Bingham NET Extension Proposals

[HSTEd]

I can just about see how a tram extension to Bingham perhaps might be an idea, but I just can't understand the idea of any extension beyond Bingham through miles of sparsely populated countryside to Grantham.

Once you go to Bingham, if you truly use a tram train solution - there is little reason not to simply go the entire length of the line.
The only costs associated with going further will be new platforms/tram stop modifications, and relatively low specification 750V overhead electrification.

Other larger systems already referred to around Manchester or Newcastle link large urban areas not miles of rural countryside. Comparing with Manchester, Bingham, Bottesford and Grantham do not really compare with Bury, Oldham, Rochdale, Ashton, Salford etc.

There is something of a false dichotomy here where people are assuming that because a tram is associated with urban travel it must only be used for that.

What I am proposing is to use tram trains to connect the regional services to the centre of the city rather than leaving them at a station that is clearly unable to cope with them as it is - less alone the service improvements necessary in future if the railway is to not be rendered irrelevant.

They are also within the same local authority of Greater Manchester but a line to Grantham would involve Nottingham City, Nottinghamshire, Leicestershire and Lincolnshire. It just won't happen.

Ah local government, so tax money from Grantham can be bled on vanity projects and transport improvements in Lincoln - a city I (having lived in Grantham my entire life) have been too maybe a half dozen times.

Both Luas and NET use Alstom Citadis, albeit different versions, so the platform height may be similar. However the Network Rail gauge I referred to earlier is the same width down to 270mm.

I think interlaced track is only used at one place for tram-platform stepping distance purposes, that being Baunatal near Kassel. It would add a couple of million to the cost of a tram-train stop.

If the loading gauge width requirement is only 2.7m for the platform that is only a difference of something like 30cm, which is only about six inches per side.
A six inch loading bridge doesn't seem unreasonable especially if it folds in the middle as well as downwards, or if it slides out from under the floor. I wonder if this problem has come up anywhere else.

Grantham-Nottingham transport demand is currently suppressed by the awful train service and the huge traffic problems in Grantham caused by the lack of an A52 bypass. While I doubt the councils insane Millau-lite viaduct plan will ever come to fruition, if it does then that constraint will ber emoved and we will end up with A52 being enormously heavily loaded all the time.
If there is no serious public transport solution at that time then political pressure will build for a dual carriageway all the way, at which point the train is done because it will never be able to compete.

 

[ashworth]

Sorry to say it but I think this is all getting a bit into fantasy land. I don't see anything like enough demand for any more than an occasional bus between Bingham and Grantham. With Grantham in Lincolnshire and sleepy Bottesford in Leicestershire I think we can safely kill off any ideas that far away from Nottingham.

I was so relieved to read the above that was posted at almost exactly the same time as my post. It was so encouraging that someone else was beginning to feel the same as me about this thread.

 

[HSTEd]

Why would you want a bus between Bingham and Grantham?
Why would someone go from Bingham to Grantham when they can go the other direction from Nottingham. Nottingham is 20-30 times the size.
And why would anyone in Grantham want to go to Bingham other than on the way to Nottingham?

If there is any major programme of improvements on the A52 then non-road public transport (if it stays as is) in the corridor is dead, dead, dead. And that includes the existing railway.

 

[kevjs]

Why would you want a bus between Bingham and Grantham?
Why would someone go from Bingham to Grantham when they can go the other direction from Nottingham. Nottingham is 20-30 times the size.
And why would anyone in Grantham want to go to Bingham other than on the way to Nottingham?

If there is any major programme of improvements on the A52 then non-road public transport (if it stays as is) in the corridor is dead, dead, dead. And that includes the existing railway.

Never say never though - remember the A453 was dualled and NET Line 2 was built at the same time...

If the housing proposed for the land between (and including) RAF Newton and Bingham ever goes ahead then would it not make sense for a tram train to turn off at Bingham and head that way http://www.rushcliffe.gov.uk/media/.../Amendments to Policies Map_final_low res.pdf Digital Pages 8 & 9 - you are pretty much trebling the size of Bingham. There's also the proposed developments at Tollerton/Gamston which would be adding pressure to the A52

 

[HSTEd]

Never say never though - remember the A453 was dualled and NET Line 2 was built at the same time...

