MML electrification: catering for passenger growth and could we see extensions of the wires?

Merle Haggard · 8 Dec 2019

Modertor note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/mml-electrification.110445/

On the subject of the current electrification, I will make an observation - and expect, as usual, to be shot down in flames. No opinions, just facts & questions.

The work between Bedford and Corby has been considerable - relaying a line from Sharnbrook northwards; electrification of all four tracks; platform reinstatement/extension.
Then, when the details of the new electric train service were announced, we learned that the 'new' electric trains will provide the same frequency (although, to be fair, more even within the hour) as the current service from Kettering, and the present diesel trains are slightly quicker from Corby etc. to London than the new electric ones will be.

I just wonder two things;
How will this encourage an increase in passengers?
Will the Government think that the benefits are so worth the expenditure that there should be even more, Northwards?

Or am myself I missing something important?

RailUK Forums

edwin_m · 8 Dec 2019

Bald Rick said:
Ah, but the key difference is that the GW electrification is nearly finished, and the money has been spent. Whereas on the MML (north of Kettering) the money hasn’t been spent.

Also, the MML electrification costs are broadly the same as GWML on a consistent basis.

We're discussing Market Harborough to Leicester versus Bristol and Oxford, and the money hasn't been spent on either.

edwin_m · 8 Dec 2019

Merle Haggard said:
The work between Bedford and Corby has been considerable - relaying a line from Sharnbrook northwards; electrification of all four tracks; platform reinstatement/extension.
Then, when the details of the new electric train service were announced, we learned that the 'new' electric trains will provide the same frequency (although, to be fair, more even within the hour) as the current service from Kettering, and the present diesel trains are slightly quicker from Corby etc. to London than the new electric ones will be.

Kettering, Wellingborough and Bedford will get a lot more capacity into London because the trains will be 12 cars in the peaks and won't have passengers from further north except Corby.

Aictos · 8 Dec 2019

edwin_m said:
Kettering, Wellingborough and Bedford will get a lot more capacity into London because the trains will be 12 cars in the peaks and won't have passengers from further north except Corby.

And there will be a shift from Thameslink to EMR Electrics especially in the peaks from commuters from both Bedford and Luton freeing up seats for intermediate stations.

Why do I believe this? Well it’s simple, take either Bedford or Luton with one to two stops maximum or all stations between Bedford and St Albans and you see the faster service wins every time.

I don’t know the exact figures but it will get a considerable shift in commuters from TL to EMR Electrics.

HowardGWR · 8 Dec 2019

It seems to me that the further electrification of the MML is not hindered by the acquisition of bi-modes. The environmental argument is not damaged by the low mileage that will be obtained by the bi-modes, as they can be cascaded elsewhere, when MML electrification is extended to Sheffield, to lines where partial electrification exists but no current committed project is in progress. Cardiff to Penzance springs to mind, or the XC route. There will be many others.

Merle Haggard · 8 Dec 2019

edwin_m said:
Kettering, Wellingborough and Bedford will get a lot more capacity into London because the trains will be 12 cars in the peaks and won't have passengers from further north except Corby.

