Future MML services post HS2 and capacity through Trent junctions

[geoffk]

I've pointed out several times that the removal of York/Newcastle and probably Leeds services from HS2 means there are paths for Nottingham trains to run without splitting/joining.

No-one has mentioned the XC services. What route should be used for Edinburgh - Plymouth, for example. It's all so far ahead that we can't know what stock XC would have, if it still exists as a separate operator.

 

[Nottingham59]

What route should be used for Edinburgh - Plymouth

It is very far ahead. The IRP talks about sending trains from Bristol to Moor St, just next door to Curzon st. So I'd expect Edinburgh-Plymouth flows to go via Carlisle to Curzon St and then change. Plymouth-Leeds flows might go via Manchester, according to IRP para3.46.

For Derby and Sheffield, I don't see that changing will save any time, compared to just going via New St and Tamworth as they do now. The HS2 route from Birmingham to Derby is so roundabout that it doesn't make much sense unless you're on an HS2 train already.

 

[Western Sunset]

It's only some 5 miles 59 chains shorter via the Erewash Valley (EV) than via Derby; there are no plans to electrify the EV and by sending trains that way, Derby is too big a city to miss nowadays.

 

[edwin_m]

Oh, there'd certainly be losers

I just thought I'd raise it as we seem to be heading to a situation where the need to filter a combination of different service patterns through a bottleneck will create a timetable like the old (National Express) Midland Mainline one in the Turbostar era, where there were two trains per hour from Derby to London and two trains per hour from Nottingham to London but within five minutes of each other

It's always going to be hard to serve Nottingham and Derby (given both the geography and the politics), but I worry that trying to please everyone by giving everywhere HS2 services is going to snarl up some junctions and cause some rather lopsided timetables - there's no "perfect" solution though

The original NX MML timetable was actually pretty good for frequency if you didn't mind changing at Leicester, but the timings weren't ideal for it to work properly.

Euston-Nottingham and Euston-Derby-Sheffield trains would probably each be at 30min intervals. They might give an even 15min interval at the Parkway, but I don't think that's particularly necessary. Timings will be driven by things like avoiding conflict at Trent and giving the optimum turnover and platform occupancy at Nottingham and Sheffield, but I don't think that regular interval is significantly more difficult to timetable than any other proposal.

It is very far ahead. The IRP talks about sending trains from Bristol to Moor St, just next door to Curzon st. So I'd expect Edinburgh-Plymouth flows to go via Carlisle to Curzon St and then change. Plymouth-Leeds flows might go via Manchester, according to IRP para3.46.

For Derby and Sheffield, I don't see that changing will save any time, compared to just going via New St and Tamworth as they do now. The HS2 route from Birmingham to Derby is so roundabout that it doesn't make much sense unless you're on an HS2 train already.

As always with things like Edinburgh-Plymouth it's more about the intermediate flows. Birmingham-Edinburgh (via Carlisle) and Birmingham-Leeds (via Manchester) would have direct HS2/NPR services but I agree Birmingham-Derby via HS2 and East Midlands Parkway just puts extra paths through Trent without shortening journey times or creating any other notable benefit. So I imagine there would still be XC trains on the existing route at least between Birmingham and Leeds, and it probably makes sense to continue to run them to Bristol and beyond. Further north is more tricky because of the ECML capacity issues - my guess would be that the trains via Derby run as far as Leeds or York and the HS2/NPR trains via Manchester continue to Newcastle or even Edinburgh.

 

[Western Sunset]

I agree that it makes sense for XC (or whoever by the time HS2 is done) to continue via Burton than via EMP. Derby to New Street can be done in around 30 min.
Derby - EMP takes around 8 min; not sure what the timings are from EMP to B'ham. Can't be much in it but as Edwin notes, above, paths around Trent are where the problems will lie.

 

[adrock1976]

Depending on how everything else fits north of the Trent Junctions and rather terminating the present day St Pancras - Sheffield at Leicester with no where to send them out of the way, I suggest the following below:

Both call at East Mids Parkway (bearing in mind as what was suggested upthread that the two Nottinghams that call Kettering, Market Harborough, etc to be revised to 1tph to each of Nottingham and Sheffield via Derby), then would run via High Level Line calling at Chesterfield, Killamarsh & Halfway (the ex Midland Killamarsh West reopened, for Sheffield Supertram), and Rotherham Masborough (for Park and Ride).

