MML Electrification: progress updates

[Nottingham59]

The design and access statement for the planning application does define the NR compound position as being the blue coloured equipment lineside between the grid compound and the track, it’s shown in grey in my earlier attachment:

That's right. It has taken many years to get this far towards getting a 400kV feeder at Braybrooke. NR, who are paying for this National Grid connection, have agreed to the NG site boundary which doesn't seem to leave enough space for the the lineside ATFS except where it will forever block reinstatement of the Desborough passing loop.

And yet, the railway industry is saying EWR needs a 6-track railway north of Bedford to allow future freight growth on the MML. Just how is that growth going to be accommodated?

 

[Bald Rick]

And yet, the railway industry is saying EWR needs a 6-track railway north of Bedford to allow future freight growth on the MML. Just how is that growth going to be accommodated?

Via Corby.

 

[Nottingham59]

Via Corby

Let's hope so!

 

[59CosG95]

Via Corby.

Absolutely - even though some freights run via Market Harborough, there doesn't have to be a loop everywhere. The one from Kilby Bridge to Wigston is bi-directional.
Besides, freights then were much slower than freights now, so more loops were required.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Absolutely - even though some freights run via Market Harborough, there doesn't have to be a loop everywhere. The one from Kilby Bridge to Wigston is bi-directional.
Besides, freights then were much slower than freights now, so more loops were required.

In any normal circumstances a southbound freight that has been let out behind a nippier passenger train from Knighton or Kilby Bridge will never see it again (even with a Market Harborough call) and especially with the new alignment at MH get a good 'run' at Desborough Bank.

(I thought that the 'third line' solum had already been compromised by the A6 Desborough Bypass years ago but perhaps someone in NR can confirm or otherwise.)

 

[swt_passenger]

Via Corby.

Seems to be not much worse than the WCML four tracking being separate for all that distance around Northampton, I suppose.

 

[zwk500]

Seems to be not much worse than the WCML four tracking being separate for all that distance around Northampton, I suppose.

Exactly, and has the advantage of avoiding Leicester altogether if routing via Loughborough.

 

[Nottingham59]

the 'third line' solum had already been compromised by the A6 Desborough Bypass years ago

It may well have been, but that still leaves 4km between Little Bowden, where the old loop finished and the A6. The ATFS at Braybrooke is half way along this stretch.

But I wouldn't advocate building a main road bridge wider, to preserve an alignment. That would cost £££. I'm saying they should have planned to locate the ATFS some 5m further away from the existing track to leave space, just in case, at almost zero cost.

 

[zwk500]

It may well have been, but that still leaves 4km between Little Bowden, where the old loop finished and the A6. The ATFS at Braybrooke is half way along this stretch.

But I wouldn't make a main road bridge wider, to preserve an alignment. That would cost £££. I'm advocating building the ATFS some 5m further away from the existing track to leave space, just in case, at almost zero cost.

A freight loop requires 775m standage + signal standback + curvature for the points in and out, total length 1.5km or so. Putting the loop over two sections increases the cost for no real benefit, and putting the ATFS 5m further back means you have to buy the land to do so. I notice in the plan @swt_passenger posted in post #4,290 that the area between the substation and ATFS is filled with an access road and Flood mitigation pond, so you're buying additional land for at least 1 of them to move to accommodate the empty strip for a freight loop that won't ever be built.

Northbound freight can be regulated on the Slows before Kettering, Southbound freight at Knighton Jn if it really needed to run via Market Harborough.

 

[Nottingham59]

the area between the substation and ATFS is filled with an access road and Flood mitigation pond, so you're buying additional land for at least 1 of them to move

The access road and pond haven't been built yet, but I agree with you it's too late to change the plans now. But remember, Network Rail is paying for this 400kV substation, and they could have specified it, at the early design stage, to allow the space. The cost of purchasing an extra few square metres of farmland would have been negligible.

But it's a moot point. The design is done now.

 

[zwk500]

The access road and pond haven't been built yet, but I agree with you it's too late to change the plans now. But remember, Network Rail is paying for this 400kV substation, and they could have specified it, at the early design stage, to allow the space. The cost of purchasing an extra few square metres of farmland would have been negligible.

Sometimes it can seem that nothing's negligible in a business case involving NR! And not all square metres of farmland are of the same value to the railway or farmer.

But it's a moot point. The design is done now.

Indeed.

 

[Class 170101]

Absolutely - even though some freights run via Market Harborough, there doesn't have to be a loop everywhere. The one from Kilby Bridge to Wigston is bi-directional.
Besides, freights then were much slower than freights now, so more loops were required.

But don't forget the passenger trains are also much faster now than before. upto 125 vice upto 110 and greater acceleration with Class 180s and 222s compared to Class 45s, HSTs and Class 170s of before.

