MML Electrification: progress updates

[londonmidland]

Wellingborough, approaching from the north, seems to have the biggest change visual wise from everywhere.

I like the ‘hexagon style’ portals they’ve used. Remind me of Leeds.

 

[70014IronDuke]

1970s actually, possibly before then.

????? Electrification of the Midland? promised in the 70s? I can't remember that. And before that, it was up for a Waterloo - Exeterisation job - single track north of Bedford to Wigston with passing loops, and inter-city trains routed via Euston-Nuneaton.

 

[Bald Rick]

????? Electrification of the Midland? promised in the 70s? I can't remember that. And before that, it was up for a Waterloo - Exeterisation job - single track north of Bedford to Wigston with passing loops, and inter-city trains routed via Euston-Nuneaton.

Yes it was intended to keep wiring northwards from Bedford - that was certianly the plan before the Midland Suburban electrification started, as the latter was only intended to be a first phase. But post sectorisation in 1982 the InterCity bean counters took over from LM Region and took a wider view. They worked out there was a much better case to electrify the ECML to Leeds and Newcastle, so that happened instead (with a later decision to go to Edinburgh).

 

[70014IronDuke]

Yes it was intended to keep wiring northwards from Bedford - that was certianly the plan before the Midland Suburban electrification started, as the latter was only intended to be a first phase. But post sectorisation in 1982 the InterCity bean counters took over from LM Region and took a wider view. They worked out there was a much better case to electrify the ECML to Leeds and Newcastle, so that happened instead (with a later decision to go to Edinburgh).

Well, OK. Must have been after I was was away. But I was on the section that did the preliminary timings for the St Pancras - Bedford electrification in 1974. I didn't do that work, it was a collegue, but there was no mention of going further north at that time, and I'm certain I'd have registered it had there been. OF course, this was well before the project was given the go-ahead, which I suppose would have been around 78.

 

[Bald Rick]

Well, OK. Must have been after I was was away. But I was on the section that did the preliminary timings for the St Pancras - Bedford electrification in 1974. I didn't do that work, it was a collegue, but there was no mention of going further north at that time, and I'm certain I'd have registered it had there been. OF course, this was well before the project was given the go-ahead, which I suppose would have been around 78.

Well I was barely in school, and bow to your experience. I’m taking my info from Modern Railways from around the time Mid Sub was authorised. Of course the national ASLEF strike in 82 didn’t help, as I guess that was the point at which the wiring teams needed to move on, and a decision was needed, and with the future of the whole railway in doubt I can see why a decision was deferred / re-examined.

 

[59CosG95]

MML Wiring Progressometer 28.0 (as of 1st of May 2019)
Mileages are from St. Pancras. Unless mentioned otherwise, all reference to the "Fast" side refers to tracks on the western side of the "10-foot" (centre of the track pairs), and the "Slow" side for the tracks on the eastern side.

Bedford (49m 65ch) - Wellingborough (65m 09ch)

• Work to raise Ford End Rd bridge is now complete.
• On the Fast side, behind Bedford P4's fence, masts to support troughing appear to have been erected. These may carry feeder cables or similar.
• Piles have gone in next to the turnback siding at Bedford.
• On the Fast side south of Bromham Rd Bridge, Bedford, at least 9 masts are now up. These masts stretch northwards from Bromham Rd as far as the eye can see, towards the Great Ouse Bridge. A number of masts now have TTC booms - many booms have stovepipes.
  
