How to increase capacity on the Birmingham-Derby line

[Nottingham59]

A link to the Birmingham-Derby line is likely to happen in my opinion, since it takes 2 paths an hour off the MML, and means that more of the country will benefit from HS2 in some way, while increasing Phase 1 utilisation slightly.

The Integrated Rail Plan (now defunct) envisaged building HS2 phase 2bEast as far as East Midlands Parkway. It would be much cheaper to build a connection from HS2 to the 125mph Birmingham-Derby line, north of Kingsbury Branch Junction, and run say 2tph to Derby and on to Sheffield. This would bring HS2 services to Yorkshire, and bypass the constraint of Colwich Junction which limits the number of HS2 trains that can serve the northwest.

But the Birmingham-Derby line is said to be full:

• there are quite a lot of freight paths (though many are not used: yesterday, around a dozen freights passed through Burton-on-Trent each way in 24 hours) https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/se...000-2359?stp=WVS&show=non-passenger&order=wtt
• The bigger constraint seems to be that Cross Country's 100mph stopping 170s get caught by their 125mph Voyagers.

Obviously, the line would have to be electrified for HS2 trains, but what else would be needed to increase the capacity of the line? Would it be enough to replace 170s on the Birmingham-Nottingham Service with 125mph EMUs with electric acceleration? Would grade separation of Stenson/N Stafford Junction add much capacity?

 

[Zomboid]

170s are pretty slow off the mark as it is, so perhaps just using 110mph EMUs would do the trick. If they're stopping everywhere then they'd have a job hitting 125 anyway.

 

[ChrisC]

I do think that a link from HS2 to the Birmingham to Derby line would be beneficial. However, I certainly do not think this will remove 2 paths an hour from the MML. Even if two Sheffield to London trains were routed via HS2 there would still need to be trains from Sheffield and Derby to Leicester. I can’t see the people of Leicester being very happy to see the number of trains to London cut by half especially as the Sheffield trains are the fastest. This would also have implications for Long Eaton and Loughborough passengers. Passengers from stations south of Leicester on MML already a rough deal with having to change to reach Derby and Sheffield without making things even more difficult. If passenger numbers continue to grow on the MML by the time HS2 finally opens, the current paths will still be required especially with the 810’s only being 5 carriage trains

 

[Zomboid]

I do think that a link from HS2 to the Birmingham to Derby line would be beneficial. However, I certainly do not think this will remove 2 paths an hour from the MML. Even if two Sheffield to London trains were routed via HS2 there would still need to be trains from Sheffield and Derby to Leicester. I can’t see the people of Leicester being very happy to see the number of trains to London cut by half especially as the Sheffield trains are the fastest. This would also have implications for Long Eaton and Loughborough passengers. Passengers from stations south of Leicester on MML already a rough deal with having to change to reach Derby and Sheffield without making things even more difficult. If passenger numbers continue to grow on the MML by the time HS2 finally opens, the current paths will still be required especially with the 810’s only being 5 carriage trains

The station calls between Sheffield and Derby could be handled by a HS2 train, so it's just Leicester to Derby and Sheffield that would need retaining.

I would suggest that 1tph is still needed for St Pancras to Sheffield to retain the link from Leicester and wherever else the Sheffield train calls and then the other existing Sheffield train can go to Nottingham instead: it may be possible to offer a faster Nottingham - Leicester - London train than presently runs so even though they're not on the route it'll be possible to point to a direct benefit that they've received from HS2.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Jun 2025 ==

An alternative to keep Leicester to Sheffield linked directly would be an XC service via Nuneaton that then runs to Derby etc, and then all 4 St Pancras IC trains every hour can go to Nottingham.

 

[Nottingham59]

HS2 running time to Rugeley North junction is 47 minutes from Euston (40 minutes from OOC). Assuming the same time to get to Kingsbury on the Eastern stump (shorter distance, but need to slow right down for the curve), suggests a running time to Derby from Euston of around 47+22 = 69 minutes for HS2, compared to 88 minutes from St Pancras today. So a sizable benefit in time saved. Much more if heading to Heathrow, of course.

 

[The Planner]

Needs resignalling, wires, Burton and probably some 4 tracking. Not convinced you need grade seperation of Stenson unless you are throwing loads towards Nottingham whereupon Sheet Stores and Trent become problematic.

 

[Zomboid]

HS2 running time to Rugeley North junction is 47 minutes from Euston (40 minutes from OOC). Assuming the same time to get to Kingsbury on the Eastern stump (shorter distance, but need to slow right down for the curve), suggests a running time to Derby from Euston of around 47+22 = 69 minutes for HS2, compared to 88 minutes from St Pancras today. So a sizable benefit in time saved. Much more if heading to Heathrow, of course.

