Future MML services post HS2 and capacity through Trent junctions

[MidlandMainlie]

With the news in the Integrated Rail Plan published yesterday that HS2 East is to run into East Midlands Parkway with services continueing along the existing tracks to Nottingham and Derby it got me thinking about what capacity there is for services to run across all the junctions of the Trent triangle?

Assuming the fast Sheffield-Derby and fast Nottingham services join HS2 South of EMP and there are also new Nottingham to Birmingham services via HS2 East to path across the junctions how many services could there be to across alll the junctions for HS2 services, but also services that need to be maintained on the MML from Derby/Nottingham to Leicester and the direct Nottingham to Derby services before the capacity of the junctions is maxed out and grade separation needs to be looked at.

Ideally you would want 2tph between each of Nottingham and Derby to Leicester to me maintained and at least 3tph between Derby and Nottingham. So what should the future service pattern be?

 

[Ken H]

With the news in the Integrated Rail Plan published yesterday that HS2 East is to run into East Midlands Parkway with services continueing along the existing tracks to Nottingham and Derby it got me thinking about what capacity there is for services to run across all the junctions of the Trent triangle?

Assuming the fast Sheffield-Derby and fast Nottingham services join HS2 South of EMP and there are also new Nottingham to Birmingham services via HS2 East to path across the junctions how many services could there be to across alll the junctions for HS2 services, but also services that need to be maintained on the MML from Derby/Nottingham to Leicester and the direct Nottingham to Derby services before the capacity of the junctions is maxed out and grade separation needs to be looked at.

Ideally you would want 2tph between each of Nottingham and Derby to Leicester to me maintained and at least 3tph between Derby and Nottingham. So what should the future service pattern be?

I think they will need to consider a flyover or two. But which junction (s) to do?

 

[Nottingham59]

I'm glad you asked this question. Flat triangular junctions like the Trent triangle are notoriously difficult to timetable effectively, especially with mixed traffic. Witness the problems caused by the Ordsall Chord which AIUI can only be used for 1tph, because of the conflicts with the other two sides of the triangle. I would be really surprised if they could timetable many more paths through the triangle than they do at present.

To your list above, we need add all the freight paths from the Sheet Stores line to Toton and to Nottingham; and the how to get occasional stock to and from Litchchurch Lane and things line the Network Rail Measurement train from Derby. There will also be local pressure to run trains from places like Mansfield through Ilkeston and Toton (if built) known as the Maid Marian line, to make East Midland more accessible from the local area. At least freight from Toton sidings onto the MML slows is already grade separated over the Nottingham line.

 

[zwk500]

This document may be of interest, if a little out of date: https://sacuksprodnrdigital0001.blo...anning/Eastern/Trent Junctions Study 2019.pdf

 

[Roast Veg]

This document may be of interest, if a little out of date: https://sacuksprodnrdigital0001.blo...anning/Eastern/Trent Junctions Study 2019.pdf

A very interesting read, though unfortuntely no options to go above 2tph in the direction of Sheffield without the use of the Erewash Valley are proposed*. If passenger services via Sheet Stores are removed (since Nottingham to Birmingham is handled via HS2) then I would hope there's scope to implement something like Figure 5, but with more service provision towards Derby from the south.

*Unless - do I understand that figure 7 is additive? That would mean 4tph Parkway/Derby, 6tph Derby/Nottingham, and 5tph Nottingham/Parkway. That can't be far off what's required under the IRP.

 

[Nottingham59]

I think they will need to consider a flyover or two. But which junction (s) to do?

I agree that's the big question. But first let's discuss the capacity of the Trent Junction triangle without rebuilding it.

