Kings Cross to Nottingham and Sheffield

[London Trains]

I propose an hourly (at first) LNER service, run by 9 car Class 800s, running:

Kings Cross - Peterborough - Grantham - Nottingham - Chesterfield - Sheffield

The service would take over the Norwich to Nottingham service (after the split of Liverpool to Norwich). I would have GA run an hourly Peterborough to Norwich service, in the opposite half hour to the (increased to hourly) Peterborough to Ipswich service, with good connections to and from this service.

By my calculations, a service with the current infrastructure doing this would take just over 2h15m. With speed improvements between Grantham and Chesterfield to bring down the time closer to 2h, would a service like this be viable and would it be able to rival the MML?

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

I propose an hourly (at first) LNER service, run by 9 car Class 800s, running:

Kings Cross - Peterborough - Grantham - Nottingham - Chesterfield - Sheffield

The service would take over the Norwich to Nottingham service (after the split of Liverpool to Norwich). I would have GA run an hourly Peterborough to Norwich service, in the opposite half hour to the (increased to hourly) Peterborough to Ipswich service, with good connections to and from this service.

By my calculations, a service with the current infrastructure doing this would take just over 2h15m. With speed improvements between Grantham and Chesterfield to bring down the time closer to 2h, would a service like this be viable and would it be able to rival the MML?

Beyond the existing commitments by LNER how much capacity is there at London King's Cross? I suspect none.

 

[John Hunt]

Also, why try to rival the MML?
MML has long been the 'poor relation' of the main lines, in recent years suffering the will we/won't we electrification fiasco.
Yes - there is plenty of traffic from Bedford to London, but there is also the London to Sheffield via Derby.
If the MML loses the Nottingham traffic, the electrification from Mkt Harborough northwards would probably never happen.

 

[Senex]

What would be the benefit of going from King's Cross, even if there were capacity there and on the ECML? The present time for the Midland to Leicester is 62 minutes. I can't find a non-stop time for Leicester to Nottingham, but it looks as if it would be 22½ minutes. So London to Nottingham with the standard 1½-minute stop at Leicester would be 86 minutes. King's Cross to Grantham appears to be 61½ ninutes to pass, so say 62 minutes to stop. Unless you're going to spend rather a lot of money on the Grantham-Nottingham line, I can't see how you're going to equal the Midland time, let alone beat it. And then going on north from Nottingham (and there of course you would save 3 or 4 minutes by not having to reverse) you've got the lousy route out to get to the Erewash Valley line, and that line itself is not a particularly fast stretch once you get on to it. The time to Sheffield is not going to be attractive! (Of course, if you're thinking of non-stop to Sheffield, then probably the fastest route available at present is King's Cross - Doncaster St James's Curve - Swinton - Sheffield.)

 

[edwin_m]

The MML would still have to run the same service as today, because Leicester and the other intermediate stations need a good service to London and to Nottingham (and Derby and Sheffield). And HS2 is planned to take at least some of the London-Nottingham passengers via Toton. The only sizeable flow it would improve is London-Peterborough, and the hourly connections on the Norwich service ought to be adequate for that. So this would offer no benefit or cost saving.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

The MML would still have to run the same service as today, because Leicester and the other intermediate stations need a good service to London and to Nottingham (and Derby and Sheffield). And HS2 is planned to take at least some of the London-Nottingham passengers via Toton. The only sizeable flow it would improve is London-Peterborough, and the hourly connections on the Norwich service ought to be adequate for that. So this would offer no benefit or cost saving.

Agreed

 

[cle]

In the ECML thread, this came up as there is a proposed 1tph Kings Cross - Stevenage - Grantham - Nottingham, post-HS2. So this is definitely a plan (no Sheffield).

If the line was upgraded (line speeds are low) and wired, Nottingham to Grantham should be possible in 20-25 mins. With the stops mentioned, 90 mins should be doable.

Upgrading the line would benefit the 'Norwich - Derby/Matlock' service, as it is now envisaged to be. If this was run with bi-mode and 100mph+ stock consistently, it could make time on the ECML and also the Nottingham line, making that service a fair bit quicker too.