On today's voyager schedules, it would take a further 1h17 to reach Leeds, so 2h26 or an additional 1h20 for York via Doncaster (2h29).

Slower than the ECML (2h14 to Leeds), but not by a huge margin and a different range of connectivity.

 

[HSTEd]

On today's voyager schedules, it would take a further 1h17 to reach Leeds, so 2h26 or an additional 1h20 for York via Doncaster (2h29).

Slower than the ECML (2h14 to Leeds), but not by a huge margin and a different range of connectivity.

Whilst a tilting train for 300kph apparently exists, I'm not aware of an electrodiesel unit capable of more than 250kph. Which means you would lose several minutes on the HS2 schedule unless electrification was completed throughout.

It does suggest that perhaps the DfT should order tender for a prototype 320km/h BEMU with the range to make it from the vicinity of Kingsbury to Doncaster.

 

[Zomboid]

Whilst a tilting train for 300kph apparently exists, I'm not aware of an electrodiesel unit capable of more than 250kph. Which means you would lose several minutes on the HS2 schedule unless electrification was completed throughout.

It does suggest that perhaps the DfT should order tender for a prototype 320km/h BEMU with the range to make it from the vicinity of Kingsbury to Doncaster.

This exercise in imagineering includes electrification from Kingsbury (let's go all the way to Birmingham) through to South Kirkby. May as well do Doncaster as well, but unless Derby to Sheffield can be significantly accelerated this isn't going to compete with the main ECML London to York and beyond flows.

 

[HSTEd]

This exercise in imagineering includes electrification from Kingsbury (let's go all the way to Birmingham) through to South Kirkby. May as well do Doncaster as well, but unless Derby to Sheffield can be significantly accelerated this isn't going to compete with the main ECML London to York and beyond flows.

Electrification from Kingsbury to South Kirkby or Doncaster is going to be very expensive however. It's a long way and 25kV electrification isn't cheap any more.

If you can get within a few minutes of the Leeds journey time then I think it might be worth considering.
You could certainly usurp a large part of MML Intercity traffic in any case.

If that could be done, it might be useful to a future HS1/St Pancras rebuild to increase south eastern capacity.

 

[Zomboid]

Electrification from Kingsbury to South Kirkby or Doncaster is going to be very expensive however. It's a long way and 25kV electrification isn't cheap any more.

If you can get within a few minutes of the Leeds journey time then I think it might be worth considering.
You could certainly usurp a large part of MML Intercity traffic in any case.

If that could be done, it might be useful to a future HS1/St Pancras rebuild to increase south eastern capacity.

It won't be cheap, but in lieu of building the eastern arm of HS2 it's interesting to see what's possible with more conventional intervention.

I don't know if Derby to Chesterfield could be readily upgraded for 125, or whether that would gain enough to be worth the hassle, but just sending the trains that way in voyager timings doesn't do much to help the ECML, so the most likely consequence is taking over some London to Sheffield trains and relieving the MML.

To really help the ECML is going to need a lot more railways building.

 

[HSTEd]

It won't be cheap, but in lieu of building the eastern arm of HS2 it's interesting to see what's possible with more conventional intervention.

I don't know if Derby to Chesterfield could be readily upgraded for 125, or whether that would gain enough to be worth the hassle, but just sending the trains that way in voyager timings doesn't do much to help the ECML, so the most likely consequence is taking over some London to Sheffield trains and relieving the MML.

To really help the ECML is going to need a lot more railways building.

The journey time you suggest, about 12-15 minutes longer to Leeds from Euston vs King's Cross, is likely fast enough that anyone who's itinerary would benefit from being swapping to Crossrail at OOC might be convinced to jump ship.
Indeed, if your walking destination is closer to Euston than King's Cross it might not be unattractive.

I think you could get a significant portion of the traffic to defect on that basis.

That would ease ECML crowding issues.

 

[Nottingham59]

To really help the ECML is going to need a lot more railways building.

Not necessariily.

I think the easiest way to improve times to Leeds is to build HS2 to Manchester, and continue to Leeds via the upgraded Transpennine route.

HS2 claim 67 minutes Euston-Manchester. Allowing say 4 minutes to reverse at HS2 Piccadilly and 41 minutes for Manchester-Leeds gives 1h52m Euston-Leeds, compared to 2h13m via the ECML today. And it's only 1h44m Leeds-OOC if heading to Heathrow.

Sending London-Leeds via HS2 should bring real relief to the ECML.