• Over the pointwork of Bedford North Jct (just north of Bromham Rd Bridge), the majority of masts now have booms (either TTC or Portal). SPS also starting to go up.
• Between Bedford North Jct & Sharnbrook Jct, about 90% of masts are up on both sides of the line.
• Aerial Earth Wire is now up on both sides between Bedford & Oakley, verified in the Clapham area. All four lines are now wired past the former site of Oakley Station - the Slow lines and the Up Fast run about as far as the Tensorex portal between Oakley Viaduct & Highfield Rd. Two-track portals now appear to be up over Oakley Viaduct too (on both lines).
• At Bromham, between the A6 (Great Ouse Way) & Lower Farm Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/rSPFrDAZQ362), 13 Twin Track Cantilevers/TTCs (with booms) are up over the Slow Lines, and about 6/7 over the Fast Lines. This includes the Box Girder bridge over the river Great Ouse.
• At least 9 boomed and dressed (aka. bedanglied) TTC masts have now gone up north of Lower Farm Rd, adjacent to the Down Fast; 2 similar structures are now up adjacent to the Up Slow here too.
• Between Clapham & Oakley, two Anchor Portals (similar to the Tensorex-bearing variety seen and loathed on the GWML) have gone up; the northern one only has a strut on the Fast side, as does the southern one. Both now have Single Insulator "gooseneck" Cantilevers on stovepipes, as well as Tensorex drums. Additionally, an adjacent TTC on the Slow side (1 mast north of the southern Tensorex Portal) lacks a boom.
• Near Milton Ernest (between Earwig Lane Bridge & New Rd), all masts appear to be up.
• Between Radwell Rd & New Rd, a TTC mast has been placed between the Up Fast & Down Slow, as the embankment adjacent to the Up Slow had to be replaced with a gabion retaining wall.
• About 6 TTCs are up immediately to the north of Radwell Viaduct, over the Slow lines (https://goo.gl/maps/r5oXUSSPSAo); 3 more TTCs are up accompanying them over the Fast lines (positioned between the pairs of lines). Another 2 are now up over the Slows south of the viaduct. Masts for 2 portal booms are up at the southern end of the viaduct; both pairs of masts now have booms, completing the portals.
• Roughly 3 or 4 piles (now with boomless TTC masts) are in next to the Down Fast, and another 4 (3 of which have boomed TTC masts) next to the Up Slow just north of Moor End Lane, Radwell (https://goo.gl/maps/cmgWsgyYAo62). South of Moor End Lane (but north of the next bridge to the south), about 5 TTC masts are up (2 of which have booms) adjacent to the Up Slow, with a similar number in adjacent to the Down Fast. South of that bridge, another 2 piles have masts (possibly w/ booms).
• 2 parallel piles are in place (no masts) adjacent to the Fast lines at Radwell; possibly for a portal frame?
• TTCs have now sprouted at the northern end of Sharnbrook Viaduct; these stretch north to the extremities of Sharnbrook Jct itself. Significantly more steelwork up over the Slows than the Fasts.
• Around Sharnbrook Jct (south of Templars Way O/B), at least 4 piles have gone in adjacent to the proposed alignment of the future Up Slow.
• North of Templars Way overbridge, 3 boomed TTC masts are in place on the Slow side, and 1 boomed & dressed TTC mast is in place on the Fast side. South of these, a pair of portal uprights have gone up.
• Almost all masts are now up over the Slow lines, from just north of Park Ln, Sharnbrook (https://goo.gl/maps/df2As431FDr) to Sharnbrook Rd overbridge (southern end of Souldrop bank); the 4-tracking here is not yet complete as signals "WH378" and “LR 8” sit right in the path of the restored Up Slow. Some TTCs have now gone up on the Fasts between these bridges too.
• At Souldrop (between Sharnbrook Rd & Back Lane overbridges), 400m approx of Aerial Earth Wire (AEW) has gone up on the Slow side TTCs.
• Back Lane Bridge (aka Odell Viaduct), demolished & rebuilt earlier in the year, had its new bridge deck installed over the weekend of 10th/11th November, to allow for a more generous OLE clearance. Follow-up work occurred the following weekend.
• North of Sharnbrook Tunnel, the first 15 piles (13 Down, 1 Up) now bear steelwork. 11 of these are TTCs (all on the Down side); the other 4 will bear SSAs "wicket-keepers" for wire run terminations in Tensorex drums on either side of the running lines.
  South of Bridge WYM-4 (adjacent to the New Inn), 9 of the 17 piles are now in on the Down side of the Slow lines - presumably for the (future) Down Slow at least.
• Between Wymington (https://goo.gl/maps/apZ6wwj9StR2) and Wellingboro', intensive 4-tracking is underway. Near the Google Maps link posted for Wymington, the car park used for the 4-tracking works is due to house a National Grid substation for the electrification; the concrete base has now been laid for the substation.
• In the southern area of the Wymington Deviation, around 9 masts are now up on the Fasts (single cantilever type). North of Souldrop Tunnel, all 7 piles south of the footbridge at 60m56ch (5 down, 2 up) now have masts (4 STCs, 3 TTCs), and another 7 piles (6 of which bear boomed TTC masts) are up to the north.
• A portal (two track) has now gone up on the Fast just south of Wymington Village.
• Near the centre of the "deviation", there are now many more masts up (with cantilevers too) on the Fasts. On the Up Fast side, there is one mast missing near Sharnbrook Summit, just north of the northernmost bridge before the summit. I suspect it might be an Overlap Termination, and as such will be Tensorex.
• On the Slows at the northern end of the "deviation", a number of STCs and TTCs have gone up, with at least two twin track portals also up.
• Masts have now sprung up in large numbers north and south of Station Rd Bridge, Irchester. North of Station Rd, all masts seem to be up over the Fast lines as far as the first footbridge north of there (Knuston Lodge).
• Between Irthlingborough Viaduct & I'borough Rd Bridge (i.e. the Kangaroo Spinney area), at least 10 TTC masts on each side of the line have gone up; about half of those on the Slow side have booms too.
• Irthlingborough Rd Bridge was demolished on Christmas Day 2018 - only the utilities pipe remains. A temporary footbridge has also been erected.