Given the increased prominence of East Midland Parkway, it will need good local services to distribute the passenger flows around the East Midlands. I'd say we should plan for the following traffic:

EAST - SOUTH
2tph Nottingham - London via HS2
2tph Nottingham - Birmingham via HS2
1tph Nottingham - London via Kettering (MML fast lines)
1tph Nottingham - Coventry via Leicester (MML fast lines)
1tph Lincoln/Nottingham - All stops to Leicester (MML slow Lines)
1tph Mansfield via Toton - Loughborough/Leicester (MML slows)

WEST - SOUTH
2tph Sheffield/Derby - London via HS2
2tph Sheffield/Derby - Birmingham via HS2
1tph Sheffield/Derby - London via Kettering
How will Long Eaton passengers get to London? Will HS2 stock have Selective Door opening?

EAST - WEST
1tph Newark/Nottingham - Derby/Matlock
1tph Nottingham - Derby/Crewe
1tph Nottingham - Derby/Burton/Birmingham/Cardiff
1tph Nottingham - Derby, via East Midlands Parkway (reverse), giving 4tph between Nottingham and Derby

FREIGHT (it's not clear how these flows needs to connect to each other)
2tph to/from Castle Donington / East Midlands Gateway
1tph to/from Derby/Litchchurch Lane/Etches Park
2tph to/from Toton Sidings
1 tph to/from Beeston sidings/through Nottingham
(EDIT: 2tph to/from the MML slows)

Before grade separation, I would first convert Platform 4 at EMD into an island platform, and move the MML slow lines across to Platforms 4 and a new platform 5. I would then lengthen platforms 1, 2 and 3 to 400m to handle HS2 trains, with platform 2 signalled bi-directionally to allow some parallel moves on the fast lines, and to allow Nottingham-Derby trains to call at EMD and reverse.

So coming from the south, HS2 trains would use platforms 1 and 2, able to go anywhere. Most trains on the MML fast lines would switch to the slows beforehand, to keep out of the way of HS2 (except those heading to Derby). Trains on the MML slows would stay there using platforms 4, able to head for Nottingham or Toton without further conflicts.

I really couldn't say if the Trent Triangle could handle this traffic without grade separation. But if you needed more separation, you could achieve this with a flying junction where HS2 joins the MML East of Kegworth. A twin-track flyover here could allow HS2 trains to drop also onto the MML slow lines where they could access Nottingham or the Erewash Valley without futher conflicts. And then you could increase capacity by six-tracking over the river and through EMD - or even reinstate the previous high-speed alignment direct to Leeds - without having to rebuild Trent Junctions at all.

 

[edwin_m]

Given the increased prominence of East Midland Parkway, it will need good local services to distribute the passenger flows around the East Midlands. I'd say we should plan for the following traffic:

I think that starting premise is wrong. There will be through HS2 trains from London and Birmingham to Nottingham and from London to Sheffield via Derby. Nearly all connections will be at least as good at Nottingham or Derby as at EM Parkway. If they stop at all, it will be for park and ride customers and passengers for nearby developments including whatever replaces the power station, not for connections.

Grade separation is complicated by the presence of housing close to the east-west curve. There might be scope to continue the HS2 viaduct across the Trent as planned, then put in a splitting junction (probably flat) with arms landing at the main Trent junction and at Sheet Stores, both of which would be re-aligned so these would be the straight routes. But as well as being expensive, this or anything else at Trent is probably incompatible with the HS2 alignment as designed, which remains protected until and unless the review of routes on to Leeds concludes it won't ever happen.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

I agree that's the big question. But first let's discuss the capacity of the Trent Junction triangle without rebuilding it.

Given the increased prominence of East Midland Parkway, it will need good local services to distribute the passenger flows around the East Midlands. I'd say we should plan for the following traffic:

EAST - SOUTH
2tph Nottingham - London via HS2
2tph Nottingham - Birmingham via HS2
1tph Nottingham - London via Kettering (MML fast lines)
1tph Nottingham - Coventry via Leicester (MML fast lines)
1tph Lincoln/Nottingham - All stops to Leicester (MML slow Lines)
1tph Mansfield via Toton - Loughborough/Leicester (MML slows)

WEST - SOUTH
2tph Sheffield/Derby - London via HS2
2tph Sheffield/Derby - Birmingham via HS2
1tph Sheffield/Derby - London via Kettering
How will Long Eaton passengers get to London? Will HS2 stock have Selective Door opening?