But are the Corby trains (5 cars, I think) full & standing at the moment? I didn't think that they were, but would welcome first hand views - it's a long time since I gave up work & commuting from Wellingboro'.
It goes without saying (but I still will!) that if the present service has adequate (seated) capacity then longer trains will not in themselves attract more custom - and ones that have less facilities may have the opposite effect. The present diesel trains could be longer, too - train length is a function of stock availability, not a direct result of electrification. I accept that the present Corby trains are only half the present service.
Regarding the benefits to Bedford, it is of course already electrified and not served only by MML; Bedford stops in the commuting peak were introduced only after National Express gained the franchise and it was admitted (to a colleague) at the time that the reason was ORCATS-related. Presumably the EMR Bedford stops will reduce opportunities for fast Bedford TL services.
In the past, the phrase 'Sparks Effect' has been used to suggest that electrification itself somehow produces an increase in demand. In reality, the electrified lines that demonstrated this effect were ones where the service provided during the dislocation caused by the electrification work itself could be described as dire (I'm particularly thinking of Euston-Lpool-Mcr) and, even if the service had only reverted to the one that applied before the work started, there would have been an increase I'm sure. To the credit of those behind the present scheme the work has not had much impact on the service, at least weekdays, so the 'Sparks Effect' can be measured more without that distortion.
I worry that, if electrification does not produce a massive increase in passenger numbers this may be used as an argument against further projects; I am far from against electrification, indeed I am pleased that the County of my birth has such a high proportion of electrified tracks; only the stretch from about a mile North of Corby to the Welland viaduct and a mile or so around King's Sutton remain to be done, though I accept that these are probably not likely candidates in the near future. Unfortunately, neither are in anything near to marginal constituencies to increase the chances!

Bald Rick · 8 Dec 2019

edwin_m said:
We're discussing Market Harborough to Leicester versus Bristol and Oxford, and the money hasn't been spent on either.

Ah my mistake, I was comparing the GWML and MML electrifications as planned.

(Although much of the money has been spent on the parts you mention. Essentially both have had all the civils done and just need wiring up).

Railwaysceptic · 9 Dec 2019

hwl said:
If all the records for the past 145+ years and the act of parliament all use one name the cost of ensuring all the documentation is brought up to data is quite large.
Hardly a good use of money?

. . . and how do you know the Act Of Parliament authorising this line incorporated that same mistake? And what has the cost of amending the documentation got to do with "being able to identify where the railway is in the word?"

AM9 · 9 Dec 2019

Merle Haggard said:
On the subject of the current electrification, I will make an observation - and expect, as usual, to be shot down in flames. No opinions, just facts & questions.

The work between Bedford and Corby has been considerable - relaying a line from Sharnbrook northwards; electrification of all four tracks; platform reinstatement/extension.
Then, when the details of the new electric train service were announced, we learned that the 'new' electric trains will provide the same frequency (although, to be fair, more even within the hour) as the current service from Kettering, and the present diesel trains are slightly quicker from Corby etc. to London than the new electric ones will be.

I just wonder two things;
How will this encourage an increase in passengers?
Will the Government think that the benefits are so worth the expenditure that there should be even more, Northwards?

Or am myself I missing something important?

Except amongst enthusiasts, I doubt the type of train makes any noticeable difference to passenger levels. As for the marginal difference in maximum speeds, on the stretches where 125 can actually be reached, a class 387 would take less than 4 seconds per mile, a time saving that would probably be swallowed up by less time wasted during dwells.

edwin_m · 9 Dec 2019

Merle Haggard said:
But are the Corby trains (5 cars, I think) full & standing at the moment? I didn't think that they were, but would welcome first hand views - it's a long time since I gave up work & commuting from Wellingboro'.
It goes without saying (but I still will!) that if the present service has adequate (seated) capacity then longer trains will not in themselves attract more custom - and ones that have less facilities may have the opposite effect. The present diesel trains could be longer, too - train length is a function of stock availability, not a direct result of electrification. I accept that the present Corby trains are only half the present service.
Regarding the benefits to Bedford, it is of course already electrified and not served only by MML; Bedford stops in the commuting peak were introduced only after National Express gained the franchise and it was admitted (to a colleague) at the time that the reason was ORCATS-related. Presumably the EMR Bedford stops will reduce opportunities for fast Bedford TL services.
In the past, the phrase 'Sparks Effect' has been used to suggest that electrification itself somehow produces an increase in demand. In reality, the electrified lines that demonstrated this effect were ones where the service provided during the dislocation caused by the electrification work itself could be described as dire (I'm particularly thinking of Euston-Lpool-Mcr) and, even if the service had only reverted to the one that applied before the work started, there would have been an increase I'm sure. To the credit of those behind the present scheme the work has not had much impact on the service, at least weekdays, so the 'Sparks Effect' can be measured more without that distortion.
I worry that, if electrification does not produce a massive increase in passenger numbers this may be used as an argument against further projects; I am far from against electrification, indeed I am pleased that the County of my birth has such a high proportion of electrified tracks; only the stretch from about a mile North of Corby to the Welland viaduct and a mile or so around King's Sutton remain to be done, though I accept that these are probably not likely candidates in the near future. Unfortunately, neither are in anything near to marginal constituencies to increase the chances!