Wellingborough (65m 09ch) - Kettering (72m 01ch)

• Preparations to return the 4th platform (P4?) at Wellingborough to public use have now begun. De-veg work and clearing ground for the new entrance and access road are underway.
• Two piles are in next to each other just north of P1; one of which now bears a mast due to take a TTC boom. The other must be for a backstay.
• Extensive 4-tracking laid (except at points where existing infrastructure has to be moved).
• North of the 4th track buffers at Mill Rd Bridge, all portal booms now appear to be in place.
• North of Finedon Rd Bridge, all portal booms (bar Tensorex Anchor Portals) are now up. These accompany the TTCs over both pairs of lines near Wellingborough Yards, along with (the unboomed) masts for Anchor Portals.
• TTCs stretch north from Wellingborough Yards over both pairs of lines as far north as the Weetabix factory (north of Burton Latimer).
• At Harrowden Junction, two Anchor Portals have now gone up. The signal gantry still appears to be in situ.
• At Burton Latimer (south of the Weetabix factory), power lines (National Grid) might be due a raise; taller wooden poles have been erected adjacent to the existing ones.
• Almost all (if not all!) masts and booms have now gone up around Kettering Headlands.
• Ground clearance works ongoing at Kettering Yard; the yard will be electrified as part of an EMU stabling facility.
• A number of TTCs have now been erected on the southern approach to Kettering station, roughly parallel to Kettering Yard. So far, these amount to 8 over the Fasts (4 having booms) and 5 (all boomed) over the Slows. At least 1 STC and 2 Anchor Portal uprights are also up next to the Slows.

Kettering (72m 01ch) - Glendon Jct (74m 00ch) - Corby (79m 40ch)