EAST - WEST
1tph Newark/Nottingham - Derby/Matlock
1tph Nottingham - Derby/Crewe
1tph Nottingham - Derby/Burton/Birmingham/Cardiff
1tph Nottingham - Derby, via East Midlands Parkway (reverse), giving 4tph between Nottingham and Derby

FREIGHT (it's not clear how these flows needs to connect to each other)
2tph to/from Castle Donington / East Midlands Gateway
1tph to/from Derby/Litchchurch Lane/Etches Park
2tph to/from Toton Sidings
1 tph to/from Beeston sidings/through Nottingham

Before grade separation, I would first convert Platform 4 at EMD into an island platform, and move the MML slow lines across to Platforms 4 and a new platform 5. I would then lengthen platforms 1, 2 and 3 to 400m to handle HS2 trains, with platform 2 signalled bi-directionally to allow some parallel moves on the fast lines, and to allow Nottingham-Derby trains to call at EMD and reverse.

So coming from the south, HS2 trains would use platforms 1 and 2, able to go anywhere. Most trains on the MML fast lines would switch to the slows beforehand, to keep out of the way of HS2 (except those heading to Derby). Trains on the MML slows would stay there using platforms 4, able to head for Nottingham or Toton without further conflicts.

I really couldn't say if the Trent Triangle could handle this traffic without grade separation. But if you needed more separation, you could achieve this with a flying junction where HS2 joins the MML East of Kegworth. A twin-track flyover here could allow HS2 trains to drop also onto the MML slow lines where they could access Nottingham or the Erewash Valley without futher conflicts. And then you could increase capacity by six-tracking over the river and through EMD - or even reinstate the previous high-speed alignment direct to Leeds - without having to rebuild Trent Junctions at all.

I agree with most of your service patterns except I not sure if 2tph Sheffield/Derby - Birmingham via HS2 is necessary as there will still be Birmingham-Derby services via Burton on Trent which could be extended to Sheffield. I also don't see the point in a Nottingham - Derby, via East Midlands Parkway (reverse) which would be slower than the other 3 services.

Assuming that you are correct and HS2 joins the MML via a flying junction in the Kegworth area then I would (similar to your suggestion) add extra platforms at EMP to the east for the slow lines making 4 an island with a new platform 5 but also build a new platform 6. Platforms 1 & 2 would be for Sheffield/Derby bound services. Platforms 3 &4 would be for Nottingham bound services and the new platforms 5 & 6 for slow line services.

As the area around the Trent triangle looks difficult for grade separation with housing to the North, I think a different option would be to extend the slow lines from the new platforms 5 & 6 over a new bride over the river Trent to connect to the slow lines roughly where they branch off start to climb for the flyover to the high level line through to Toton. (this would take out the farm next to the line). The existing slow line bridge would then be freed up for Nottingham services exclusively with the current fast line bridge for Derby/Sheffield services.

 

[Nottingham59]

If they stop at all,

I would expect one of each 2tph pair from HS2 to call at EMD, and the other to pass, rather like the London trains do now. But even if no HS2 trains call, they will still use up paths around the Trent triangle. We currently (pre-covid) have 3tph between Nottingham and Leicester; 2tph Leicester to Derby; and 4tph Derby-Nottingham. Plus quite a lot of freight paths in the timetable, even if they are not all used.

The big question is what happens to this local connectivity when HS2 starts? I don't believe the infrastructure can handle it, given the difficulty they had finding a fourth path between Nottingham and Derby.

So unless they build additional capacity through EMD and across the river, with grade separation either North or South of EMD, the Nottingham-Derby-Leicester triangle will lose local services.