It's probably true that the benefits to passengers are relatively modest, as they were in fact on the ECML scheme in the 90s, because an electric saves relatively little time compared with a 125mph diesel. The case was originally made in 2009 on savings in running cost justifying the infrastructure spend - the scheme was said to be financially positive without needing to consider the non-financial benefits. Clearly this will no longer be the case as costs have risen considerably, but on the other hand the decarbonization argument is far more important now than it was then.

cle · 9 Dec 2019

It's a shame that the frequency can't go up further, given the increase in capacity (and speed for stopping electric services) - compared to the GWML and future Crossrail frequency, MML/Thameslink isn't anywhere near as high. I appreciate the demand to EM isn't the same to TV/West/Wales either, but that aside...

I know many operational reasons for it too, but you'd think for all of the four tracking work, and platform reinstatement - you'd get more than a second Corby out of the whole lot. Hopefully in time there will be ways to squeeze some additional services - be they an electric slow to Leicester, another semi Nott/Derby, or these talks of Manchester or Leeds faster services.

MarkyT · 9 Dec 2019

HowardGWR said:
It seems to me that the further electrification of the MML is not hindered by the acquisition of bi-modes. The environmental argument is not damaged by the low mileage that will be obtained by the bi-modes, as they can be cascaded elsewhere, when MML electrification is extended to Sheffield, to lines where partial electrification exists but no current committed project is in progress. Cardiff to Penzance springs to mind, or the XC route. There will be many others.

Or the modular diesel generator rafts and fuel tanks on the AT300s could simply be removed eventually, and perhaps replaced with moderately sized battery banks that could allow comparatively short wiring gaps to continue to exist where expedient in particularly difficult or expensive areas, and provide a means to get passengers to the next station in the event of planned or unexpected isolations.

hwl · 9 Dec 2019

MarkyT said:
Or the modular diesel generator rafts and fuel tanks on the AT300s could simply be removed eventually, and perhaps replaced with moderately sized battery banks that could allow comparatively short wiring gaps to continue to exist where expedient in particularly difficult or expensive areas, and provide a means to get passengers to the next station in the event of planned or unexpected isolations.

It also removes deadline for getting bits of work completed so if a problems is encountered it can be dealt with in a planned low cost way rather than rush at all costs to meet a deadline. The only impact would be on starting to run any bi-mode /electric local services through Leicester / Loughborough etc. in the first instance which isn't on the cards at the moment.
Always worth remembering that more electrification will see the the fuel tanks needing filling less potentially cutting ECS milage and driver requirements and allowing higher unit utilisation in service. (the fuel tanks aren't massive)

4tph is often seen as the tipping point frequency so adding some local services would help there.

In terms of assessments the local air quality issues in Leicester / Loughborough / Nottingham / Derby / Sheffield is something to look for given that this isn't factored in by DfT hence that is something that could change.

ohgoditsjames · 11 Dec 2019

Realistically do you think the electrification for the whole line will be reinstated/are there any rumours to indicate so? If it is and the wires do reach Sheffield the wires could be extended to Doncaster and Leeds. Would certainly allow the removal of many diesel units.

Aictos · 11 Dec 2019

ohgoditsjames said:
Realistically do you think the electrification for the whole line will be reinstated/are there any rumours to indicate so? If it is and the wires do reach Sheffield the wires could be extended to Doncaster and Leeds. Would certainly allow the removal of many diesel units.