• No activity yet at Kettering station - Platform extensions for the new EMU services are planned, and it is not yet known if canopy works will need to be undertaken.
• On the Fast side, around 6 TTCs are up to the north of the signal gantry at the north end of Kettering station; another is up immediately south of said gantry. On the Slow side, about 4 or 5 TTCs are up roughly parallel to the 6 on the Fasts; one is currently without a boom. Another pile is driven & capped in the 10-foot between the Up Fast & Down Slow.
• Between Kettering station & the A43, a number of piles are now in on the Slow side between the A43 bridge (nr Prologis Park) & the A6003 (Northampton Rd) bridge.
• At Glendon Jct/Kettering North Jct, all piles on the Slow side have now grown TTCs with booms; at least 5 are now bedanglied ("dressed"). A few signal gantries from the BR days have been (or are due to be) removed. Unclear of progress with piling/masts on the Main line north of Glendon Junction.
• A pair of Anchor Boom Portal Masts are now up on the Slow side just short of where the lines to Corby diverge; 1 TTC is between them. No corresponding structures have appeared on the Fast side yet.
• About 5/6 STC masts are up adjacent to each side of the line just north of Glendon Jct, roughly where the Corby Lines diverge from the Mains.
• Pile now in on the Down side near Kettering North Jct.
• 2nd track now in operation, and linespeed raised to 90mph where it was previously 60mph.
• A number of STCs are up over both sides in the Storefield area.
• A good stretch of the overheads are now up between Glendon Jct & the Oakleys (Gt. Oakley/Little Oakley) on the Corby Lines - these include catenary & contact wires.

Glendon Jct (74m 00ch) - Market Harborough (82m 74ch)

• Braybrooke Substation approved. To be located here: (https://goo.gl/maps/fuy1uZeDjdQ2).
• The extent of wiring towards Market Harborough has now been as good as confirmed to reach the station.

Any updates would be greatly appreciated.

 

[70014IronDuke]

Well I was barely in school, and now to your experience. I’m taking my info from Modern Railways from around the time Mid Sub was authorised. Of course the national ASLEF strike in 82 didn’t help, as I guess that was the point at which the wiring teams needed to move on, and a decision was needed, and with the future of the whole railway in doubt I can see why a decision was deferred / re-examined.

What I don't understand about the idea that electrification north from Bedford was seriously considered to follow on after the suburban job is that in October 1975 (or possibly early 76) LMR actually cut back the MML Inter-City service as part of the austerity measures needed at that time. Outside the peaks, some of the semi-fast MML turns could be very lightly loaded, and the powers at be decided some had to go. It ruined the hourly everywhere to everywhere service (including change at Leicester) of course, but in 75-76, the country was in dire straits.

It just seems difficult to believe that already by 78-79 they would consider it at all viable to extend northwards - most especially with the GN sitting unwired north of Hitchin (or was it north of Peterborough by then, I forget). I mean, the GN always was far more important than the Midland as an Inter-City route.

 

[Dr Hoo]

As a supernumerary clerk being ‘utilised to best advantage’ on the Midland Suburban Electrification in the late 1970s I was quite lucky in being able to see a lot of the paperwork in Euston House and get involved in various official functions. This even included accompanying (BRB Chairman) Peter Parker on one occasion!
At no stage did I come across anything resembling a serious intention to electrify north of Bedford. This rumour seemed to arise largely because there was so much spare space in Hornsey Electrical Control Room, which at the time only controlled the King’s Cross Great Northern Suburban power. “Yeah, we could happily control all the way to York/Leeds/Sheffield, etc.” was a common gag line but not really to be taken seriously.
The limit of skullduggery seemed to be bustituting the DMU Hitchin-Huntingdon shuttle whilst the engineers re-built some bridges supposedly for 8’ 6” Freightliner container clearance but nudge-wink was really to reduce the cost of ECML electrification extension. Typical Eastern Region post-Fiennesian creativity!

 

[Bald Rick]

What I don't understand about the idea that electrification north from Bedford was seriously considered to follow on after the suburban job is that in October 1975 (or possibly early 76) LMR actually cut back the MML Inter-City service as part of the austerity measures needed at that time. Outside the peaks, some of the semi-fast MML turns could be very lightly loaded, and the powers at be decided some had to go. It ruined the hourly everywhere to everywhere service (including change at Leicester) of course, but in 75-76, the country was in dire straits.

It just seems difficult to believe that already by 78-79 they would consider it at all viable to extend northwards - most especially with the GN sitting unwired north of Hitchin (or was it north of Peterborough by then, I forget). I mean, the GN always was far more important than the Midland as an Inter-City route.