Another option could be electric services from Peterborough. Thameslink woiuld be a bit much, but electric locals to Nottingham might be worth considering.

 

[Bald Rick]

In the ECML thread, this came up as there is a proposed 1tph Kings Cross - Stevenage - Grantham - Nottingham, post-HS2. So this is definitely a plan (no Sheffield).

I don’t think that a mention on another thread deems it ‘definitely a plan’. I’m not aware that Kings Cross to Nottingham via Grantham is being considered, let alone planned, by the industry.

 

[cle]

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/629168/high-speed-two-phase-two-strategic-case-appendix-hs2-released-capacity-study-summary-report.pdf

Check it out. The thread is a few below this one, so not too far to validate before a sneer.

 

[Peter Kelford]

Beyond the existing commitments by LNER how much capacity is there at London King's Cross? I suspect none.

Extend the Newark North Gate trains perhaps. Like some do say, it would be good to run via Doncaster

 

[Peter Kelford]

and the hourly connections on the Norwich service ought to be adequate for that

Erm...no. The Norwich train amounts to a 3-car DMU with nothing near the levels of comfort or convenience that any form of intercity service could afford. Pre-Werrington the Norwich train was also the big timetable disruptor.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Extend the Newark North Gate trains perhaps. Like some do say, it would be good to run via Doncaster

Newark trains now run to Lincoln?

 

[Bald Rick]

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/629168/high-speed-two-phase-two-strategic-case-appendix-hs2-released-capacity-study-summary-report.pdf

Check it out. The thread is a few below this one, so not too far to validate before a sneer.

Ok, I walked into that, apologies.

Nevertheless, I would argue that this is simply some work done by steers to look at options, and is by no means a serious proposal.

 

[edwin_m]

Erm...no. The Norwich train amounts to a 3-car DMU with nothing near the levels of comfort or convenience that any form of intercity service could afford. Pre-Werrington the Norwich train was also the big timetable disruptor.

It's actually only a 2-car, though it may become a 3-car at some point. I used it reasonably often before Covid and never found it to be overcrowded. But it could be lengthened if there was enough demand between Nottingham and Peterborough to justify it.

 

[HSTEd]

I don’t think that a mention on another thread deems it ‘definitely a plan’. I’m not aware that Kings Cross to Nottingham via Grantham is being considered, let alone planned, by the industry.

I believe it was in a RUS a while back.
Objective was London trains for Bingham/Bottesford (honestly never remember which one is larger!)

 

[David Goddard]

Beyond the existing commitments by LNER how much capacity is there at London King's Cross? I suspect none.

Extend the Newark North Gate trains perhaps. Like some do say, it would be good to run via Doncaster

Newark trains now run to Lincoln?

Why not use 2x5 car 800s on the bi-hourly Lincoln service, and detach a portion at Grantham for Nottingham.

 

[edwin_m]

Why not use 2x5 car 800s on the bi-hourly Lincoln service, and detach a portion at Grantham for Nottingham.

This would have to use Platform 4 at Grantham in both directions, as no other through platform has access to the Nottingham line. Going southbound it would have to cross the Down Main twice - just the sort of thing recent ECML capacity enhancements have been trying to eliminate!

Radcliffe, Bingham and Bottesford total less than 30,000 people and the other places served are negligible. That's half as many as Loughborough for example.

 

[David Goddard]

Had been thinking along those lines, hence the joining of up trains would then be at Peterborough, where delays in coupling can be mitigated better as well.

 

[sheff1]

I remember the Master Cutler Pullman running from Sheffield to Kings Cross (pretty sure not via Nottingham).

Certainly a direct alternative to the MML route for London traffic, also resulting in a better service (i.e. 'intercity' standard rather than a 2 car DMU) between Sheffield and Peterborough, would be welcome, but I suspect it is not likely to happen.

 

[Bevan Price]

I remember the Master Cutler Pullman running from Sheffield to Kings Cross (pretty sure not via Nottingham).

Certainly a direct alternative to the MML route for London traffic, also resulting in a better service (i.e. 'intercity' standard rather than a 2 car DMU) between Sheffield and Peterborough, would be welcome, but I suspect it is not likely to happen.

