The Sharnbrook Line

[wnr1990]

I've always wondered, why is this line used? I know it's only open to freight but why do they use this diversion rather than just stick to the mainline?

 

[Supercoss]

Not just for freight , fully available for
passenger use, prior to Sundon up loop being constructed freight services held here until morning peak had finished under the " thou shall not run south of Bedford in the peak" capacity issues for freight in up direction
line speed is low though dropping to50 then 20 in places
thameslink services are cleared to operate north of Bedford to Bedford North Jcn to reverse unlocking the potential of platform 4 use at Bedford but the TOC hasn't bothered to grasp this extra capacity with zero driver route training so services queue south of Bedford for a vacant platform whilst platform 4 remains empty.

 

[43066]

I've always wondered, why is this line used? I know it's only open to freight but why do they use this diversion rather than just stick to the mainline?

As above, it isn’t only open to freight. If there is a block on the mainline it’s a useful diversion. Same as any other diversionary route, really!

It’s also necessarily used if there’s a block north of Kettering and Connect trains are terminating at Wellingborough, as there’s no fast-to-slow crossover at Wellingborough south.

EDIT: it’s also still known as the MML slow lines, despite being a fair way from the fasts, and a couple of hundred feet(?) below!

unlocking the potential of platform 4 use at Bedford but the TOC hasn't bothered to grasp this extra capacity with zero driver route training so services queue south of Bedford for a vacant platform whilst platform 4 remains empty.

Empty apart from the two EMR Connect services per hour which call at it, and the four northbound EMR IC trains which pass through it at 110mph!

It can’t realistically be used by TL, and there’s also no need - they are adequately provided for by 1-3. TL could also (but AFAIK don’t) make use of the ability to shunt empty trains north from 1-3 onto the down slow to clear platforms during disruption.

They do make use of the P1 siding but IIRC it’s 8 car max.

 

[Lucan]

Isn't the MML simply a 4-track line in that area (from St Pancras to Kettering North Jcn). It happens that in the Sharnbrook area the slow lines diverge from the fasts for a few miles, then re-join. I expect that when the line was quadrupled from being double, the additional tracks took a different route for good engineering and land purchase reasons. It is not as if there were any significant towns on this stretch. I'm guessing that the Wymington Tunnel route was the earlier one, because later steam locos could handle Sharnbrook summit better.

 

[43066]

Isn't the MML simply a 4-track line in that area (from St Pancras to Kettering North Jcn). It happens that in the Sharnbrook area the slow lines diverge from the fasts for a few miles, then re-join.

Yes indeed, as per my edit above.

I'm guessing that the Wymington Tunnel route was the earlier one, because later steam locos could handle Sharnbrook summit better.

The route via the summit was built earlier, surprisingly enough (at least going by Wikipedia). There isn’t a great deal of online information to go on.

 

[Rob F]

The Wymington route was constructed as part of the four tracking of the route and was built to a different alignment to ease the gradient for heavy goods trains.

 

[pdeaves]

The Wymington route was constructed as part of the four tracking of the route and was built to a different alignment to ease the gradient for heavy goods trains.

Exactly so (similar reason to one of the tracks around Patchway being a very different vertical alignment to the other).

 

[Merle Haggard]

The Midland railway from Leicester to Bedford was very much built on the cheap; the company put the work out to tender, and then told the company providing the lowest tender that they had to reduce their price even further if they wanted the contract.

As a result, it goes over or around hills rather than through them. Every other route through the Northamptonshire uplands tunnelled but the Midland went over the top at Desborough. There's lots of curves, including through Market Harborough (recently eased), Kettering and Wellingborough stations.

As well as Desborough there was a steep climb both ways to Sharnbrook. The steep climbs obviously limited the loading of coal trains so, later, the railway built the Wymington diversion with a shallower ruling gradient (and a tunnel). Desborough summit was avoided by building the Kettering - Manton cut off.

It's still a bit of a puzzle to me that the Wymington route was re-instated as double track and electrified but the line speed wasn't increased, It is used for freight but the electrification would only be of use if there were bi-mode freight locos; most freight is routed via Manton, which will probably never be electrified. Pre-electrification there was a morning peak Up service booked on the route for pathing, but no passenger service is now booked slow line South of Wellingborough South Junction.

Incidentally, although the route was called the 'Goods Line' until recently, around the 1960s (???) like many 'Goods Lines' signalling alterations were made to allow use by passenger trains.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Where exactly is this so-called 'Sharnbrook Line'? Somewhere between Wellingborough and Bedford on the Midland Main Line?

 

[pdeaves]

Where exactly is this so-called 'Sharnbrook Line'? Somewhere between Wellingborough and Bedford on the Midland Main Line?

Here: https://goo.gl/maps/5PPRojHbpp2nFwQN7 (zoom/pan a bit to get your bearings)

 

[vic-rijrode]

The Midland railway from Leicester to Bedford was very much built on the cheap...

As a result, it goes over or around hills rather than through them. Every other route through the Northamptonshire uplands tunnelled but the Midland went over the top at Desborough.