 

[Zomboid]

That's a somewhat different scenario though as it relies on HS2 reaching Manchester. Which means building a lot more than the Derby line connection.

You could indeed help Leeds by running via Manchester, but that probably won't do anything for the York/ Newcastle line.

I always thought that HS2 had too many termini and the way to reach Leeds was by making Manchester a through station and heading east from there.

 

[Nottingham59]

I always thought that HS2 had too many termini and the way to reach Leeds was by making Manchester a through station and heading east from there.

Yes, I agree with you on that. And go straight into Manchester Centre at 360kph, rather than zig-zagging round Cheshire at 230kph just to get a station a mile away from Manchester Airport. They could have got London to Manchester centre down to less than 60 minutes that way.

 

[The Planner]

Yes, I agree with you on that. And go straight into Manchester Centre at 360kph, rather than zig-zagging round Cheshire at 230kph just to get a station a mile away from Manchester Airport. They could have got London to Manchester centre down to less than 60 minutes that way.

Disagree, Manchester was effectively a spur like Birmingham. Manchester Airport is Birmingham Interchange for the North and has a massive catchment area.

 

[Manutd1999]

This may well be the easiest add-on to HS2 Phase 1. It could even be done before Phase 2a.

If electrification of the MML progresses to Sheffield over the next 5-10 years (i.e. in parallel with HS2 Phase 1), all it would require is a short spur from HS2, electrification to Derby (fairly painless, mostly open fields?) and maybe a couple of freight loops.

1ph to Derby/Sheffield and 1ph to Nottingham via HS2 would reduce journey times to London for those cities and would replace the 2x fast services on the MML, freeing up space for more stoppers/semi-fasts from St Pancras to Leicester.

 

[Zomboid]

Disagree, Manchester was effectively a spur like Birmingham. Manchester Airport is Birmingham Interchange for the North and has a massive catchment area.

I think Manchester Airport as a sort of Cheshire Parkway does make sense, but turning east from Manchester to head to Leeds would allow the Eastern leg of the Y shape to be omitted entirely.

Connecting to the Birmingham to Derby line does a lot of the work that Toton parkway would have in relieving the MML and without building a great big station in the middle of nowhere.

The obvious downside being that whilst the journey to Leeds is very competitive, York and Newcastle might be less so - though I'd be surprised if the 100km (81 in a straight line via Leeds city centre) or so from Manchester to somewhere near Ulleskelf took long enough to make journeys via HS2 slower than the ECML.

 

[The Planner]

This may well be the easiest add-on to HS2 Phase 1. It could even be done before Phase 2a.

If electrification of the MML progresses to Sheffield over the next 5-10 years (i.e. in parallel with HS2 Phase 1), all it would require is a short spur from HS2, electrification to Derby (fairly painless, mostly open fields?) and maybe a couple of freight loops.

1ph to Derby/Sheffield and 1ph to Nottingham via HS2 would reduce journey times to London for those cities and would replace the 2x fast services on the MML, freeing up space for more stoppers/semi-fasts from St Pancras to Leicester.

It needs much more than that. Signalling, level crossing closures, redeveloping Burton station and so on. Its not "all it would require"

 

[Nottingham59]

Disagree, Manchester was effectively a spur like Birmingham. Manchester Airport is Birmingham Interchange for the North and has a massive catchment area.

Yes Manchester was designed as a spur, but it's the primary destination for HS2 West. My point is that it shouldn't be a spur., requiring a 360kph train to slow down to 230kph to take the diverging route, tens of kilometres before its final destination.

By all means have a Cheshire Parkway station to serve the massive catchment area, but don't cripple the main London-Manchester flow by doing so. A parkway station on the M56 could be served by trains to Liverpool or Warrington NPR, rather than Manchester.

And the Airport station as currently envisaged by HS2 really is not an effective interchange for the North: it would be much more cost effective for Manchester HS2/NPR station to have that role.

 

[bleeder4]

No mention of Lichfield? How about sending a few trains up the Cross City line via Aston, Sutton Coldfield and Lichfield. They can then proceed from there along the South Staffordshire line and re-join the traditional route at Wichnor Jn just south of Burton. That would free up some capacity on the Water Orton to Tamworth section.

 

[The Planner]

Yes Manchester was designed as a spur, but it's the primary destination for HS2 West. My point is that it shouldn't be a spur., requiring a 360kph train to slow down to 230kph to take the diverging route, tens of kilometres before its final destination.

By all means have a Cheshire Parkway station to serve the massive catchment area, but don't cripple the main London-Manchester flow by doing so. A parkway station on the M56 could be served by trains to Liverpool or Warrington NPR, rather than Manchester.