If and it’s a big IF the wires do reach Sheffield then it’s common sense to extend to Doncaster and Leeds but at the same time any infill schemes that are created should be completed.

For example, if Sheffield is wired up and you have Huddersfield wired up then why not look at wiring up the Penistone line which would not only provide a electric route for potential diversions but as I understand the gradients are steep and a EMU would be able to tackle the gradients easier then a DMU I believe.

gingertom · 11 Dec 2019

Aictos said:
...... it’s common sense to extend to Doncaster and Leeds but at the same time any infill schemes that are created should be completed.

unfortunately common sense is not something the DfT is blessed with.

Killingworth · 11 Dec 2019

Aictos said:
If and it’s a big IF the wires do reach Sheffield then it’s common sense to extend to Doncaster and Leeds but at the same time any infill schemes that are created should be completed.

For example, if Sheffield is wired up and you have Huddersfield wired up then why not look at wiring up the Penistone line which would not only provide a electric route for potential diversions but as I understand the gradients are steep and a EMU would be able to tackle the gradients easier then a DMU I believe.

One step at a time. Leicester, then Derby and Nottingham, then Sheffield and on to Leeds and Doncaster. That will take until 2035-40 so add ons like Penistone and the busier Hope Valley might come by 2050-60!

Tyne Valley may have a better business case as a diversionary route, although bi-modes make diversionary route electrification less essential.

Aictos · 11 Dec 2019

Killingworth said:
One step at a time. Leicester, then Derby and Nottingham, then Sheffield and on to Leeds and Doncaster. That will take until 2035-40 so add ons like Penistone and the busier Hope Valley might come by 2050-60!

Tyne Valley may have a better business case as a diversionary route, although bi-modes make diversionary route electrification less essential.

I can’t see why it takes so long for OHL schemes to be completed, there should be schemes that are ready to roll once the existing OHL schemes are completed especially as you have the work force who are highly qualified.

To take until 2040 to complete the MML schemes is simply in layman’s terms, the DfT dragging their heels when they should be completed by the mid 2020s.

Meerkat · 11 Dec 2019

Once you have got to Nottingham and Derby wouldn’t it be better to go back through Burton, and through Nuneaton, to Birmingham?
Especially if we are still waiting for HS2 to commit to Sheffield.

ZL exile · 11 Dec 2019

Or you could turn it on it’s head at start electrification infill from the north, ie Doncaster/ Wakefield / Leeds and head south towards Derby whilst the rest of the issues are addressed, this would clean up the air in ‘dirty’ polluted Sheffield, and would still be of use when the Class 804’s enter traffic.

Raul_Duke · 12 Dec 2019

Merle Haggard said:
On the subject of the current electrification, I will make an observation - and expect, as usual, to be shot down in flames. No opinions, just facts & questions.

The work between Bedford and Corby has been considerable - relaying a line from Sharnbrook northwards; electrification of all four tracks; platform reinstatement/extension.
Then, when the details of the new electric train service were announced, we learned that the 'new' electric trains will provide the same frequency (although, to be fair, more even within the hour) as the current service from Kettering, and the present diesel trains are slightly quicker from Corby etc. to London than the new electric ones will be.

I just wonder two things;
How will this encourage an increase in passengers?
Will the Government think that the benefits are so worth the expenditure that there should be even more, Northwards?

Or am myself I missing something important?

I believe Corby and Geddington are slated for some massive massive housing developments as dormitory towns for London (of course) in the not too distant future. Geddington station is rumoured to be being considered for reopening.

This is a rare case of the infrastructure being developed beforehand.

MMLLuton · 15 Dec 2019

Is there any updates regarding the wires south of bedford? Does anyone know when the upgrade for 125mph running will take place considering EMR electrics is suppose to go live at the end of next year?

Bald Rick · 15 Dec 2019

MMLLuton said:
Is there any updates regarding the wires south of bedford? Does anyone know when the upgrade for 125mph running will take place considering EMR electrics is suppose to go live at the end of next year?