There used to be a few through trains - or portions - between Kings Cross and Sheffield via Retford. Back in the 1960s, I had a Deltic from Kings Cross to Retford, and then a B1 took the rear portion to Sheffield Victoria. That was in addition to the Master Cutler, which also ran via Retford and was an early working for a Class 40.

(Way back in history, the GNR even used to run some through trains from Kings Cross to Manchester & Liverpool Central via Sheffield & Woodhead. )

 

[Bald Rick]

I believe it was in a RUS a while back.
Objective was London trains for Bingham/Bottesford (honestly never remember which one is larger!)

Bingham is bigger. But it really isn’t of a size that could justify through trains to London. (I speak as a former resident of the area).

 

[HSTEd]

There used to be a few through trains - or portions - between Kings Cross and Sheffield via Retford.

Additionally, the original Virgin East Coast bid (that produced the original GNER franchise) apparently included building an LGV paralleling large parts of the East Coast main Line, with trains to Sheffield running via Retford.

 

[class26]

This would have to use Platform 4 at Grantham in both directions, as no other through platform has access to the Nottingham line. Going southbound it would have to cross the Down Main twice - just the sort of thing recent ECML capacity enhancements have been trying to eliminate!

Radcliffe, Bingham and Bottesford total less than 30,000 people and the other places served are negligible. That's half as many as Loughborough for example.

Couldn`t the Lincoln part go via Sleaford and Spalding, joining at Peterborough?

 

[edwin_m]

Couldn`t the Lincoln part go via Sleaford and Spalding, joining at Peterborough?

It could, if you wanted to make the London-Lincoln service a whole lot slower.

 

[class26]

It could, if you wanted to make the London-Lincoln service a whole lot slower.

But would it be THAT much slower? The timetable for the existing 156 service hasn`t really fully taken effect of the higher line speeds and of course makes extra stops which a London service would not. The present service often has a wait for a path at Newark for several minutes anyway which lengthens the time by that route.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Is there a market for Nottingham?

Definitely.

Is there a market for Sheffield?

Definitely.

Why?

Consider: when their direct services to East Anglia are gone / reduced, frequency and connectivity through Peterborough will be pivotal. In Sheffield’s case, a fast service to Peterborough and improved connectivity at Retford will be great news. If you assume the Norwich service starts at Nottingham, you connect there; but Ipswich and Cambridge you will want trains within 20 minutes.

As for Nottingham to Peterborough and Kings Cross, assuming the service takes in Grantham, Peterborough and Stevenage you open up very solid connectivity via Peterborough and Stevenage to lots of areas; and of course you can accelerate the Lincoln / other services accordingly.

Indeed, post-HS2 (assuming there is a modal shift and you only need 1tph to Leeds via the ECML and 1tph to Newcastle / Scotland, actually unlocking connectivity and finding use for IEP is entirely correct. Someone suggested using IEP on a Leeds to Cambridge or Ipswich - great idea. Fantastic for people who can then connect at Doncaster or Leeds with a huge array of other Northern cities and destinations.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

I believe it was in a RUS a while back.
Objective was London trains for Bingham/Bottesford (honestly never remember which one is larger!)

Bingham is the larger, and could support an extra service. Whether it’s even a case of “We need a train to London!”, or not, matched with a Nottingham to Norwich you’ve got 2tph to Peterborough. Indeed, one could argue in favour of Netherfield as well as it’s a large part of east Nottingham.

 

[eastwestdivide]

Ok, I walked into that, apologies.

Nevertheless, I would argue that this is simply some work done by steers to look at options, and is by no means a serious proposal.

No need to argue, the report itself says:

all the work described here should be regarded as an exploration of the possibilities arising from HS2, rather than firm plans or commitments.

 

[Trainician]

Also if LNER would had a service to Sheffield or Nottingham then EMR would be finished and Bedford will not have a service to Nottingham

 

[London Trains]

Also if LNER would had a service to Sheffield or Nottingham then EMR would be finished and Bedford will not have a service to Nottingham

Bedford won't have a service to Nottingham from December anyway, only the Corby services will call there. Bedford to Nottingham will require changing at Kettering and going to Sheffield will require changing at both Kettering and Leicester.