 

[ohgoditsjames]

Reading some of these comments I suspect there’s a fair number of people who don’t understand how complicated Wayleave agreements can be to organise. It’s not as simple as “buying a little bit of extra land”. I’ve worked for a DNO for 10 years and I tell you, I do everything I can to avoid the wayleave agreement side of things and dealing with irate farmers when we come out to inspect overhead equipment.

 

[Elecman]

Reading some of these comments I suspect there’s a fair number of people who don’t understand how complicated Wayleave agreements can be to organise. It’s not as simple as “buying a little bit of extra land”. I’ve worked for a DNO for 10 years and I tell you, I do everything I can to avoid the wayleave agreement side of things and dealing with irate farmers when we come out to inspect overhead equipment.

And thats when the farmer lets you back on and doesn’t renege on the wayleave

 

[Nottingham59]

It’s not as simple as “buying a little bit of extra land"

Well, we'll just have to see when it's built whether the AFTS (in blue) interferes with any future use of that trackbed, and whether they could have located it on railway land just a bit further away from the existing tracks

 

[WAO]

I don't understand the problem as the substation is to be to the South of the track.

The space for the (old) loop or even paired slow lines looks to be to the North.

A greater problem for our crayons would be the two-track MH station.

The Oakham route seems the solution if traffic really rises.

WAO

 

[Nottingham59]

the substation is to be to the South of the track

Afraid not. It's to the North, as shown by the planning application in post #4278.

 

[Bald Rick]

If there was any remote possibility of a loop being needed there, and the FS could have been provided without needing more non railway land, then it would have been kept clear. But there is no realistic prospect of a loop there.

 

[WAO]

Afraid not. It's to the North, as shown by the planning application in post #4278.

Thanks, noticed the compass arrow at the top of the drawing. Imagine it's because of low loader access for SGT's. A lot of new road needed though.

WAO

 

[Flying Phil]

The new road access from the A6 is taking advantage of the new development of 600 houses + other buildings, being built between the A6 and railway line. The original access across the rail line, would only have been suitable for small loads, as the bridge is in poor condition and has its cracks monitored!

 

[The Ham]

The new road access from the A6 is taking advantage of the new development of 600 houses + other buildings, being built between the A6 and railway line. The original access across the rail line, would only have been suitable for small loads, as the bridge is in poor condition and has its cracks monitored!

Things are likely to have moved on a bit, but when I last saw what was proposed access was benefiting from a new roundabout at the site access to those new houses but using an existing service track to travel from the highway network rather than any of the new roads on the development site.

 

[John Webb]

Passing the Napsbury Access Point this afternoon on my way to work at St Albans South, there is absolutely no sign of anything yet going on here.

 

[Skymonster]

So will Hull Trains run on the wires from Kettering to St Pancras and back this weekend, or use diesel?

 

[Hairy Bear]

So will Hull Trains run on the wires from Kettering to St Pancras and back this weekend, or use diesel?

Diesel....not authorised to use the ole yet.

 

[Mag_seven]

Just a reminder that the subject of this thread is MML Electrification updates.

If anyone wants to discuss anything else they are welcome to start a new thread in the relevant forum section.

For a general discussion of the slow lines north of Bedford please see this thread.

thanks

 

[59CosG95]

Just a reminder of the planned possessions between Kettering & Leicester (and other points on the electrified MML):

• 7-10 June, nights: Kettering - Leicester closed (KO1a work?)
• 13 June all day: some lines closed between St P & Bedford (Brent Cross?)
• 15-18 June, nights: some lines closed between St P & Luton (Brent Cross?); Kettering - Leicester closed (KO1a work?)
• 19, 20, 26 & 27 June all day: some lines closed between St P & Luton (Brent Cross?); Kettering - Leicester closed (KO1a work?)
• 28 June - 2 July, nights: Kettering - Leicester closed (KO1a work?)
• 19-23 July, nights: Kettering - Leicester closed (KO1a work?)
• 31 July night - 1 August morning: some lines closed between St P & Luton (Brent Cross?)
• 9-13 August, nights: Kettering - Leicester closed (KO1a work?)

 

[James Kevill]

So is there the engineering works going on soon in Leicester?

 

[59CosG95]

So is there the engineering works going on soon in Leicester?

Nothing electrification related, no.
There is a capacity improvement scheme to reopen the east bore of Knighton Tunnel and/or add extra platforms at Leicester, but AFAIK that's a separate scheme to any extension of wires beyond Market Harborough.

 

[swt_passenger]

So is there the engineering works going on soon in Leicester?

Closed last night “between Kettering and Leicester” refers to the direct route via Market Harborough, Leicester station itself was still available from the north. Such lists of line closures as in post #4316 often include stations either side where nothing is actually happening.

 

[londonmidland]

There is a capacity improvement scheme to reopen the east bore of Knighton Tunnel and/or add extra platforms at Leicester, but AFAIK that's a separate scheme

Has there been any traction regarding this? There’s been several mentions of it, but nothing has actually started on the ground.