Jump to content
 

Midland Main Line Electrification


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

By contrast the GW electrification still smacks of being half-baked with the main lines effectively being cut in two by available traction. Electrics would run to Cardiff and Bristol but bi-mode is still on the cards to enable Swansea to retain through trains. The operational flexibility of a single fleet (currently of HSTs) which can go anywhere from Paddington to Penzance or Pembroke Dock is in danger of being lost.

 

I believe the announcement will include extending the GWML electricification to Swansea, and include the Cardiff valleys. The stupid thing is that it should also go to Plymouth (via Bristol and Castle Cary).

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully it will be extended from Dore to Manchester and then the Euston-Picc trains can have some much-needed competition. I suspect that those dodgy MR tunnels between Chinley and Dore might rule this out though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Getting down the list then - this was Priority 4 in a document I had around 1970, after KX - Edinburgh, Paddington - Bristol / Cardiff and Swansea - York.

 

The big mistake on this line in the past was doing BedPan.

Had they started from Leeds no politician would be able to stop it before it got to London?

Would WCML have got past Northampton or perhaps Birmingham in the 1960s if they hadn't started from Liverpool and Manchester?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Not wishing to derail (sic) this topic there are significant concerns and technical issues regarding electrifying the coastal stretch between Exeter and Newton Abbot. Diesel may reign supreme in the west for many years yet.

 

MML currently has a regular St. Pancras - Corby service with a single train extending north via the Harringworth route to Derby. Any electrification must not jeopardise this service. If the entire route were to be wired then there remains only a relatively short gap from Melton Mowbray to Peterborough as another infil project and again massively increasing the potential flexibility of the electrified railway for freight routing and diversions.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not wishing to derail (sic) this topic there are significant concerns and technical issues regarding electrifying the coastal stretch between Exeter and Newton Abbot. Diesel may reign supreme in the west for many years yet.

 

As a Derbyshire exile living in Cornwall I feel qualified to comment on both. The MML electrification is fantastic news and it's been a long time coming. This must be one of the busiest non-electrified lines in Europe and infastructure investment hasn't kept up with usage so it's good the government is finally looking to put that right.

 

[OT] As far as Newton Abbot - Exeter goes, I was hoping HLOS would include funding to at least start planning for an alternative route in CP5. This would be a relatively low-cost way to at least get started on addressing a serious long-term issue for the rail network in the West Country, and would demonstrate that the goverment hasn't completey forgotten an area of the UK where rail use is rising rapidly. [/OT]

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Hallelujah! Excellent news for an area sliding into economic depression. Now--why not the Cross-Country Bristol-Birmingham-Burton-Derby line to make a real 'joined-up' network? Hopefully,it will mean investment and development in Derby's long tradition of train & infrastructure manufacturing which we've been on the way to losing recently. Please let's make sure that the new 'kit 'and engineering development needed stay 'in house' and are not bought in from Kassel. We need innovative skills and knowledge right here---six miles from where I'm writing this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

There are also the well documented wider benefits to the economy of rail investment schemes. If nothing else, it should reduce congestion on the M1.

Knowing the way politicians minds 'work' I'm rather suspicious of this announcement and I wonder if something else will be coming along behind it because electrifying this route might not only take stuff off the M1 but would also potentially relieve the WCML - and it's easy to work out what that would mean, especially in political terms.

 

BTW I doubt the Erewash Valley is going to be included at that sort of cost estimate - in fact the figure suggests that the amount of knitting which will actually be erected is going to be kept to a minimum (unless it excludes structure work on bridges, stations, and signals).

Link to post
Share on other sites

About time this line has been the poor relation far to long,lets hope that freight gets a look in as surely containers from the east coast could run here plus if connected to Peterborough could add even more possibilities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I shall await the official announcement with interest and see what those who write in the learned journals have to say in due course. On the face of it the announcement must be good news - there is too much running of diesel traction under the wires and that includes freight.

 

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
Now--why not the Cross-Country Bristol-Birmingham-Burton-Derby line to make a real 'joined-up' network?

Perhaps be cause that would achieve almost the opposite? Most XC trains run to, from or between points well beyond those limits meaning either the direct service could be lost, bi-mode traction would be required to replace the still youthful Voyagers or that those units would run under the wires negating most of the benefit from electrification.

 

The official announcement will be interesting. But just as the Crossrail project only took wires to Maidenhead - possibly to get it in under some sort of budget - when Reading was really the only serious destination and has now been promised the juice so it might be reasonable to assume that if the main announcement is only for Sheffield via Derby plus Trent to Nottingham that the "extras" such as Trent and Nottingham to Clay Cross (and possibly the equally short and useful Derby to Stoke link) might be added as the project develops. To then leave Sheffield - Leeds unwired would also be a criminal omission and Corby needs to be in there asa well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I shall await the official announcement with interest and see what those who write in the learned journals have to say in due course. On the face of it the announcement must be good news - there is too much running of diesel traction under the wires and that includes freight.

 

Chris

 

Picking up on Chris's point, I live at Stevenage on the ECML, and apart from the FCC locals and half(?) the East Coast trains we have Grand Central, Hull Trains and half(?) the East Coast trains being diesel, and very few of the freight trains are electric.

 

Ed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why am I not jumping for joy?

 

I think the MML has a few deeper (literally in the Erewash Valley) than string a few wires up will solve

 

Given that the only City of any size it serves is Sheffield, why not string the line between there and Retford and go ECML?

 

Nonsense. Nottingham and Leicester are both significant cities and Derby is not far behind. Nottingham in particular always appears smaller than it is as much of the contiguous built up area is not included in the population figure for the city. By the time you add in Beeston, West Bridgford, Arnold, Chilwell etc you end up with metropolitan area that rivals Sheffield in size.