Line two is more a loop that happens to end at the A453 than running directly parallel to it though.

If the housing proposed for the land between (and including) RAF Newton and Bingham ever goes ahead then would it not make sense for a tram train to turn off at Bingham and head that way http://www.rushcliffe.gov.uk/media/.../Amendments to Policies Map_final_low res.pdf Digital Pages 8 & 9 - you are pretty much trebling the size of Bingham. There's also the proposed developments at Tollerton/Gamston which would be adding pressure to the A52

Well the first development (page 8) puts Bingham Railway station at the centre of super-Bingham, so not sure it would lead to a big business case for the line to diverge from the railway at that position.

 

[edwin_m]

Line two is more a loop that happens to end at the A453 than running directly parallel to it though.

Having a decent dual carriageway rather than a congested two-lane that most people avoided at all costs would have helped with patronage at the P&R I think (especially as there was no extra highway capacity provided over Clifton Bridge). However it wasn't planned that way - the two projects were separate and just happened to finish at about the same time.

 

[kevjs]

Having a decent dual carriageway rather than a congested two-lane that most people avoided at all costs would have helped with patronage at the P&R I think

About 9 months after launching I remember reading that the figures were below expectation - the journey time savings on the A453 being large enough that significant time was being saved on the first leg and NET Line 2 didn't offer enough savings to warrant switching to the tram for the last leg (especially as the outbound at the end of the day would be even faster)

 

[HSTEd]

In either case, this corridor is symptomatic of lack of infrastructure investment across most of England over the last 20 years.

EDIT:

Turns out a 2.4m wide tram and 2.7m wide loading gauge, that is only 150mm to each side additional.

150mm plus the normal 75mm clearance distance normally provided at tram platforms, would allow a distance of 225mm, even if the platform obeyed the loading gauge.
That is actually compliant since the maximum horizontal platform distance on National Rail is 275mm.
Although some sort of slide out or flip down ramp would be preferable, or using gauntlet track.
(How much does a single track-gauntlet-single track section actually cost? It has no frogs or anything like that as the rails never actually cross over each other.)

 

[kevjs]

Might not be Bingham, but stumbled on some interesting proposals being investigated as part of the HS2 links....

http://www.emcouncils.gov.uk/write/NET_Extensions_-_presentation.pdf 13 September 2016 via http://www.emcouncils.gov.uk/HS2-Strategic-Board

NET To HS2
1. Obviously Toton P&R to HS2 Hub (I can't imagine this not being built!)

Short Extensions in Long Eaton area
2. HS2 Hub to A52 P&R next to J25 - 3.6km, 5 mins, £139m
3. HS2 Hub to Long Eaton (Market Place) - 3km, 3mins, £105m

Derby
4. HS2 Hub to Derby via A52 - 15.8km, 18mins, £682m
5. HS2 Hub to Derby via Canal Corridor (extension of 2.) 16.5km, 28mins, £402m

East Midlands Airport
Both could be extensions of either 2. or 3. (and presumably 4 but not indicated)
5. HS2 Hub to EMA via Castle Donington, 18.2km, 33mins, £388m
6. HS2 Hub to EMA alongside M1, 15.9km, 28mins, £346m

Gedling and A52 P&R at RSPCA
Via Cattle Market, Daleside Road, Colwick, with a New Bridge over Trent for RoT
7. Gedling, 9.6km, 21mins, £212m
8. RSPCA, 8.6km, 17mins, £202m

Some journey times
UoN and QMC from Derby - 52mins
UoN and QMC from Gedling - 36mins
Nottingham to Derby (Stations) - 61mins
Nottingham to HS2 Hub - 33mins

HS2 Hub, Long Eaton, M1/A52 P&R and Gedling/A52
Radcliffe-on-Trent P&R route options ready to be taken
to business case assessment
 Derby options potentially promising. Further
discussions with local interested parties to define way
forward.
 Route to EMA requires further consideration to identify
best options

Quite a few options in the Derby area including a rather convoluted route via Infinity Park