As a supernumerary clerk being ‘utilised to best advantage’ on the Midland Suburban Electrification in the late 1970s I was quite lucky in being able to see a lot of the paperwork in Euston House and get involved in various official functions. This even included accompanying (BRB Chairman) Peter Parker on one occasion!
At no stage did I come across anything resembling a serious intention to electrify north of Bedford. This rumour seemed to arise largely because there was so much spare space in Hornsey Electrical Control Room, which at the time only controlled the King’s Cross Great Northern Suburban power. “Yeah, we could happily control all the way to York/Leeds/Sheffield, etc.” was a common gag line but not really to be taken seriously.
The limit of skullduggery seemed to be bustituting the DMU Hitchin-Huntingdon shuttle whilst the engineers re-built some bridges supposedly for 8’ 6” Freightliner container clearance but nudge-wink was really to reduce the cost of ECML electrification extension. Typical Eastern Region post-Fiennesian creativity!

Well, I wasn’t there at the time so happy to stand corrected. Next time I dig out the old Modern
Railways I’ll try and find where it was stated.

One things i am reasonably sure of is that West Hampstead resignalling up to Sharnbrook, and all the Leicester area resignalling, was done electrification ready, ie signals in the right place and ‘immunised’ in advance. To have taken those decisions there must have been an intention to electrify. (West Hampstead was certianly decided in the 70s)

 

[Dr Hoo]

Certainly right about West Hampstead signalling immunisation north of Bedford (although it would have been bizarre to do anything else). Having two technical standards on one project would be more complicated and expensive I would have thought.
West Hampstead was an excellent scheme for its era and stood the test of time very well.

 

[Senex]

At no stage did I come across anything resembling a serious intention to electrify north of Bedford. This rumour seemed to arise largely because there was so much spare space in Hornsey Electrical Control Room, which at the time only controlled the King’s Cross Great Northern Suburban power. “Yeah, we could happily control all the way to York/Leeds/Sheffield, etc.” was a common gag line but not really to be taken seriously.

I've got a vague memory of seeing reports of the opening of that Control Room, probably either in Modern Railways or the Railway Magazine, saying that at the opening coverings were peeled off lists of stick-on place-names heading down both the ECML and the MML. But that could just be age playing tricks, of course.

 

[Dr Hoo]

I've got a vague memory of seeing reports of the opening of that Control Room, probably either in Modern Railways or the Railway Magazine, saying that at the opening coverings were peeled off lists of stick-on place-names heading down both the ECML and the MML. But that could just be age playing tricks, of course.

Yes, there certainly was such an event but it was only kite flying theatre. There was no business case, plan, project, cash, promise or anything substantive.

 

[70014IronDuke]

Well, I wasn’t there at the time so happy to stand corrected. Next time I dig out the old Modern
Railways I’ll try and find where it was stated.

One things i am reasonably sure of is that West Hampstead resignalling up to Sharnbrook, and all the Leicester area resignalling, was done electrification ready, ie signals in the right place and ‘immunised’ in advance. To have taken those decisions there must have been an intention to electrify. (West Hampstead was certianly decided in the 70s)

Please do. And I agree, I seem to remember reading that all signalling would be immunised for electrification - but as noted, that is not the same as actively planning for electrification.

 

[Aictos]

How many sidings will the newly electrified Kettering Yard have and how many units will it take?

 

[edwin_m]

Certainly the signal gantries that went up around Leicester were of the type that allowed clearance for OLE (unlike all the ones in South Wales more recently that had to be replaced).

 

[grumpyoldman01]

In the mid 1970s. it was not uncommon to hear comments by senior managers suggesting that - once Bedford was reached - why stop there? So far as I am aware, nothing specific was ever developed into a meaningful project for electrification of the MML north from that town.

However, a relative of mine worked in BR civils, and I do remember him telling me that a comprehensive analysis of LMR routes was undertaken to determine which overbridges would require reconstruction to establish sufficient clearance for 25kv AC electrification; I can't remember when that work was undertaken (or how detailed it was), but the exercise included lines such as Stenson - Sheet Stores and therefore must have been very wide in scope.

