MML Electrification: progress updates

[Chris125]

Anyone know where the first masts are?

You can see some of the masts in this video alongside the A43

 

[Flying Phil]

It's never been quadruple between Glendon and the southern edge of Leicester, although I think there were some loops that no longer exist and another line ran alongside at Market Harbororough but the two were pretty much separate operationally. The line via Corby provided an alternative for some north-south trains, including a quicker route into Nottingham via what is now the Old Dalby test track.

Thanks Edwin - I really should have noticed that the bridge South of Market Harborough Station is only three tracks wide!

 

[edwin_m]

Thanks Edwin - I really should have noticed that the bridge South of Market Harborough Station is only three tracks wide!

Quadrupling it is however floated as an idea in the East Midlands Route Strategy - which tends to confirm my original point* that it's something of a bottleneck.

*At least I think it was here I made that point, but I don't have time to wade back and check right now.

 

[InTheEastMids]

It's never been quadruple between Glendon and the southern edge of Leicester, although I think there were some loops that no longer exist and another line ran alongside at Market Harbororough but the two were pretty much separate operationally. The line via Corby provided an alternative for some north-south trains, including a quicker route into Nottingham via what is now the Old Dalby test track.

Quadrupling it is however floated as an idea in the East Midlands Route Strategy - which tends to confirm my original point* that it's something of a bottleneck.

*At least I think it was here I made that point, but I don't have time to wade back and check right now.

There was, for a time, a 1971 cab ride from STP to MHR on YouTube, I think it was this one, although seems to have been taken down now.
http://www.videoscene.co.uk/vintage-cab-ride-part-1-st-pancras-market-harborough.html

Based on having seen that, I am pretty sure Edwin_m is correct, it has always been mostly a 2 track railway, but with some 3 track/extended passing loop sections between Desborough and Little Bowden, and between Kibworth and Kilby Bridge. The 4-track section at Harborough was effectively 2 separate 2-track railways.

I agree it's a bottleneck, but in terms of improving capacity I think there's quite a bit that should be gained from 260m passenger trains, state-of-the-art signalling and growth should be offset by a significant loss of passengers to HS2 if/when it reaches Toton.

 

[edwin_m]

I agree it's a bottleneck [Kettering to Leicester], but in terms of improving capacity I think there's quite a bit that should be gained from 260m passenger trains, state-of-the-art signalling and growth should be offset by a significant loss of passengers to HS2 if/when it reaches Toton.

The problem is the diversity of destinations. It's necessary to provide a reasonable service for Leicester, Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield and for the intermediate stations. I would argue that HS2 only drops Sheffield off that list, as Leicester doesn't benefit at all (southward at least) and many people will prefer fast trains to Nottingham and Derby city centres rather than a change at Toton which saves 10min at the very most. There is also the potential for direct trains to Toton from MML stations.

Thus I think, after HS2 phase 2, the MML north of Kettering needs to keep a mix of fast services serving all three cities and semi-fasts linking the smaller stations and connecting intermediate stations to Sheffield and Toton. This mix, plus the transfer of Sheffield/Chesterfield and some Derby/Nottingham passengers to HS2, suggests relatively frequent but relatively short trains.

 

[InTheEastMids]

MML 4-tracking update

Travelled to London and back today. Quite a lot of plain line, sleepers and track down, especially the first mile or 2 North from Sharnbrook jcn, and from Wellingborough North freight yard to Burton Latimer (Weetabix)

Looks like the existing line still needs to be moved over in lots of places, no attempt to do much around crossings, and in some places the new line terminates abruptly because of a signal post.

Didn't see any evidence of electrification, seems to be happening entire North of Glendon Junctions

 

[Rob F]

Didn't see any evidence of electrification, seems to be happening entire North of Glendon Junctions

This is a good idea. It makes the scheme harder to cancel or reduce in scope further if you do the extremities first!

Rob

 

[daodao]

The problem is the diversity of destinations. It's necessary to provide a reasonable service for Leicester, Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield and for the intermediate stations. I would argue that HS2 only drops Sheffield off that list, as Leicester doesn't benefit at all (southward at least) and many people will prefer fast trains to Nottingham and Derby city centres rather than a change at Toton which saves 10min at the very most. There is also the potential for direct trains to Toton from MML stations.