The IRP states (footnote 58) that the HS2 junction with the MML is "subject to detailed consultation and future design." Let's hope they do that work properly, so we don't have to make those trade-offs.

extend the slow lines from the new platforms 5 & 6 over a new bridge over the river Trent

Yes. That's exactly the sort of increased capacity North of EMD that I envisage is going to be needed. I hope they've got the budget for it!

I would expect one of each 2tph pair from HS2 to call at EMD, and the other to pass, rather like the London trains do now. But even if no HS2 trains call, they will still use up paths around the Trent triangle. We currently (pre-covid) have 3tph between Nottingham and Leicester; 2tph Leicester to Derby; and 4tph Derby-Nottingham. Plus quite a lot of freight paths in the timetable, even if they are not all used.

The big question is what happens to this local connectivity when HS2 starts? I don't believe the infrastructure can handle it, given the difficulty they had finding a fourth path between Nottingham and Derby.

So unless they build additional capacity through EMD and across the river, with grade separation either North or South of EMD, the Nottingham-Derby-Leicester triangle will lose local services.

The IRP states (footnote 58) that the HS2 junction with the MML is "subject to detailed consultation and future design." Let's hope they do that work properly, so we don't have to make those trade-offs.

Yes. That's exactly the sort of increased capacity North of EMD that I envisage is going to be needed. I hope they've got the budget for it!

I also don't see the point in a Nottingham - Derby, via East Midlands Parkway (reverse) which would be slower than the other 3 services

That was to mirror the sort of shuttle service Nottingham-Toton-Derby that was previously envisaged. And it can also provide better connectivity to places like Long Eaton and Attenborough for HS2 passengers. Get off the Nottingham-bound HS2 at EMD, and catch the shuttle to LGE or DBY. Or get off the Derby-bound HS2, and catch the shuttle to Beeston or NOT. Thus giving a third tph to Nottingham and to Derby from London and from Birmingham with one change. (Or it could do so with the right timetabling.)

 

[quantinghome]

Wouldn't EMD be used to split/join the Derby and Nottingham HS2 London-bound trains? Derby and Nottingham wouldn't be taking 400m long trains, but you'd want to minimise 200m trains running on the HS2 mainline as it's a waste of precious capacity.

 

[edwin_m]

I would expect one of each 2tph pair from HS2 to call at EMD, and the other to pass, rather like the London trains do now. But even if no HS2 trains call, they will still use up paths around the Trent triangle. We currently (pre-covid) have 3tph between Nottingham and Leicester; 2tph Leicester to Derby; and 4tph Derby-Nottingham. Plus quite a lot of freight paths in the timetable, even if they are not all used.

The big question is what happens to this local connectivity when HS2 starts? I don't believe the infrastructure can handle it, given the difficulty they had finding a fourth path between Nottingham and Derby.

So unless they build additional capacity through EMD and across the river, with grade separation either North or South of EMD, the Nottingham-Derby-Leicester triangle will lose local services.

The IRP states (footnote 58) that the HS2 junction with the MML is "subject to detailed consultation and future design." Let's hope they do that work properly, so we don't have to make those trade-offs.

Yes. That's exactly the sort of increased capacity North of EMD that I envisage is going to be needed. I hope they've got the budget for it!



That was to mirror the sort of shuttle service Nottingham-Toton-Derby that was previously envisaged. And it can also provide better connectivity to places like Long Eaton and Attenborough for HS2 passengers. Get off the Nottingham-bound HS2 at EMD, and catch the shuttle to LGE or DBY. Or get off the Derby-bound HS2, and catch the shuttle to Beeston or NOT. Thus giving a third tph to Nottingham and to Derby from London and from Birmingham with one change. (Or it could do so with the right timetabling.)

Broadly agree with that - having now read the IRP right through, I note it was indicating at least some HS2 trains would stop at EM Parkway.