Then 1tph to Leeds, calling Wakefield Westgate (or Kirkgate if easier to enter Leeds from the Hunslet direction) and Leeds, with the other 1tph continuing to York, calling Pontefract Baghill and York.

I did think about sending one of them to Doncaster, but if I remember right, the south facing bay platform on the left hand island as looking north is very short to hold an 810 (or one of its 5 car sisters).

Being as the Matlock branch train has been curtailed to Derby, I have thought about extending that to Leicester, calling at all stations which would double the frequency to every 30 minutes at the Ivanhoe Project Phase I stations, with Derby still retaining their 2tph frequency to Leicester. The section between Derby and Nottingham will be compensated by the intention of plans to double the Derby - Stoke-on-Trent - Crewe via Uttoxeter from every 60 minutes to every 30 minutes.

 

[Nottingham59]

run via High Level Line

I like that part. They could look again at using a speeded up Erewash Valley line for at least one of the HS2 services to Sheffield. That will avoid lots of conflicts on the triangle.

 

[HSTEd]

I like that part. They could look again at using a speeded up Erewash Valley line for at least one of the HS2 services to Sheffield. That will avoid lots of conflicts on the triangle.

You will get a lot of junction remodelling for the cost of a "speeded up Erewash valley"

 

[edwin_m]

I like that part. They could look again at using a speeded up Erewash Valley line for at least one of the HS2 services to Sheffield. That will avoid lots of conflicts on the triangle.

If the junction to HS2 was on the Slow lines (south of the station) then a train via the High Level would reduce conflict but one taking any other route would have to cross to the Fasts. If the junction was on the Fasts a train via the High Level would have to cross to the Slows. Either way it would miss Derby.

 

[Nottingham59]

From the slows, you can get to Nottingham too, without crossing to the fasts

 

[edwin_m]

From the slows, you can get to Nottingham too, without crossing to the fasts

You still have a crossing move somewhere for any route other than the High Level lines, and any crossing move potentially creates conflict.

 

[Western Sunset]

Nothing much about freight in the IRP, but that is still important around Trent and hopefully will grow by the time HS2 is up and running. Think a continuation of the High-Level goods to the Stenson line might be worth consideration, to avoid conflicts and free up paths for passenger traffic.

 

[edwin_m]

Nothing much about freight in the IRP, but that is still important around Trent and hopefully will grow by the time HS2 is up and running. Think a continuation of the High-Level goods to the Stenson line might be worth consideration, to avoid conflicts and free up paths for passenger traffic.

Interesting one. These freight trains are down to 10mph at Sheet Stores so block the junctions for quite a time - I remember driving from Nottingham to Trent Lock and being stopped at Station Street crossing, then at Lock Lane by the same train. It would be quite a length of viaduct and would affect a golf course, but not too near any housing.

 

[Western Sunset]

More NE - SW freight seems to go via the Erewash Valley and the Sheet Stores - Stenson line nowadays (than via Derby), particularly Freightliners due to limited clearances in Toadmoor Tunnel. If they continue to go this way (even though Toadmoor might be dealt with during electrification) because it'd free paths via Derby, then something would need to be done at Trent. I'm hoping freight traffic will greatly expand by rail (environmental effects, traffic growth etc) in the next few decades.
Looking at satellite maps, it looks (as Edwin notes above) that there's only a golf course in the way. By rearranging a couple of holes there, it'd be possible to squeeze in a rail route through to Lock Lane. It'd make paths for Derby - Nottm traffic much easier (and quicker) and possibly (if Toton station is ever built [though I don't hold my breath on that one]) it might be able to abandon the low-level route through central Long Eaton altogether.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Nov 2021 ==

This is the sort of thing I've in mind...