Thus I think, after HS2 phase 2, the MML north of Kettering needs to keep a mix of fast services serving all three cities and semi-fasts linking the smaller stations and connecting intermediate stations to Sheffield and Toton. This mix, plus the transfer of Sheffield/Chesterfield and some Derby/Nottingham passengers to HS2, suggests relatively frequent but relatively short trains.

The HS2 proposals to serve the East Midlands and beyond seem poorly thought out. Toton Parkway station in particular is neither fish nor fowl.

There should be HS2 services to Derby/Chesterfield/Sheffield, via the existing main line from just south of Derby. The NE and Yorkshire (except for Sheffield) should continue to be served from King's Cross. Leicester and Nottingham could have been served by HS2 by reusing the old ex-GC line to just south of Leicester and then the Midland route, but if not, they should continue to be served from St Pancras.

 

[edwin_m]

The HS2 proposals to serve the East Midlands and beyond seem poorly thought out. Toton Parkway station in particular is neither fish nor fowl.

There should be HS2 services to Derby/Chesterfield/Sheffield, via the existing main line from just south of Derby. The NE and Yorkshire (except for Sheffield) should continue to be served from King's Cross. Leicester and Nottingham could have been served by HS2 by reusing the old ex-GC line to just south of Leicester and then the Midland route, but if not, they should continue to be served from St Pancras.

If you wanted to do that it would be better to put in a connection near East Midlands Parkway to serve both Derby and Nottingham without having to re-open 50 miles of the GC main line, much of which has now vanished and which if restored would be not much faster than the MML is today. A connection is already planned further north to serve Chesterfield and Sheffield. But by your suggestion the Sheffield connection would be the northernmost limit of the eastern leg of HS2, which does leave Leeds rather out in the cold.

 

[jfowkes]

Network Rail posted this video yesterday:

The zoom-in on the map is depressing.

 

[Senex]

Network Rail posted this video yesterday:

The zoom-in on the map is depressing.

Is it "Midland Main Line Upgrade" any more, or is it "Extension of MML Outer Suburban Electrification" for the benefit of London commuters, i.e. a London & South East investment, not something for the East Midlands and South Yorkshire? See Roger Ford's latest "Informed Sources" for the "benefits" of the bi-modes to be provided for those north of Kettering.

 

[jyte]

The zoom-in on the map is depressing.

Wow you're not wrong, a serious hatchet job has been taken to this project in how aggressively it [the electrification part] has been de-scoped, and I thought the GWEP was bad.

(edited for clarity)

 

[snowball]

As far as I know the track improvements have not been de-scoped.

 

[Jan]

See Roger Ford's latest "Informed Sources" for the "benefits" of the bi-modes to be provided for those north of Kettering.

Or his submission to the Welsh Affairs Committee.

 

[Senex]

Or his submission to the Welsh Affairs Committee.

Indeed — that's powerful stuff!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Indeed — that's powerful stuff!

Wow - way to go Roger - If I were PM -you would be a consultant to me, paid handsomely and knighted.

 

[snowball]

I note that one of the subtitles referred to work continuing till 2020. I was under the impression that electric trains would be running in December 2019 (though I would not regard myself a fount of all Network Rail knowledge). Does anybody have a better idea of the anticipated completion?

This is a conspiracy vs cockup type argument. Did they simply get the dates wrong /misinterpretation e.g. electric trains running from 01/01/2020, or has the project slipped and they've just unofficially announced it.

Given NR's record on electrification, you've got to suspect that it's the last of these, and the project timescales have slipped again.

NatGrid can't get the substation work finished till 2020 so work will continue to 2020 even after some electric trains are running.

It seems that when the Enhancements Delivery Plan Update came out in early Oct, everyone in this thread failed to notice that there has been in effect a year's new slippage! I only realised it when I saw the new Modern Railways, page 11, just now, so I looked back at the EDP and there it is. Infrastructure available by Aug 2020, first timetabled use Dec 2020.

 

[Senex]

Yes - and the mileposts through Nottingham run "backwards" to this day.

Because Midland mileposts follow the shortest direct route from London St Pancras (except on the West Branch). At a trailing junction a new set begins. So the mileposts run from Kettering through Manton and Melton to Nottingham. There is a zero at Manton for the Peterborough line, and at Melton this set meets the set measured via Syston Jn. From Nottingham the series continues via Lenton Jn and Radfor to Trowell, where it stops on meeting the shorter series via Leicester and Trent.