However I see little point in terminating very much there, except perhaps a Mansfield service via Toton, using the high level lines to avoid conflicts at Trent. However, extending this all stations to Leicester would allow the current Ivanhoe stopper to become a semi-fast and therefore useful for Leicester-Nottingham journeys, maybe allowing one London-Nottingham train to be cut back to Leicester. Between them these might offer connections from Parkway to Long Eaton, Attenborough and Beeston.

I don't therefore see the point of a Nottingham-Parkway-Derby service - no use for end to end journeys and each one uses two paths through Trent. It's just replicating the sort of service that would have been necessary for HS2 at Toton, for which we never had an answer for the capacity question and the IRP notes nothing was funded.

Wouldn't EMD be used to split/join the Derby and Nottingham HS2 London-bound trains? Derby and Nottingham wouldn't be taking 400m long trains, but you'd want to minimise 200m trains running on the HS2 mainline as it's a waste of precious capacity.

There doesn't seem to be any suggestion of that. Even if the junction is south of the station it will probably be too close for platform lengthening, and with no more York/Newcastle and possibly no more Leeds trains there should be enough paths available out of Euston.

 

[tomuk]

Wouldn't EMD be used to split/join the Derby and Nottingham HS2 London-bound trains? Derby and Nottingham wouldn't be taking 400m long trains, but you'd want to minimise 200m trains running on the HS2 mainline as it's a waste of precious capacity.

You could extend platforms 1 & 2 at Derby to 400m they are I think about 340m currently.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Wouldn't EMD be used to split/join the Derby and Nottingham HS2 London-bound trains? Derby and Nottingham wouldn't be taking 400m long trains, but you'd want to minimise 200m trains running on the HS2 mainline as it's a waste of precious capacity.

Derby trains will also continue to Sheffield so would a 200m set be enough?

However I see little point in terminating very much there, except perhaps a Mansfield service via Toton, using the high level lines to avoid conflicts at Trent. However, extending this all stations to Leicester would allow the current Ivanhoe stopper to become a semi-fast and therefore useful for Leicester-Nottingham journeys, maybe allowing one London-Nottingham train to be cut back to Leicester. Between them these might offer connections from Parkway to Long Eaton, Attenborough and Beeston.

I don't therefore see the point of a Nottingham-Parkway-Derby service - no use for end to end journeys and each one uses two paths through Trent. It's just replicating the sort of service that would have been necessary for HS2 at Toton, for which we never had an answer for the capacity question and the IRP notes nothing was funded.


There doesn't seem to be any suggestion of that. Even if the junction is south of the station it will probably be too close for platform lengthening, and with no more York/Newcastle and possibly no more Leeds trains there should be enough paths available out of Euston.

Good ideas though Long Eaton is on the Derby side of the triangle so would have to be served via something from that direction.

I suspect the HS2 junction will be South of the A453 between Keworth and Kingston upon Soar so platform lengthening shouldn't be an issue and there is room to extend northwards anyway.

 

[Western Sunset]

Yes, I imagine that HS2 will pass south of Kegworth now, rather than north in the original plans. Gives a better alignment onto the MML.

 

[edwin_m]

Good ideas though Long Eaton is on the Derby side of the triangle so would have to be served via something from that direction.

There will still need to be trains between Leicester and Derby, which may still run to/from London but only for intermediate journeys. One of those can call at Long Eaton as it does now.

 

[HSTEd]

I think that starting premise is wrong. There will be through HS2 trains from London and Birmingham to Nottingham and from London to Sheffield via Derby. Nearly all connections will be at least as good at Nottingham or Derby as at EM Parkway. If they stop at all, it will be for park and ride customers and passengers for nearby developments including whatever replaces the power station, not for connections.

East Midlands Parkway may just end up getting used as a convenient place to split Sheffield/Nottingham portions.

 

[edwin_m]

East Midlands Parkway may just end up getting used as a convenient place to split Sheffield/Nottingham portions.