 

[edwin_m]

Electrification to Corby was being talked about back in the 80s, I think driven by new housing much as it actually has been. Wasn't there supposed to be some kind of major leisure attraction there as well - or am I thinking of Battersea which was being floated about the same time?

 

[Hadders]

Wasn't there supposed to be some kind of major leisure attraction there as well - or am I thinking of Battersea which was being floated about the same time?

Wonderworld on the old steel works. The nearest we got was a sign promoting the scheme which was still rotting away several years later.

 

[Brissle Girl]

Wonderworld on the old steel works. The nearest we got was a sign promoting the scheme which was still rotting away several years later.

It became known as Wonderwhen after several years of talk but inactivity. With some justification as it turned out.

 

[richieb1971]

How was Bedford chosen as the termination of OHLE? Was it a 50 mile post, the depot land for the units? The new Bedford Midland station? Or was it that the railway north of Bedford was the older bits? Isn't there some 30 years difference between going To Hitchin/KX than straight STP? I'd imagine all helped the cause but interesting to hear anything different.

I travel on the Bromham road bridge almost daily. Its open both ways now. The only difference to its original state is that a scaffolded walkway is now on the north of the bridge and the incline road from the east has its sides treated somehow, but apart from tree growth pushed back and the grassy bits removed I can't see anything significant done. I really cannot see how the bridge can be expanded for cycles and heightening the bridge will make the incline even steeper. Strangely I am not feeling the amount of congestion caused by the Ford end road bridge. But i'm sure that time will come when the road bridge is completely missing.

There are 2 areas in Bedford near the lines which are getting used for the first time in many years.



Can anyone tell me what is happening on the 2 circled areas? It may or may not be related to OHLE or EWR, just wondering.

Thanks.

 

[59CosG95]

How was Bedford chosen as the termination of OHLE? Was it a 50 mile post, the depot land for the units? The new Bedford Midland station? Or was it that the railway north of Bedford was the older bits? Isn't there some 30 years difference between going To Hitchin/KX than straight STP? I'd imagine all helped the cause but interesting to hear anything different.

I travel on the Bromham road bridge almost daily. Its open both ways now. The only difference to its original state is that a scaffolded walkway is now on the north of the bridge and the incline road from the east has its sides treated somehow, but apart from tree growth pushed back and the grassy bits removed I can't see anything significant done. I really cannot see how the bridge can be expanded for cycles and heightening the bridge will make the incline even steeper. Strangely I am not feeling the amount of congestion caused by the Ford end road bridge. But i'm sure that time will come when the road bridge is completely missing.

There are 2 areas in Bedford near the lines which are getting used for the first time in many years.

View attachment 62606

Can anyone tell me what is happening on the 2 circled areas? It may or may not be related to OHLE or EWR, just wondering.

Thanks.

No idea on the one off Cauldwell St, but I'd hazard a guess at the other one next to the MML being a Feeder Station (or Autotransformer Site).

 

[70014IronDuke]

How was Bedford chosen as the termination of OHLE? Was it a 50 mile post, the depot land for the units? The new Bedford Midland station? Or was it that the railway north of Bedford was the older bits? ...

Well, I don't know, but at the time it seemed to me that it was one of the next logical and affordable electrification scheme. Bedford - St Pancras was a moderately intensive suburban route, most particularly south of Luton, and the DMU stock, introduced in late 1959, was nearing the end of its life.

North of Bedford there was only a 1 TPH, sometimes 2 TPH and 3 TPH in the peaks inter-city route, but that was not up for wires (as we've discussed above).

Again, I don't know for sure, but I've always understood the Bedford rebuild was a result of the decision to electrify, not the other way around. But even then, it was only cheapo job, still suffering from the decisions taken c 1850 and 1860, with no platforms on the fasts.

I suppose the rival claim for electrification at the time was Paddington to .. well, where? Reading? Didcot? Oxford? Newbury? That was probably the problem - just how far and along how many of the branches would you go if you chose the western electrification. By comparison, the Bedford route was neat and complete, and did away with a whole fleet of DMUs and associated costs.