 

[edwin_m]

More NE - SW freight seems to go via the Erewash Valley and the Sheet Stores - Stenson line nowadays (than via Derby), particularly Freightliners due to limited clearances in Toadmoor Tunnel. If they continue to go this way (even though Toadmoor might be dealt with during electrification) because it'd free paths via Derby, then something would need to be done at Trent. I'm hoping freight traffic will greatly expand by rail (environmental effects, traffic growth etc) in the next few decades.
Looking at satellite maps, it looks (as Edwin notes above) that there's only a golf course in the way. By rearranging a couple of holes there, it'd be possible to squeeze in a rail route through to Lock Lane. It'd make paths for Derby - Nottm traffic much easier (and quicker) and possibly (if Toton station is ever built [though I don't hold my breath on that one]) it might be able to abandon the low-level route through central Long Eaton altogether.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Nov 2021 ==

This is the sort of thing I've in mind...View attachment 106000

Thanks for sketching pretty much what I had in mind, though I wouldn't myself have any scruples about moving the golf course to some nearby alternative site.

 

[Nottingham59]

It'd be possible to squeeze in a rail route through to Lock Lane

That's a good idea too. But you could locate this new line a bit further south, crossing the river in a sweeping curve and crossing the MML above Ratcliffe North Junction. Then turn west near the car park of EMD, to join the Castle Donington line north of Lockington Quarry.

Then if they ever decide to continue the Eastern leg after all, you've already got four miles of it built.

 

[Western Sunset]

Thanks guys. I'll have another look at some satellite maps and get me crayons out...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Nov 2021 ==

Just had another thought... Will the level crossings at Spondon, Sawley, Meadow Lane and Attenborough have to be removed if HS2 trains are running over the "classic" lines now?

 

[DDB]

One of the key disadvantages of HS2 running into the classic stations (which I am otherwise in favour off) is the capacity of the Derby to Nottingham line.
With Spondon level crossing I feel like the opportunity has been missed as there is major remodeling going on the south side which has just started in earnest. For the last couple of years I suspect it would have been easy to acquire land on the south side for remodelling the approach in that direction. There is a very high hump back bridge immediately to the north of the station and I have always wondered if it is high enough that if you kept going at that height you could go straight over the railway.

 

[edwin_m]

Thanks guys. I'll have another look at some satellite maps and get me crayons out...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Nov 2021 ==

Just had another thought... Will the level crossings at Spondon, Sawley, Meadow Lane and Attenborough have to be removed if HS2 trains are running over the "classic" lines now?

Not necessarily, as they would be at conventional speeds. It's possible any extra trains would push the risk model into recommending an upgrade, although I think all except one are already full barriers.

 

[Western Sunset]

One of the key disadvantages of HS2 running into the classic stations (which I am otherwise in favour off) is the capacity of the Derby to Nottingham line.
With Spondon level crossing I feel like the opportunity has been missed as there is major remodeling going on the south side which has just started in earnest. For the last couple of years I suspect it would have been easy to acquire land on the south side for remodelling the approach in that direction. There is a very high hump back bridge immediately to the north of the station and I have always wondered if it is high enough that if you kept going at that height you could go straight over the railway.

I think if they'd acted before the housing on the Towpath development, where the old Ellis Bros scrapyard was, then it could've been done fairly easily. Can't see it happening now. As you say, heightwise they'd been fine.

 

[Nottingham59]

Time for a few crayons ....

I think the cheapest way to connect the HS2 Eastern spur into the classic network is to have a twin track curve south of Kegworth village, as shown in Blue here:

It would be possible to have a flat junction with the MML, with HS2 merging at grade onto the MML fasts. I fear this is what will be chosen to save costs, but it would introduce conflicts. It would be much better to have a flying junction, so that the main cross-flows (Birmingham-Nottingham and Derby-Leicester) do not conflict.

I would go for the following track layout:

Working from North to South, there are currently four tracks over the river, and through the Redhill tunnels.
This could become five tracks serving five platforms at East Midlands Parkway, by converting platform 4 into an island. South of the station there are three bridges. I think there is space to keep five tracks under the station approach road and under the A453 Remembrance Way:

Kegworth Road bridge will need to be rebuilt for five tracks, with space for electrification.

And it might be easier to relocate this bridge futher south, with space for six tracks and increased height at the centre to accommodate the incline on tracks 3 and 4 towards the HS2 flying junction.