No need to do that in the short term as with no Leeds/NE trains out of Euston, there would be capacity to run them separately. It might become necessary if Leeds trains did eventually go onto HS2, but that would involve overcoming the probably significant engineering challenges of designing a route that included both a connection to the MML and a continuation northward.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

East Midlands Parkway may just end up getting used as a convenient place to split Sheffield/Nottingham portions.

No need to do that in the short term as with no Leeds/NE trains out of Euston, there would be capacity to run them separately. It might become necessary if Leeds trains did eventually go onto HS2, but that would involve overcoming the probably significant engineering challenges of designing a route that included both a connection to the MML and a continuation northward.

What are the platform lengths at Derby and Nottingham? There doesn't look to be too much room to expand at Derby due to the bridge over the Dervent to the North and the junctions to the South and don't London services use the Eastern most platforms to avoid conflicting movements at the station?

 

[The Planner]

What are the platform lengths at Derby and Nottingham? There doesn't look to be too much room to expand at Derby due to the bridge over the Dervent to the North and the junctions to the South and don't London services use the Eastern most platforms to avoid conflicting movements at the station?

Shortest at Derby is P4 at 304m, Nottingham P1 and 3 are over 300m, 6 and 7 around the 260/270m mark.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Shortest at Derby is P4 at 304m, Nottingham P1 and 3 are over 300m, 6 and 7 around the 260/270m mark.

Thanks, am I correct in thinking that platform 1 at Nottingham is normally used by Robin Hood line services? Extending platform 3 would mean the loss of the platform 2 bay and platform 4 was shortened by building out to the through line at the end.

 

[The Planner]

Thanks, am I correct in thinking that platform 1 at Nottingham is normally used by Robin Hood line services? Extending platform 3 would mean the loss of the platform 2 bay and platform 4 was shortened by building out to the through line at the end.

Are you assuming Nottingham would be getting 400m trains? Its not beyond the wit of man to re-platform a service group.

 

[quantinghome]

Are you assuming Nottingham would be getting 400m trains? Its not beyond the wit of man to re-platform a service group.

Are any platforms at Nottingham, Derby or Sheffield that length? Platform extensions look difficult. Nottingham station looks constrained by bridges, as does Sheffield.

 

[Glenn1969]

Would they have to run 400m trains to EMP and then split them?

 

[ohgoditsjames]

Are any platforms at Nottingham, Derby or Sheffield that length? Platform extensions look difficult. Nottingham station looks constrained by bridges, as does Sheffield.

Only arrow straight platforms of 415m length can be used for splitting joining 2x200m HS2 trains.

The longest platform at Sheffield is platform 8 at 378m with very little room for lengthening.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Are you assuming Nottingham would be getting 400m trains? Its not beyond the wit of man to re-platform a service group.

Are any platforms at Nottingham, Derby or Sheffield that length? Platform extensions look difficult. Nottingham station looks constrained by bridges, as does Sheffield.

That is what I am trying to understand are 400m platforms at Nottingham/Derby possible? The point about Robin Hood services using platform 1 is it limits crossing movements at the Western throat correct?

Would they have to run 400m trains to EMP and then split them?

That may be the only option if 400m trains are not possible.

 

[quantinghome]

As far as I understand it, the HS2 trains will be either 400m long or 200m long. Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield can take 300m long trains at present but have very limited scope for lengthening platforms.

This raises a significant capacity problem. Assuming EMR will use doubled-up Auroras (Class 810) at peak times, this provides around 600 seats per train to Nottingham and Derby. However HS2 200m trains are spec'd for 550 seats. So we're actually looking at a capacity REDUCTION if HS2 is only running 200m long trains on the eastern spur, when they should be looking to double capacity.

Solutions are: run longer trains up to the current maximum permitted by the existing platforms. This will complicate HS2's strategy of using a common size fleet. Or at great expense increase platform lengths to 400m at Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield. Chesterfield? Who knows. Probably getting skipped anyway to meet the government's commitment to fast Sheffield services.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

As far as I understand it, the HS2 trains will be either 400m long or 200m long. Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield can take 300m long trains at present but have very limited scope for lengthening platforms.