Hence the old saying that the LNWR was built by engineers, the Midland by mountaineers.

 

[corsaVXR]

Really could do with a station near Rushden on these lines.

 

[43066]

Really could do with a station near Rushden on these lines.

There actually already is one. There’s a ghost station where the route passes between Rushden and Irchester, before the slows diverge towards the tunnel. It closed many decades ago, however!

 

[John Webb]

There actually already is one. There’s a ghost station where the route passes between Rushden and Irchester, before the slows diverge towards the tunnel. It closed many decades ago, however!

Irchester station, the one nearest to Rushden, closed in March 1960 and Sharnbrook station in May 1960. Ditchford on the LNWR line closed in 1924 and Rushden itself in 1959. (The latter two stations both have entries at http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/ for those interested.)

 

[zwk500]

Irchester station, the one nearest to Rushden, closed in March 1960 and Sharnbrook station in May 1960.

Is there time in the Corbys to reopen the old Irchester station? It'd presumably require either new crossovers or a general linespeed lift of the slows to make it work, which is a shame because Irchester and Rushden together would probably contribute a fair amount of London and Wellingborough/Kettering traffic...

 

[ExRes]

I've always wondered, why is this line used? I know it's only open to freight but why do they use this diversion rather than just stick to the mainline?

Lots of very good comments by other posters, my question is where would you put freight if you only had the mainline? I can't see there would be any way of fitting them in with the passenger service so you would either be stopping freight altogether or limiting it to a very few hours during the night

 

[Merle Haggard]

Is there time in the Corbys to reopen the old Irchester station? It'd presumably require either new crossovers or a general linespeed lift of the slows to make it work, which is a shame because Irchester and Rushden together would probably contribute a fair amount of London and Wellingborough/Kettering traffic...

In my opinion it would be better to have a new station on the slow lines as they loop around towards Wymington. Irchester station site is on the A45 about halfway between Rushden and Wellingborough and there wouldn't be much advantage in only having to drive there (from Rushden/Higham) rather than a couple of miles more to Wellingborough.
Similarly, i.m.o. there's not much advantage in re-opening using the site of a closed station versus a new station at a new site. For example, although the platform on the Up Slow at Wellingborough remained, trackless, it was pretty much removed before the new one was built in the electrification upgrade.

Irchester station, the one nearest to Rushden, closed in March 1960 and Sharnbrook station in May 1960. Ditchford on the LNWR line closed in 1924 and Rushden itself in 1959. (The latter two stations both have entries at http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/ for those interested.)

Right up until closure a morning Northampton - Peterborough and evening return called at Ditchford when required to convey railway staff. It seems that the former Ditchford station staff moved to Irthlingborough on redundancy.

After the withdrawal of the Wellingborough-Rushden-Higham branch service summer dated trains continued to run - loco hauled corridor stock - but I can't remember the destination (it wasn't just a service to Wellingborough). The branch continued to carry a considerable amount of parcels traffic (boot & shoe) after the closure of the passenger service, too (I posted on another thread about this, can't remember where).

Although I don't have a pre 1960 W.T.T. my 1962 one shows a comparatively frequent Wellingborough/Kettering - Leicester all stations service, and of course there was the London-St Albans/Bedford one, with nothing in between. Presumably, the Bedford-Wellingborough stretch was seen as a bit of a desert so Sharnbrook and Irchester were closed. I do remember the 'Rolls - Royce' sets working through Wellingborough to Leicester in their early days, though.

 

[richieb1971]

I guess its not used for passenger traffic because network rail have not increased the line speed. Watching a class 70 heading south through Radwell once, the bogies were bouncing all over the place on old jointed track with really old sleepers. The Oakley road bridge has a up slow speed of 20mph approaching the non exist Oakley station. The other issue is that there are 10x as many trains running south of Bedford as there are north of Bedford so 2 lines suffice. This is why its puzzling to me that EWR need another 2 tracks north of Bedford just for the benefit of easier pathing. North of Wellingborough of course, got the full upgrade spec for the 360's.

One issue I see north of Bedford is that the up slow is used to stop freight at red for considerable time. If you used that particular line it would be blocked for long periods so you couldn't really have a passenger service using the up slow. Bedford needs more platforms and a loop north of Bedford.

 

[corsaVXR]

I guess its not used for passenger traffic because network rail have not increased the line speed. Watching a class 70 heading south through Radwell once, the bogies were bouncing all over the place on old jointed track with really old sleepers. The Oakley road bridge has a up slow speed of 20mph approaching the non exist Oakley station. The other issue is that there are 10x as many trains running south of Bedford as there are north of Bedford so 2 lines suffice. This is why its puzzling to me that EWR need another 2 tracks north of Bedford just for the benefit of easier pathing. North of Wellingborough of course, got the full upgrade spec for the 360's.

One issue I see north of Bedford is that the up slow is used to stop freight at red for considerable time. If you used that particular line it would be blocked for long periods so you couldn't really have a passenger service using the up slow. Bedford needs more platforms and a loop north of Bedford.

There's a plan to remodel Bedford as part of the next phase of EWR.