This layout would minimise conflicts between the main flows across the Trent Triangle without introducing more grade separation on the triangle itself, as shown here. The Nottingham-Birmingham flows (Red:4tph) avoid the Derby-Leicester flows (Dark blue:2-3tph). The black arrows represent freight paths which still need to be timetabled (1-2tph with irregular destinations).


All of these developments should be designed to be compatible with future extension of HS2. This would include:

1. Height separation between tracks where HS2 diverges from the original route, to allow a grade separated junction for fast trains to continue north along the original route
2. New bridges and structures able to accommodate 400m trains with TGV-Duplex loading gauge
3. New platforms at Nottingham Station (7 & 8) able to take 400m trains
4. Six tracks across the Trent and six platforms at East Midlands parkway
5. Increased local services between Leicester, Nottingham and Derby to replace those services which will now go via HS2 to Birmingham and London.

What do others think?

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Time for a few crayons ....

I think the cheapest way to connect the HS2 Eastern spur into the classic network is to have a twin track curve south of Kegworth village, as shown in Blue here:
View attachment 106130
It would be possible to have a flat junction with the MML, with HS2 merging at grade onto the MML fasts. I fear this is what will be chosen to save costs, but it would introduce conflicts. It would be much better to have a flying junction, so that the main cross-flows (Birmingham-Nottingham and Derby-Leicester) do not conflict.

[/QUOTE]

That is exactly where I expected HS2 to join the MML. I can not see having spent a few £billions building a high speed line from Birmingham to have it then join the MML without a grade separated junction only saving a few £million.

I would go for the following track layout:
View attachment 106169
Working from North to South, there are currently four tracks over the river, and through the Redhill tunnels.
This could become five tracks serving five platforms at East Midlands Parkway, by converting platform 4 into an island. South of the station there are three bridges. I think there is space to keep five tracks under the station approach road and under the A453 Remembrance Way:
View attachment 106170 View attachment 106171
Kegworth Road bridge will need to be rebuilt for five tracks, with space for electrification.
View attachment 106172
And it might be easier to relocate this bridge futher south, with space for six tracks and increased height at the centre to accommodate the incline on tracks 3 and 4 towards the HS2 flying junction.

This layout would minimise conflicts between the main flows across the Trent Triangle without introducing more grade separation on the triangle itself, as shown here. The Nottingham-Birmingham flows (Red:4tph) avoid the Derby-Leicester flows (Dark blue:2-3tph). The black arrows represent freight paths which still need to be timetabled (1-2tph with irregular destinations).
View attachment 106173

All of these developments should be designed to be compatible with future extension of HS2. This would include:

1. Height separation between tracks where HS2 diverges from the original route, to allow a grade separated junction for fast trains to continue north along the original route
2. New bridges and structures able to accommodate 400m trains with TGV-Duplex loading gauge
3. New platforms at Nottingham Station (7 & 8) able to take 400m trains
4. Six tracks across the Trent and six platforms at East Midlands parkway
5. Increased local services between Leicester, Nottingham and Derby to replace those services which will now go via HS2 to Birmingham and London.

What do others think?

[/QUOTE]

If as been discussed upthread platforms at Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield are difficult to extend to 400m then splitting at EMP may be the best option. IMO the best place to split and join a a 400m set would be platforms 2 & 3 so that the Derby spiting in platform 2 could rejoin the line to Derby north of platform 1. Platform 4 should become the main southbound line to Leicester. There should the be two new platforms 5 & 6 on the slow lies which I would extend northwards on a new alignment with new tunnel and bridge over the Trent to link with the High level line through Long Eaton. This combined with Western Sunsets proposals in post 74 for grade separation of Lock Lane to the High level line would mean that freight flows were are kept separate from passenger flows.

 

[tomuk]

If as been discussed upthread platforms at Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield are difficult to extend to 400m then splitting at EMP may be the best option.

If you look at the stations concerned only Sheffield would be a problem. There is room at both Derby and Nottingham. At Derby the platforms are already 340m long and at Nottingham pre revamp they were over 400 and there is room for an expanded platform 7&8. It makes no sense to split trains at EMP ten minutes before the end of their journeys. What is more likely is that more 200m trains will be run in the paths freed up by not running Leeds services.