And the Airport station as currently envisaged by HS2 really is not an effective interchange for the North: it would be much more cost effective for Manchester HS2/NPR station to have that role.

Its not crippling it, take that abundance of passengers out of the equation and the business case looks even ropier!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jun 2025 ==

No mention of Lichfield? How about sending a few trains up the Cross City line via Aston, Sutton Coldfield and Lichfield. They can then proceed from there along the South Staffordshire line and re-join the traditional route at Wichnor Jn just south of Burton. That would free up some capacity on the Water Orton to Tamworth section.

What trains? XC? It slows them down to the point no one would use them.

 

[bleeder4]

What trains? XC? It slows them down to the point no one would use them.

Maybe, but we won't know unless we try. New Street to Derby via Lichfield and South Staffordshire line is 40 miles 36 chains, whereas New Street to Derby via the normal route though Tamworth is 41 miles 2 chains. So going via Lichfield is less mileage. It just depends whether you could get a non stop path for a Voyager up the Cross City line to Lichfield and beyond.

 

[fishwomp]

But the Birmingham-Derby line is said to be full: [•••]

• The bigger constraint seems to be that Cross Country's 100mph stopping 170s get caught by their 125mph Voyagers.

Frequently.. it's nuts that there are seemingly good places to have four track (and maybe even have permissive passing loops) like Burton and Willington. I think that I may have seen Kingsbury loop used to enable an overtaking move before.

Obviously, the line would have to be electrified for HS2 trains, but what else would be needed to increase the capacity of the line?

HS2 trains is too far away - better to improve the 20:37 (time) departure today, than (year) 2037.. interventions today will help more, now. These things still help later if some future thing in around 2040 ever gets planned. Loops. Electric trains for stoppers.

Reliable dispatch from Birmingham (reliable arrival). Possibly aided by splitting Notts-Cardiff, also aided by Moor St in future.

 

[Zomboid]

Frequently.. it's nuts that there are seemingly good places to have four track (and maybe even have permissive passing loops) like Burton and Willington. I think that I may have seen Kingsbury loop used to enable an overtaking move before.

HS2 trains is too far away - better to improve the 20:37 (time) departure today, than (year) 2037.. interventions today will help more, now. These things still help later if some future thing in around 2040 ever gets planned. Loops. Electric trains for stoppers.

Reliable dispatch from Birmingham (reliable arrival). Possibly aided by splitting Notts-Cardiff, also aided by Moor St in future.

Electrify Birmingham to South Kirkby/ Doncaster now (tbh if we started now I doubt it'll be in service all that long before HS2) and you can improve much more than just the Sheffield to London train service.

Give Burton 125mph passing tracks on the outside and you can get rid of the 50mph through the platform thing for non stop trains; quite a long stretch of 4 track looks possible through there (5.5km between the southern end of the coalville branch triangle and the level crossing at the pumping station). That'll create an overtaking opportunity, and there's plenty of space between Tamworth and Central Rivers for more 4 tracking or freight loops.

 

[Nottingham59]

Give Burton 125mph passing tracks on the outside and you can get rid of the 50mph through the platform thing for non stop trains; quite a long stretch of 4 track looks possible through there (5.5km between the southern end of the coalville branch triangle and the level crossing at the pumping station). That'll create an overtaking opportunity, and there's plenty of space between Tamworth and Central Rivers for more 4 tracking or freight loops.

That was my thinking. But if necessary, you could simply timetable the 2tph HS2 service to call at Burton, until budget becomes available; both platforms are long enough. An HS2 calling pattern of Sheffield, Chesterfield, Derby, Burton, Tamworth, OOC, HS2 Euston would still be faster than MML.

Its not crippling it, take that abundance of passengers out of the equation and the business case looks even ropier!

The Euston-Piccadilly flow is around twice that of the Euston-Wilmslow, Euston-Macc and Eustion-Stockport combined. It would be even more so if HS2 Manchester trains continue on to Leeds.

HS2 can perfectly well serve the South Manchester market by running 2tph starting at Manchester Airport and picking up at Wilmslow and Crewe before joining HS2. And that option needs no capital spending after Phase 2a.

If you must have a Cheshire Parkway station for South Manchester business passengers heading to London for the day, then I'd propose the layout shown below. Served by 2tph calling at Parkway, Warrington NPR, and Liverpool. As all HS2 Liverpool trains would call at Parkway, the S-W curve can be tight without time penalty.

A parkway station next to M56 junction 8 would be easy to drive to, and you could have a much bigger and cheaper car park. At ground level in open country it would be far cheaper than building a station at the Airport (dependent on third party funding, with four 400m platforms and two through lines, twenty metres underground). And the tunnel under Manchester would be around £2bn cheaper, too.