 

[richieb1971]

Not much 4 tracking progress yet.

 

[Flying Phil]

Thanks for those pictures Ritchieb - we traveled to London yesterday and on our return there were workers on track in Kettering Station and a works train pulled by a class 37. There had been a track tamper parked up in the Market Harborough station spur (which is just a single spur now, as the point and other track has been lifted.)

 

[richieb1971]

I spoke a manager of one of the temporary plants at Sharnbrook from which all the action happens from. He did show me that right next to Sharnbrook viaduct they are ready to receive the raw materials (gantries etc). A big patch of empty space is now allocated for this (access is at the northern end of the viaduct on the slow line side). There is also one of these plants at Lower Farm Road in Bromham where both sides of the track are (newly) fenced off for network rail.

Apparently more heavy work is due to happen in 2 weeks time.

I also noticed there is much more "rail photography" friendly locations, as some fields have had their trees completely removed. One section on a public right of way had bushes for 1/4 mile. You walk along side the track now (albeit at a lower level than the track) for the whole section which is completely clear of bushes and trees. Which is pretty cool.

 

[47802]

Indeed — that's powerful stuff!

That's not what I would describe it as, more like a shoddy biased piece of work from someone who should know better in my view.

He describes the performance on Diesel slower well ok yes but seems to fail to mention the fact that it wasn't in the spec that they should be as fast on Diesel so of course they are slower, but we have already seen there is some flexibly in the design to run faster on diesel than originally specified.

A weight penalty and higher costs of the actual train well yes of course that's true, but then you have to look at that in relation to the alternatives, the cost of electrifying all the routes you need to run on, possible electrification timescales, possible connecting services instead of through trains to some destinations, Diesel dragging of EMU's or Diesel under the wires, overall not impressed but then again I gather Mr Ford is fairly Anti Bi-mode anyway.

Plus of course where's the mention that if Notwork Rail hadn't have gone so crazy over budget on GWR electrification we probably wouldn't even need to discuss bi-modes for MML

 

[ivanhoe]

I hope as a country we can learn from the debacle of the GW Electrification and try and bring best practice into the conversion of other lines in the future.Im sure there are plenty of best practice which NR could call upon throughout Europe. Bi mode should only be seen as a temporary fix ,with a few exceptions, with the short to medium term aim of Electrification. It is right to question bi mode as a fix for the MML and indeed Cardiff to Swansea.

 

[47802]

I hope as a country we can learn from the debacle of the GW Electrification and try and bring best practice into the conversion of other lines in the future.Im sure there are plenty of best practice which NR could call upon throughout Europe. Bi mode should only be seen as a temporary fix ,with a few exceptions, with the short to medium term aim of Electrification. It is right to question bi mode as a fix for the MML and indeed Cardiff to Swansea.

My view is there is some difference in argument between the MML and Cardiff - Swansea. Cardiff-Swansea was originally meant to be Diesel anyway and IEP ordered accordingly, and then the whole project being so far behind schedule that all the trains need to be Bi-mode probably alters things somewhat in that you were having the Bi-mode trains anyway.

As far as MML goes Electrification to Corby seems reasonable to me, the rest of the route can be looked at latter probably post Grayling, the question then is whether it is better to get Bi-modes for the whole route beyond Kettering as Grayling seems to be suggesting, or would it be better to just to get Bi-modes for Nottingham and keep 222 for Sheffield.

I'm not saying that Bi-modes are the best perm solution for all routes but it seems to me to have some benefits in that it allows electrification to be done in stages and still get significant benefit, and it can add resilience in the event of Line Blockage, Overhead Line damage etc.

 

[snowball]

Cardiff-Swansea was originally meant to be Diesel anyway

Cardiff-Swansea electrification was included in the original announcement by Adonis in summer 2009.

 

[47802]

Cardiff-Swansea electrification was included in the original announcement by Adonis in summer 2009.

Well yes but then it was reviewed and deferred and was the last to finally given the go-ahead. In any event you have the situation where you have the Bi-modes regardless so its not quite the same as well if we don't electrify to Swansea we will have to build Bi-modes which was the main point I was making, and correct if I'm wrong but I am under the impression that the original IEP order was placed on the basis of Cardiff-Swansea not being electrified.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I'm not saying that Bi-modes are the best perm solution for all routes but it seems to me to have some benefits in that it allows electrification to be done in stages and still get significant benefit, and it can add resilience in the event of Line Blockage, Overhead Line damage etc.