 

[zwk500]

If you look at the stations concerned only Sheffield would be a problem. There is room at both Derby and Nottingham. At Derby the platforms are already 340m long and at Nottingham pre revamp they were over 400 and there is room for an expanded platform 7&8. It makes no sense to split trains at EMP ten minutes before the end of their journeys. What is more likely is that more 200m trains will be run in the paths freed up by not running Leeds services.

By my count, 340m platforms aren't long enough for 400m trains, and at Derby there's not really the room to the south to extend the platforms due to the junction (which has just been very expensively remodelled). North of the station you've got the A6 bridge, River Derwent Bridge and connection to Chaddesden sidings to consider. None of these are easy to resolve for an additional 60m of platform.

 

[Nottingham59]

at Derby there's not really the room to the south to extend the platforms due to the junction

I reckon you could extend the southern end of Platform 6 at Derby by 30 metres without relaying any tracks at all. And by 25m at the northern end. And you could bring platform 7 into public use at the same length. To get 400m, you might have to merge the main line with the avoiding line beyond platform 7 which accesses Chaddesden sidings under the A6 bridge.

 

[zwk500]

I reckon you could extend the southern end of Platform 6 at Derby by 30 metres without relaying any tracks at all. And by 25m at the northern end. And you could bring platform 7 into public use at the same length. To get 400m, you might have to merge the main line with the avoiding line beyond platform 7 which accesses Chaddesden sidings under the A6 bridge.

I'm willing to bet that the overlap protecting Way & works Jn won't let you extend P6. I haven't looked at the detailed signalling plans but I'd be very surprised if there was much wiggle room left after the rebuild a few years ago.

 

[Nottingham59]

the overlap protecting Way & works Jn won't let you extend P6. I

I'm sure there will be issues like that which will need to be solved. But I'm sure they could be fixed. Looking at openrailwaymap, it might be possible to shift all the junctions on track 6 further round the curve towards Long Eaton, if necessary. And at the North end, you might be able to reach Chaddesden sidings with a new bridge over the Derwent, through the next span of the A6 viaduct, set a few inches lower than the main line if necessary to avoid the A6 above. It would be bizarre to spend so many billions on the HS2 Eastern stump without trying hard making full use of its capabilities. Hell, you could even relocate Etches Park to Toton if necessary!

 

[zwk500]

I'm sure there will be issues like that which will need to be solved. But I'm sure they could be fixed. Looking at openrailwaymap, it might be possible to shift all the junctions on track 6 further round the curve towards Long Eaton, if necessary. And at the North end, you might be able to reach Chaddesden sidings with a new bridge over the Derwent, through the next span of the A6 viaduct, set a few inches lower than the main line if necessary to avoid the A6 above. It would be bizarre to spend so many billions on the HS2 Eastern stump without trying hard making full use of its capabilities. Hell, you could even relocate Etches Park to Toton if necessary!

Remember the reason it's a stump is to save money. It would be strange to save money by not building the line and then spend most of what you'd saved rebuilding a station that was itself rebuilt about 5 years ago. If you were going on the 'just spend the money' argument, the better option is just to build the full length of HS2.

 

[Western Sunset]

I think it's a given that HS2 will join the MML near Kingston by a grade-separated junction, passing Kegworth on the southern edge. Not sure you'd need another bore through Red Hill though. Think four tracks would suffice, especially with Ratcliffe PS long gone by then.

 

[Nottingham59]

especially with Ratcliffe PS long gone by then.

Yes. The important thing is that any land needed to extend EMD towards the power station site is properly safeguarded before plans to redevelop the site are finalised. You never know, they might even be able to wangle a developer contribution to extend the station and open a second entrance on that side.

As for adding a third bridge over the Trent and/or a freight viaduct from the Castle Donington Line to the High Level line to Toton, would it perhaps be better to build any new viaducts to serve high speed services? I'd extend the HS2 alignment to link straight into the route to Nottingham, like this:

You'd still need the blue spur to serve Derby and Sheffield (built with grade separation already in place); and I'd build the main line to Nottingham with height separation north of the river to allow the HS2 mainline to continue through Long Eaton towards Leeds if that was ever decided. We could run closer to EMD station, though, to allow for the possibilty of HS platforms there in future, as part of the station. Note that this alignment does not conflict with @Western Sunset 's freight viaduct proposal.