haggard
Established Member
Experienced the new Wellingborough service today, travelling to Leicester.
13.07 connects into the fast Nottingham at Kettering, but was cancelled. The next train, the13.37, should connect into the 13.53 Kettering to Nottingham.
On arrival at Kettering, the 13.53 the departure screen showed that the 13.53 was only going as far as East Midlands Parkway*.
Observations (not criticisms) are;
Only information shown was that against the cancelled 13.07 was 'catch 13.37'.
At Kettering, no explanation why the 13.53 was not going through to Nottingham.
The following Nottingham service runs non-stop Leicester - Nottingham, but there was no advice that it was better to wait for that, and, if you caught the 13.53 and alighted at East Midlands Parkway you would not be able to board the next Nottingham service as it didn't stop. This absence of advice applied at Kettering; there was no announcement on the 13.53 itself, but the steward did ask me how far I was travelling and may well have told me to change at Leicester for Nottingham if that had been my answer
It does seem that passengers are expected to make their own decisions. No regret was expressed, although sorrow announced by a computer may not seem entirely sincere...
*It was a beautiful but unreliable Cl 180, presumably heading for Derby and an early bedtime.
13.07 connects into the fast Nottingham at Kettering, but was cancelled. The next train, the13.37, should connect into the 13.53 Kettering to Nottingham.
On arrival at Kettering, the 13.53 the departure screen showed that the 13.53 was only going as far as East Midlands Parkway*.
Observations (not criticisms) are;
Only information shown was that against the cancelled 13.07 was 'catch 13.37'.
At Kettering, no explanation why the 13.53 was not going through to Nottingham.
The following Nottingham service runs non-stop Leicester - Nottingham, but there was no advice that it was better to wait for that, and, if you caught the 13.53 and alighted at East Midlands Parkway you would not be able to board the next Nottingham service as it didn't stop. This absence of advice applied at Kettering; there was no announcement on the 13.53 itself, but the steward did ask me how far I was travelling and may well have told me to change at Leicester for Nottingham if that had been my answer
It does seem that passengers are expected to make their own decisions. No regret was expressed, although sorrow announced by a computer may not seem entirely sincere...
*It was a beautiful but unreliable Cl 180, presumably heading for Derby and an early bedtime.
Railperf
Established Member
- Joined
- 30 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 2,941
Been analysing performance of the 360's and impressed with them. They are achieving similar times to the shorter 2+6 HST's despite the slightly lower top speed.
Superior acceleration and braking makes up for the lack of higher speeds.
Superior acceleration and braking makes up for the lack of higher speeds.
Why is it a "shame" (other than for track bashing)? If they fit on the fasts, they might as well stay there.
Aictos
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 10,403
Because the time penalty for a Bedford stop be less as they will already be on the slow line or crossing over anyway.
InTheEastMids
Member
- Joined
- 31 Jan 2016
- Messages
- 726
Plus I think the slows are something like 50mph South of Wellingborough. I think they were left that way precisely because the fast lines can accommodate all 6 EMR services.
Shouldn’t really be surprise!
Bob Buckler
Member
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2018
- Messages
- 16
I still think that it was a mistake not to install a crossover between all lines when the new layout was installed just south of Wellingborough.
With the present layout, if a northbound fast train is closely following a 360 on the fast line it will have to wait while the 360 stops at platform 1 and then crosses over to the slow north of Wellingborough.
If the complete ladder crossover had been installed, the 360 could be diverted into the newly restored platform 3.
Is this platform scheduled to have any services, or is it just for use in emergencies?
Railperf
Established Member
- Joined
- 30 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 2,941
Yes.. That is a very good observation.
Looks like a simple case of not having the space.
The existing trailing turnout on the Up Fast has its toes pretty much on that bridge deck, and then it's straight into the next bend, which you don't want to hammer to speed on to get a turnout in:
If there’s a northbound fast train sufficiently close to a Corby stopping at Wellingborough to be delayed by it calling, that means one of three things :
1) the Corby is late
2) the Fast is late
3) they both are
If (1) then depending on how late it is, it will already have delayed the fast by stopping at the Lutons or Bedford. There is the option of swapping to slows at various places to enable the faster train to overtake - I have seen this done between in the last few days. For the fast service to be delayed only at Wellingborough would mean that the Corby would have to be 1-3 minutes late, which would delay the fast service by the same amount. Crossing it slow line at an imaginary Wellingborough South would delay a following train a little (slowing for the Junction earlier than slowing for the station). Given that using the slow line is, err, slower, and there is potentially freight in the way, you are then into a debate about trading delaying the Corby further - potentially to miss PPM, compared to delayng the fast by 1-3 minutes.
If the fast is late, Then similar arguments apply, albeit from the point of view that if it is late enough to be catching the on time Corby only at Wellingborough, it must be about 30 minutes late, and an extra 3 minutes is hardly here or there, compared to delaying an on time Corby.
The wider point is though surely that the inclusion of a Down direction ladder at the South would result in the Corby’s being off the Fasts 2 mins earlier. Granted it doesn’t buy you anything currently in the standard hour off-peak (a laughable concept on the MML really as it only truly covers 3 hours in the middle of the day) but there are a handful of trains in the shoulder peaks where it would unlock a quicker path through either Wigston, Trent or Dore, and it would probably enable you to swing both Corby services over rather than have one run up to Kettering Sth as it does today.
There may well be some gain in true peaks as well, but from memory they were pretty well fixed everywhere else. All of the future incremental gain in the new timetable is to be found in the shoulder and contra peaks, where for one reason or another it is not yet as optimised as it could be. Still, to be expected and the kind of natural fettling that occurs in the period post timetable implementation.
A ladder at the south end of Wellingborough would have been useful. Was part of the original scheme plan but de-scoped quite early on, despite much protestation from operators.
There may well be some gain in true peaks as well, but from memory they were pretty well fixed everywhere else. All of the future incremental gain in the new timetable is to be found in the shoulder and contra peaks, where for one reason or another it is not yet as optimised as it could be. Still, to be expected and the kind of natural fettling that occurs in the period post timetable implementation.
A ladder at the south end of Wellingborough would have been useful. Was part of the original scheme plan but de-scoped quite early on, despite much protestation from operators.
OK, referring back to my earlier post, where exactly would such a ladder fit?
Only obvious way would be to replace the bridge with a double track span. Which means £££ (and a maintenance liability of having a crossover on a bridge deck).
Seems like gold plating for something of relatively limited additional benefit as @Bald Rick spells out above.
- Status