 

Rob

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Picking up on Chris's point, I live at Stevenage on the ECML, and apart from the FCC locals and half(?) the East Coast trains we have Grand Central, Hull Trains and half(?) the East Coast trains being diesel, and very few of the freight trains are electric.

Ed

A very reasonable point Ed and one I can't see things changing very much to be honest. The simple fact is that many private terminals are not wired and would probably be uneconomic or operationally awkward to wire so diesel traction in some form is inevitable for part of the trip. On shorter workings loco changes are a desperately uneconomic proposition and if that has to happen at both ends that is even more the case so electric loks are really only a decent operational proposition on long hauls. But then the question of energy costs comes into it as well and electrics are still only viable if the NR electricity charge makes them so.

 

Sorry to say it but diesels are flexible and can readily move to other traffic flows as markets change, electrics can only follow the wires.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Nonsense. Nottingham and Leicester are both significant cities and Derby is not far behind. Nottingham in particular always appears smaller than it is as much of the contiguous built up area is not included in the population figure for the city. By the time you add in Beeston, West Bridgford, Arnold, Chilwell etc you end up with metropolitan area that rivals Sheffield in size.

 

Rob

 

Not to mention additional traffic centres such as Market Harborough, Kettering, Wellingborough and Chesterfield.

 

I also note the promotion of 'simple' extensions to the electrified network in this thread. Preston to Blackpool and Wolverhampton to Shrewsbury have been 'simple' extensions for years but the former is only being done now as part of the NW scheme and the latter isn't even mentioned these days.

When it comes to development of the UK rail network my observation over many years is that patience is indeed a virtue.

 

David

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I wouldn't argue that Nottingham is a city of sorts.....but my butcher wouldn't argue that Rump steak is better than Spam ;)

 

Fact is that the MML goes to Sheffield and its surrounding Slu towns - all of which ( and this is opinion not fact) would be better served by a decent connection to the ECML

 

Total population of Nottingham, Derby and Leicester (within city boundaries) is 850k and adding in the other towns on the route would give a population in the region of 1.25m. Adding in Sheffield takes it to almost 2m and then there are those from other locations near the route who will railhead who would add to the total. I understand that the financial case for electrification was way in excess of that for the Great Western and many commentators were baffled as to why the GW route was announced first.

The case for running to Sheffield from Kings Cross is further undermined by the capacity shortage on the ECML. In the past having more than one line to a location was dismissed as a duplication but these days can be seen as adding valuable capacity on an over-stretched network. At one time BR re-routed the 'Master Cutler' from Marylebone to Kings Cross but, if it still ran, they wouldn't do it now.

 

David

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Fact is that the MML goes to Sheffield and its surrounding Slu towns - all of which ( and this is opinion not fact) would be better served by a decent connection to the ECML

 

Is there sufficient capacity North of Peterborough on the ECML to accomodate through services to Sheffield using this newly electrified "East Midlands Avoiding Line" to Retford or wherever?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I wonder how long it would take from Manchester to Derby if the peak line was reinstated and electrified?

 

I think it takes about an hour and 45min now with a change at Sheffield?

 

Interesting question, Mike. According to the summer 1960 'The Palatine' (Manchester Central - London St Pancras) took 1hr 35mins in the up direction to reach Derby Midland. The time in the down direction was 1hr 27mins and in both directions included stops at Chinley, Miller's Dale and Matlock. In 1960 I would think that this was still a steam-hauled service using Scots, Jubilees and possibly Britannias. I will leave it to those with more expertise in motive power matters to give an estimate of what could be achieved with modern traction. Class 67 (or Eurolight) + 8 Mk3 + DVT anyone.

As an aside, I made a lot of use of the 'Project Rio' services when they were running a few years ago. These used the Hope Valley (not a high speed main line) and the the Dore south curve and reached St Pancras in, if I recall correctly, a little over three hours but at very reasonable fares. The services, despite being well used, were discontinued when most of the WCML upgrade was complete and any discussion of continuance at least as far as Leicester was dismissed due to capacity limitations on the MML. The fact that this also restored Virgin's monopoly on London services from Manchester on an expensively upgraded WCML was probably a slightly truer reflection of DT's thinking.

 

David

 

Edit: Just noticed that the 16.35 to St Pancras ran the 61 miles non-stop Manchester - Derby in 1hr 21mins and a further 2hrs 35mins to reach London. This latter part of the journey now takes one hour less.

Edited by DavidLong
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I wouldn't argue that Nottingham is a city of sorts.....but my butcher wouldn't argue that Rump steak is better than Spam ;)

 

Fact is that the MML goes to Sheffield and its surrounding Slu towns - all of which ( and this is opinion not fact) would be better served by a decent connection to the ECML

Has the ECML the necessary capacity to absorb the current frequency of service between St. Pancras and Sheffield ?
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Has the ECML the necessary capacity to absorb the current frequency of service between St. Pancras and Sheffield ?

Welwyn Viaduct was always quoted as the pinch-point. If that has been doubled or otherwise addressed, then maybe.
Link to post
Share on other sites

As MML have many of the trains serviced at Nevill Hill in Leeds it might be interesting to see if the plans include wires from Sheffield to say either Doncaster or up the Dearve Valley towards Wakefield.

 

If they were to go for the electric power car as discussed above in the 222's then the wires north of Sheffield would not be needed.

 

However we need to work out how old the stock will be when the wires are up. To suggest 91's cascaded would be impossible as they will probably be life expired then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...