A while off yet.

However the EMR electrics won’t be running at 125, as they are not capable of that speed.

MMLLuton · 15 Dec 2019

Bald Rick said:
A while off yet.

However the EMR electrics won’t be running at 125, as they are not capable of that speed.

Of course, I know the 360’s will be 110mph capable but will the wires be ready in that time? Will be interesting to see if the existing headspans will be converted into portals to reduce maintenance and to prevent all lines from being down if there is any damage to the OHLE.

Bald Rick · 15 Dec 2019

MMLLuton said:
Of course, I know the 360’s will be 110mph capable but will the wires be ready in that time? Will be interesting to see if the existing headspans will be converted into portals to reduce maintenance and to prevent all lines from being down if there is any damage to the OHLE.

Definitely won’t be done by the time the 360s arrive. There was an article in Modern Railways a few months back, and that suggested December 2023 at best.

edwin_m · 15 Dec 2019

If the 360s are arriving before their interior refurbishment, they might also be arriving before they get the mods for 110mph operation. The whole fleet needs those before the timetable can be based on 110mph timings, as managing a split fleet would be a nightmare. So I would expect the times to be tightened up in some later year once the fleet and probably also the OLE is modified. This might also include tweaks to the intercity times if they have to run on diesel south of Bedford initially.

MMLLuton · 15 Dec 2019

If that is the case I would keep some of the class 222’s, perhaps the 7 and 5 cars until the wires have been upgraded down south and to keep extra capacity and that would allow the introduction of the bi modes and allow all HST’s to be retired from the MML. Perhaps transfer the 4 car Meridians to XC and refurb the remaining until the bimodes can run at 125 on wires down south.

edwin_m · 15 Dec 2019

MMLLuton said:
If that is the case I would keep some of the class 222’s, perhaps the 7 and 5 cars until the wires have been upgraded down south and to keep extra capacity and that would allow the introduction of the bi modes and allow all HST’s to be retired from the MML. Perhaps transfer the 4 car Meridians to XC and refurb the remaining until the bimodes can run at 125 on wires down south.

The HSTs are going next year and the 180s and 222s between them have to run the entire intercity service until the bi-modes arrive. This is being discussed in another thread.

Merle Haggard · 15 Dec 2019

AM9 said:
Except amongst enthusiasts, I doubt the type of train makes any noticeable difference to passenger levels.

Bear in mind that the differences between the present and proposed replacement trains are as follows;
In Standard; 2 + 2 vs 3+2 seating
No trolley service.
In First; 2 + 1 reclining vs 2 + 2 seating possible fixed rake
No at seat service or cooked breakfast on morning commuter trains.
Journey time; the same/slower, with more stops.
Not gangwayed, so having to choose which 4 coaches to travel in - if it's standing-room only in the set you choose, that's tough 'til the next station.
the non-enthusiast passengers might notice the type of train in terms of change in service level that it brings. Whether they'll move elsewhere is another matter.

When the Northampton commuter service hit a nadir around 1989 I started to drive to Wellingboro' instead. I live in Northampton, but the extra distance was only about 1 1/2 miles and I found a lot of previously familiar faces had made the same change. Maybe the reverse will happen with the new trains. As I said up-thread, I can't see how this change can encourage an increase in passenger useage and indeed these changes might produce the opposite.

I am not negative about change; when I was spotting on Wellingborough station 60 years ago I would have been absolutely staggered if I'd been offered a ride in a time machine to see the current improvements particularly after so many years of under-investment. It's just surprising to me that, after all that investment, progress has not all been in a forward direction.

edwin_m · 16 Dec 2019

3+2 seating in Standard is reported to be only temporary until the trains are refitted.

Not sure how often you actually see the trolley between Wellingborough and London, especially if full and standing.

MML electrification: catering for passenger growth and could we see extensions of the wires?

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member