I completely agree

 

[edwin_m]

He describes the performance on Diesel slower well ok yes but seems to fail to mention the fact that it wasn't in the spec that they should be as fast on Diesel so of course they are slower, but we have already seen there is some flexibly in the design to run faster on diesel than originally specified.

Fairly unlikely that the performance of a diesel would ever be the same as that of an electric, especially at that sort of speed. Trying to achieve it ends up with a very heavy and uneconomical unit, aka a Voyager. And savings of 20min quoted by Grayling are pure codswallop, only achievable by taking out stops and with the same stopping pattern the electrics would have saved more.

A weight penalty and higher costs of the actual train well yes of course that's true, but then you have to look at that in relation to the alternatives, the cost of electrifying all the routes you need to run on, possible electrification timescales, possible connecting services instead of through trains to some destinations, Diesel dragging of EMU's or Diesel under the wires, overall not impressed but then again I gather Mr Ford is fairly Anti Bi-mode anyway.

Plus of course where's the mention that if Notwork Rail hadn't have gone so crazy over budget on GWR electrification we probably wouldn't even need to discuss bi-modes for MML

That's the whole issue. MML had a good business case for electrification in 2009, but what we don't know is whether the cost overruns on GWML would have been replicated on MML or not. The sorts of cost GWML is running up aren't intrinsic to electrification - Denmark is apparently achieving it at the same cost as the ECML in real terms.

I think it's fair to say that Roger Ford's view of bi-modes represents that of the industry as a whole, with the exception of those who have a specific reason to support them. Ian Walmsley is saying the same thing in the December issue of Modern Railways.

 

[47802]

Fairly unlikely that the performance of a diesel would ever be the same as that of an electric, especially at that sort of speed. Trying to achieve it ends up with a very heavy and uneconomical unit, aka a Voyager. And savings of 20min quoted by Grayling are pure codswallop, only achievable by taking out stops and with the same stopping pattern the electrics would have saved more. .

Depends on what's required and specified at the end of the day, and yes maybe Graylings quoted saving may only be achievable by taking stops out but then isn't that the whole idea of the half hourly service to Corby!.

That's the whole issue. MML had a good business case for electrification in 2009, but what we don't know is whether the cost overruns on GWML would have been replicated on MML or not. The sorts of cost GWML is running up aren't intrinsic to electrification - Denmark is apparently achieving it at the same cost as the ECML in real terms.

I think it's fair to say that Roger Ford's view of bi-modes represents that of the industry as a whole, with the exception of those who have a specific reason to support them. Ian Walmsley is saying the same thing in the December issue of Modern Railways.

I don't doubt MML had a good electrification case but when Notwork Rail P*** all the money away then I think questions with regard to future electrification need to be asked. In a lot cases if you get improved performance on Electric then the Bi-mode doesn't need to have the same performance on Diesel, ok against a 222 this may be more difficult for the current spec AT300's but then we don't actually know what is proposed for MML and for those that don't like Bi-modes what's your alternative? other than full electrification which the government is rightly in my view not funding at present.

 

[Kettledrum]

As far as MML goes Electrification to Corby seems reasonable to me, the rest of the route can be looked at latter probably post Grayling, the question then is whether it is better to get Bi-modes for the whole route beyond Kettering as Grayling seems to be suggesting, or would it be better to just to get Bi-modes for Nottingham and keep 222 for Sheffield.

I'm not saying that Bi-modes are the best perm solution for all routes but it seems to me to have some benefits in that it allows electrification to be done in stages and still get significant benefit, and it can add resilience in the event of Line Blockage, Overhead Line damage etc.

Doing electrification in stages is really sensible and should have been planned as such from the start. The idea of doing the Great Western in one long go, was extremely ill-advised. The MML lends itself to being done in stages, and had it been done first, before the Great Western, then perhaps lessons would have been learnt before the money had all been spent. The most disappointing thing about Grayling is that he has simply cancelled the MML electrification north of Kettering, instead of a more phased approach to doing it in stages. History wlil judge him badly - it's a poor decision and he will go down in history as an unsuccessful transport secretary.