 

[richieb1971]

Has the north of Bedford passenger numbers justified this program? Or we just going green?

Thx for your answers.

 

[edwin_m]

Has the north of Bedford passenger numbers justified this program? Or we just going green?

Thx for your answers.

When Network Rail looked at costs and benefits of electrification in 2009, MML was the only scheme judged to be so worth doing that it was justified financially based on operating cost savings and didn't need to realise any other benefits. Now clearly electrification costs have gone up a lot since then, but it should still be an indicator that this scheme is relatively good value compared with most of the others (and indications seem to be that it hasn't run over budget in the same way GW has).

The MML north of Bedford has a basic service of four trains per hour, with six as far as Kettering when the Corby electrification is finished. That's not too far behind the same part of the ECML where they are talking about six per hour with more south of Peterborough, although the trains are shorter on the MML. However (before the advent of bi-modes) they had to electrify the ECML all the way to Leeds before any Intercity service could be converted to electric, and to Edinburgh to be able to run electrics on most of them. But going as far as Sheffield would allow electric operation of all MML services aside from a few odds and ends that are essentially there for stock placement. I think this partly explains why MML was seen as a good value electrification scheme - and probably continuing to Sheffield would still be worthwhile especially if it allowed purchase of standard EMUs instead of heavier and more expensive bi-modes.

 

[hwl]

When Network Rail looked at costs and benefits of electrification in 2009, MML was the only scheme judged to be so worth doing that it was justified financially based on operating cost savings and didn't need to realise any other benefits. Now clearly electrification costs have gone up a lot since then, but it should still be an indicator that this scheme is relatively good value compared with most of the others (and indications seem to be that it hasn't run over budget in the same way GW has).

The MML north of Bedford has a basic service of four trains per hour, with six as far as Kettering when the Corby electrification is finished. That's not too far behind the same part of the ECML where they are talking about six per hour with more south of Peterborough, although the trains are shorter on the MML. However (before the advent of bi-modes) they had to electrify the ECML all the way to Leeds before any Intercity service could be converted to electric, and to Edinburgh to be able to run electrics on most of them. But going as far as Sheffield would allow electric operation of all MML services aside from a few odds and ends that are essentially there for stock placement. I think this partly explains why MML was seen as a good value electrification scheme - and probably continuing to Sheffield would still be worthwhile especially if it allowed purchase of standard EMUs instead of heavier and more expensive bi-modes.

Clearance issues are also now more of a problem due to standards changes so some increase in difficulty /cost.

With 6tph electrification will usually stack up hence "Kettering", but with 4tph harder to justify e.g. with 4tph IC to Trent Jn they are going as far as it is cheap /easy. It would been some of the local in/out of Derby or Nottingham services to swap to Bi-mode to help tip the balance further North.

 

[cle]

It's also got more of an outer commuter sense (eg Wellingboroughs of this world) to capitalize on - the Corbys benefit from wires way more than a non-stop express to Leicester.

GWML was good because Bristol/Cardiff runs have regular stations 15-30 mins apart throughout. More sparks gain on dwells and accel/decel vs the HSTs.

 

[Kneedown]

You've also got to factor in diversions due to engineering work, disruption etc. Unless of course you're going to electrify Corby to Syston, Erewash Valley via Toton, Meadow Lane and also Trowell -Radford and Mansfield Jct, Sheet Stores - Stenson - Derby, and Tapton - Sheffield via Beighton. A lot of work there and not committed to even before cancellation of the scheme. The non Corby services were always going to be a bi-mode of some sort. It's just that now, a meaty diesel bi-mode is required.

 

[richieb1971]

Network rail ballast train came off the rails on the bi-slow at Wellingborough a couple of days ago.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Network rail ballast train came off the rails on the bi-slow at Wellingborough a couple of days ago.

Great video thanks for posting

 

[Flying Phil]

Good post Richie! Do we have any idea why it came off like that?