This raises a significant capacity problem. Assuming EMR will use doubled-up Auroras (Class 810) at peak times, this provides around 600 seats per train to Nottingham and Derby. However HS2 200m trains are spec'd for 550 seats. So we're actually looking at a capacity REDUCTION if HS2 is only running 200m long trains on the eastern spur, when they should be looking to double capacity.

Solutions are: run longer trains up to the current maximum permitted by the existing platforms. This will complicate HS2's strategy of using a common size fleet. Or at great expense increase platform lengths to 400m at Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield. Chesterfield? Who knows. Probably getting skipped anyway to meet the government's commitment to fast Sheffield services.

If 400m trains at Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield aren't possible then splitting at EMP and sending 200m set to Derby/Sheffield and the other portion to Nottingham may be the best option. Do that twice an hour and you get the same as one 400m set to each.

There will also still be legacy services to St Pancras via Leicester to maintain conectivity between the East Midlands cities so overall capacity shouldn't be too bad.

 

[quantinghome]

If 400m trains at Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield aren't possible then splitting at EMP and sending 200m set to Derby/Sheffield and the other portion to Nottingham may be the best option. Do that twice an hour and you get the same as one 400m set to each.

There will also still be legacy services to St Pancras via Leicester to maintain conectivity between the East Midlands cities so overall capacity shouldn't be too bad.

This chart from the IRP sheds some light:


The lack of horizontal gridlines means it's difficult to gauge accurately, but this is looking like the IRP gives slightly more than 2000 seats (per hour) via HS2. So that's 4 x 200m trains.

To get the stated capacity (about 4000), conventional intercity services will also INCREASE compared to today and would require at least 3 doubled up Auroras per hour to operate.

The presumed maximum seating capacity on the MML post-2023 would be around 2400 per hour. So we're looking at a 65% increase on that, noting this is heavily reliant on running nearly double the number of fast trains through Trent junction compared to today. Certainly not a 'doubling or tripling' widely quoted by Shapps and Johnson.

Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield are meant to be the big winners from the IRP. The journey time reduction should drive a big modal shift from cars on what is currently a Cinderella service, and ripe for large increases in train passengers with improved journey times.

As a comparison, Norwich (urban area population 210,000) now gets over 1500 seats per hour for its London service. And the IRP is promising 4000 seats per hour shared between Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield* (combined urban area pop. 1.7 million).

This will not drive a step change in rail use.

* IRP states that Sheffield will be served AS A CONTINUATION from Derby.

 

[Western Sunset]

Just some random thoughts:

1. As I see it, there are three main HS2 flows - Euston - Sheffield (via Derby), Euston - Nottm, and Nottm - Birmingham.
2. With Ratcliffe PS closed by the time this gets done (or if...), they'll be space on the east side of East Mid P'way to expand the station.
3. Sheet Stores Jn is a pinch point, especially now that freight from NE - SW travels via Erewash Valley rather than Derby. Even if Toadmoor Tunnel is sorted out to allow Freightliners that way again, they'll still be the problem of paths. Maybe a freight flyover from the current High-Level goods lines to somewhere near Lock Lane crossing?

 

[g22]

This IRP seems bad news for Leicester. I expect Services North will be fewer and downgraded with all the HS2 services taking up space from EM Parkway northwards. In terms of the Midland Rail Hub, Leicester seems to have been dropped from this in terms of the text in the IRP. Not surprising as with Birmingham to Nottingham sorted by the new High Speed Line they probably think they no longer need to bother with Leicester. In the future it will take double the time to get to Birmingham from Leicester compared with from Nottingham. Leicester should get electrification but that is something they now need to do anyway with HS2 services planned to join MML at Parkway.

Having said this I absolutely agree that Nottingham in particular should get improved services in the future. When you look at the services they have had in recent years to London, Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds they have all been too slow and I was never a great fan of the originally proposed HS2 services requiring change at Toton onto other connecting services.