It would be nonsensical to not grade-separate Wigston North Jn and four-track from there to Syston as part of the MML electrification programme.

[Halish Railway]

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

ISTR they will plow on with electrification and see how much the line is used and worry about grade separation and other route improvements later.

Grade separation at Wigston North Jn is very dependent on other schemes happening envisioned by Midland Connect / Midland Rail Hub / whatever we’re calling it today, those being the Nuneaton Dive-under and the Bordesley chords. If these schemes happen it could turn the Nuneaton to Leicester line into a very busy railway.

Present usage:
1tph Birmingham New Street to Stansted Airport.
1tph Birmingham New Street to Leicester
+ Freight paths (can someone enlighten me on how many paths/hour are currently available for freight?)

Potential future usage:
2tph Birmingham New Street to Leicester and beyond (fast)
2tph Birmingham Moor Street to Leicester (stopper)
2tph Coventry (and beyond) to Nottingham
+ Ideally more freight paths

I do think that given the aspiration of starting construction on the Nuneaton dive-under (2025 for construction starting is what I’ve read), it would be nonsensical to not grade-separate Wigston North Jn and four-track from there to Syston as part of the MML electrification programme.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I do think that given the aspiration of starting construction on the Nuneaton dive-under (2025 for construction starting is what I’ve read), it would be nonsensical to not grade-separate Wigston North Jn and four-track from there to Syston as part of the MML electrification programme.

FWIW so do I - but money is tight and these schemes will have to wait.

 

[snowball]

the aspiration of starting construction on the Nuneaton dive-under (2025 for construction starting is what I’ve read)

Sounds implausible. Does it require a T&W order? Has an application been submitted? Has anybody agreed to fund it?

 

[Bald Rick]

Sounds implausible. Does it require a T&W order? Has an application been submitted? Has anybody agreed to fund it?

Yes, no and no.

I can’t see it happening.

 

[The Planner]

I do think that given the aspiration of starting construction on the Nuneaton dive-under (2025 for construction starting is what I’ve read), it would be nonsensical to not grade-separate Wigston North Jn and four-track from there to Syston as part of the MML electrification programme.

Don't believe what you read, there is no commitment for the dive under yet.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Is there enough space where the Wigston line joins the MML for a diver under?

 

[Bald Rick]

Is there enough space where the Wigston line joins the MML for a diver under?

Flyover would be substantially easier and therefore cheaper. There’s not much space.

Don't believe what you read, there is no commitment for the dive under yet.

I can’t see it happening. It’s a lot of money, for (frankly) little benefit.

There’s a reason why we dropped it in WCRM days!

 

[zwk500]

Flyover would be substantially easier and therefore cheaper. There’s not much space.



I can’t see it happening. It’s a lot of money, for (frankly) little benefit.

There’s a reason why we dropped it in WCRM days!

Indeed, I'd not heard anything serious about Nuneaton for a long time. Wigston I thought had a kind of gentleman's agreement something did need to be done, but there wasn't yet consensus on what form of grade-separation it would take.

 

[Nottingham59]

Potential future usage:
2tph Birmingham New Street to Leicester and beyond (fast)
2tph Birmingham Moor Street to Leicester (stopper)
2tph Coventry (and beyond) to Nottingham
+ Ideally more freight paths

Even that much extra usage isn't going to require grade separation at Wigston North, as far as I can see. The 2tph Coventry-Nottingham will stay on the Western side of the alignment. The 2tph BMO-LEI stoppers will presumably terminate at Leicester, so can stay on that side also. The 2tph BHM-LEI and beyond will (presumably) be crossing the MML traffic, but that is only 1tph more than the Cross-Country traffic now.

The original rationale for a twin-track overpass at Wigston North was to allow greatly increased freight flows on the Felixstowe to Nuneaton route to cross increasing MML traffic without conflicts. But F2N growth depends on investment in the Ely area than doesn't seem to be happening. And current plans for HS2 imply that MML traffic through Leicester is going to decrease (or terminate at Leicester), not increase.

What I do think will be needed is more platforms at Leicester. And four tracks between Wigston and Syston. The current traffic all fits through just two tracks in places, so four tracks should be plenty.

 

[wallan]

New Rail Conected Freight Terminal planned next to Junc 2 of the M69

 

[CdBrux]

I presume should the HS2 east spur to East Midlands come about some current MML services through the area would reduce, would this make any difference?

 

[Glenn1969]

Presume that won't happen for at least 15 years so has no bearing on current planning. If there is any in the current financial climate

 

[Nottingham59]

Wigston I thought had a kind of gentleman's agreement something did need to be done

My understanding that the decision to be made was whether to plan the next stage of the MML electrification on the basis of the track layout as it currently is, or to develop plans for three/four tracks north of Wigston, before deciding where the OHLE masts are to be located.

Though as far as I can see, it's pretty obvious where the third and fourth tracks would have to go, especially as they had four tracks on the original alignment.

 

[StewLane]

Is my memory playing tricks?
Was there not a suggestion of switching the freight lines from west side to eat side happening north of Leicester?
The main lines to use the east side island platform at Leicester and the slows using the west side island.

 

[zwk500]

Is my memory playing tricks?
Was there not a suggestion of switching the freight lines from west side to eat side happening north of Leicester?
The main lines to use the east side island platform at Leicester and the slows using the west side island.

I suspect every possible configuration has been suggested at one point. Part of the difficulty is that the freight traffic is on the east side to the North of Leicester station and on the west side south of it. A flyover at Wigston North to separate freight and passenger would be lovely, but then any traffic off the Burton line is stranded on the wrong side. Similarly, if you provide the fast lines in the centre then you create a flat conflict north of Leicester station with Leicester LIP and eastbound traffic wanting the Peterborough line.

 

[Nottingham59]

Was there not a suggestion of switching the freight lines from west side to eat side happening north of Leicester?

I suspect every possible configuration has been suggested at one point

See the Leicester Strategic Advice here:

https://sacuksprodnrdigital0001.blob.core.windows.net/regional-long-term-planning/Eastern/Leicester%20Area%20Strategic%20Advice%202021.pdf

It goes into some detail on the options.

8.01 Recommendations
The study has identified Recommendation 1 as a key,
‘no regrets’ intervention and four further interventions
that are recommended for progression in parallel to
enable future passenger and freight demand growth,
support stakeholder aspirations and promote a
high-performing railway, connecting the Leicester
area to people and markets across the country.

Recommendation 1: Four tracking between Wigston
North Junction and Leicester Station is progressed to
SOBC immediately with a view to delivering benefits
as soon as practicable.