 

[The Planner]

Maybe, but we won't know unless we try. New Street to Derby via Lichfield and South Staffordshire line is 40 miles 36 chains, whereas New Street to Derby via the normal route though Tamworth is 41 miles 2 chains. So going via Lichfield is less mileage. It just depends whether you could get a non stop path for a Voyager up the Cross City line to Lichfield and beyond.

You don't need to try, you can work a timetable out and immediately see that people will go for the quicker train where the route via Tamworth far outstrips it. The Cross City is 60mph with sections as low as 20mph up to Wichnor. The route via Tamworth is 120/125mph from Water Orton to Wichnor. You can't get a clean path for a Voyager now when there are engineering works and they are diverted, let alone if the Cross City ever went back up to 6tph.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jun 2025 ==

The Euston-Piccadilly flow is around twice that of the Euston-Wilmslow, Euston-Macc and Eustion-Stockport combined. It would be even more so if HS2 Manchester trains continue on to Leeds.

HS2 can perfectly well serve the South Manchester market by running 2tph starting at Manchester Airport and picking up at Wilmslow and Crewe before joining HS2. And that option needs no capital spending after Phase 2a.

Where are people parking at the airport for that? The cost of airport parking and time penalty for many will just make them drive to Crewe. The airport station is being upgraded to allow much more permissive working, start clogging up platforms with 200m trains and you are cutting trains out from the Airport to Manchester and beyond.

If you must have a Cheshire Parkway station for South Manchester business passengers heading to London for the day, then I'd propose the layout shown below. Served by 2tph calling at Parkway, Warrington NPR, and Liverpool. As all HS2 Liverpool trains would call at Parkway, the S-W curve can be tight without time penalty.

A parkway station next to M56 junction 8 would be easy to drive to, and you could have a much bigger and cheaper car park. At ground level in open country it would be far cheaper than building a station at the Airport (dependent on third party funding, with four 400m platforms and two through lines, twenty metres underground). And the tunnel under Manchester would be around £2bn cheaper, too.

The HS2 station at the Airport is next to Jn 6, just as easy to drive to and has more population near it. Why are you assuming a massive car park and station in much more open countryside is going to be any easier in terms of opposition, especially when it looks like you have driven it through Dunham Massey? It isn't going to be much easier to build as the proposed station is on an open site as well.

 

[brad465]

Electrification will need to go further south of Bromsgrove (plus include the Barnt Green fast lines) to make Birmingham-Derby electrification well-used. If it goes through to Bristol Parkway and Filton Bank gets done in a separate programme, electric trains can run from Bristol all the way to Sheffield*/Manchester, then further north if other infills are done. If the Chepstow line were electrified then XC EMUs are possible here as well, but if not BEMUs should work if they only run off the juice between Gloucester and Severn Tunnel Jct.

*On completion of MML electrification.

If Kingsbury remains in long-term use, this area could do with 4-tracking, or at the very least a segregated reversing loop, so freight shunting into the yard doesn't block the mainline.

 

[Zomboid]

Electrification will need to go further south of Bromsgrove (plus include the Barnt Green fast lines) to make Birmingham-Derby electrification well-used.

In the world of bi-modes that's not really the case any longer. Aside from this idea of putting HS2 trains onto it, by the time and such a scheme is actually built voyagers will be end of life and their replacements are all but certain to have an electric powertrain. Maybe diesel and/or batteries as well, but they'll be able to use whatever electrification there is. As will whatever replaces the 170s.

I don't like bi-modes as an excuse to not electrify trunk routes, but they do mean that you don't have to do the whole of a route to get the benefits in the places that do have electrification.

 

[Sonik]

The Integrated Rail Plan (now defunct) envisaged building HS2 phase 2bEast as far as East Midlands Parkway. It would be much cheaper to build a connection from HS2 to the 125mph Birmingham-Derby line, north of Kingsbury Branch Junction, and run say 2tph to Derby and on to Sheffield. This would bring HS2 services to Yorkshire, and bypass the constraint of Colwich Junction which limits the number of HS2 trains that can serve the northwest.

Besides the obvious connectivity/capacity/ROI arguments, I wouldn't underestimate the *political* benefit of *announcing* that HS2 will reach a much wider catchment, much sooner.

It undermines disingenuous political agitators who argue that HS2 funding should be diverted to local & regional improvements, because it does both. And if something like this is put in progress, any politician who still argues for scrapping HS2 entirely, effectively proposes to take benefits away, from a much wider constituency, for a (relatively) minor cost saving. So the political cost of NOT completing HS2 increases.