Is there time in the Corbys to reopen the old Irchester station? It'd presumably require either new crossovers or a general linespeed lift of the slows to make it work, which is a shame because Irchester and Rushden together would probably contribute a fair amount of London and Wellingborough/Kettering traffic...

At the moment, it's irritating if I want to travel to London from Rushden.

My choices are Bedford, which is a 20 ish minute drive away and has poor parking (Pre-pandemic at least) or Wellingborough, which is the wrong direction, more annoying to drive to and is way more expensive.

A station nearer to Rushden would be at least walkable.

 

[zwk500]

This is why its puzzling to me that EWR need another 2 tracks north of Bedford just for the benefit of easier pathing.

EWR needs the extra 2 tracks through Bedford Station, and because of the short distance before it would turn off to Cambridge, it is not cost or capacity effective to merge onto the slows and then turn off again.

 

[richieb1971]

EWR needs the extra 2 tracks through Bedford Station, and because of the short distance before it would turn off to Cambridge, it is not cost or capacity effective to merge onto the slows and then turn off again.

If only we had foresight in the early 80's. Lots of holding sidings for local services in those days. Station is completely empty.

 

[zwk500]

If only we had foresight in the early 80's. Lots of holding sidings for local services in those days. Station is completely empty.

Cracking picture - Tanks in the dock, Gronk in the loop, traps on the Goods Lines (now Slow), Semaphores still in place and no platforms on the fasts. Sadly travel demand is not always easy to predict 50 years in advance, and there are many ways Bedford might have been done differently if we knew then what we know now.

 

[Class 170101]

The Midland railway from Leicester to Bedford was very much built on the cheap; the company put the work out to tender, and then told the company providing the lowest tender that they had to reduce their price even further if they wanted the contract.

Surprised the current bunch of clowns in Parliament haven't tried this trick with HS2, MML Wiring and any other rail project you can think of.

 

[wnr1990]

thankyou for your answers, now i'm educated

 

[zwk500]

Surprised the current bunch of clowns in Parliament haven't tried this trick with HS2, MML Wiring and any other rail project you can think of.

You can only pull that trick so many times before nobody will submit a bid.

 

[Haywain]

If only we had foresight in the early 80's. Lots of holding sidings for local services in those days. Station is completely empty.

View attachment 132540

That was the old station (the photo is more likely late 1970s) before electrification and a completely new station, and associated car parking, being built mainly on the site of those holding sidings.

 

[Bartsimho]

Bringing this back up but have there been any suggestions to try and up the line speed to Kettering?

I could think of an Oxford-Leicester service once EWR is present which could use it to avoid a change out of the way.
Would also mean it's not painful as a diversionary route when there is an issue.

Although I guess it would be painfully expensive

 

[Edvid]

The fact that Bedford-Corby electrification (MSE+, in a sense) has happened and the up side embankment near Oakley - the remaining (?) reason for that pitiful 20mph PSR on the up slow, 50mph otherwise between Bedford and Sharnbrook - doesn't appear to have been touched says it all really.

 

[zwk500]

Bringing this back up but have there been any suggestions to try and up the line speed to Kettering?

Not really, nothing high speed really uses this section.

I could think of an Oxford-Leicester service once EWR is present which could use it to avoid a change out of the way.

we've done EWR extensions to death. Operationally it's a bad idea and the passenger demand doesn't justify the risk to the passengers on the main section.

Would also mean it's not painful as a diversionary route when there is an issue.

Positive impacts for diversions are a bonus and are never significant in a business case.

Although I guess it would be painfully expensive

It wouldn't necessarily be painfully expensive, but the time to do it was when. They were electrifying it.

 

[Magdalia]

As a result, it goes over or around hills rather than through them. Every other route through the Northamptonshire uplands tunnelled but the Midland went over the top at Desborough. There's lots of curves, including through Market Harborough (recently eased), Kettering and Wellingborough stations.

This part of the Midland Main Line is "up hill and down dale", crossing the River Welland at Market Harborough, the River Ise at Kettering, the River Nene at Wellingborough and the River Great Ouse at Bedford, with watersheds to get over or through in between.

As well as Desborough there was a steep climb both ways to Sharnbrook. The steep climbs obviously limited the loading of coal trains so, later, the railway built the Wymington diversion with a shallower ruling gradient (and a tunnel). Desborough summit was avoided by building the Kettering - Manton cut off.

The goods lines south of Glendon were not constructed for passenger use, and did not have signalling suitable for passenger trains. Remember that in those days moving coal was more lucrative than moving people! The slow lines south of Bedford only got upgraded for passenger use when the DMU service was introduced in 1960. I think that the Wymington tunnel section was only passed for passenger trains after the remodelling and resignalling at Bedford that immediately preceded the BedPan electrification.

After the withdrawal of the Wellingborough-Rushden-Higham branch service summer dated trains continued to run - loco hauled corridor stock - but I can't remember the destination (it wasn't just a service to Wellingborough).

These were Wakes Week specials mainly to/from Blackpool and Yarmouth, and they last ran in 1964.