MML Electrification: progress updates

[Domh245]

The proposed timetable as I remember it was the Sheffield services fast to/from Leicester, whilst the Nottingham services had stops at Market Harborough & Kettering. Whether that's what runs come December...

 

[Merle Haggard]

Does anyone know what the line speeds are on the slow lines between Bedford and Wellingborough? One might assume that the Corby trains will run on them after electrification (otherwise, why re-instate platform 4 at Wellingboro'), and a suggestion above was that, at least on the previously-existing track (now the down slow), line speed would be somewhat less than 100 in places.
The 1750 St Pancras - Melton (an extension of the standard Corby service) is (or was!) timed at just over 100mph StoS Luton AP to Wellingborough. Bearing in mind the press release implied an improvement in journey times with electrification I wonder how this can be achieved - obviously, the Corby trains run F/L at the moment.

 

[DDB]

The proposed timetable as I remember it was the Sheffield services fast to/from Leicester, whilst the Nottingham services had stops at Market Harborough & Kettering. Whether that's what runs come December...

If I have done it right the consultation pdf is attached to this post and confirms your memory.

 

[Hairy Bear]

Does anyone know what the line speeds are on the slow lines between Bedford and Wellingborough? One might assume that the Corby trains will run on them after electrification (otherwise, why re-instate platform 4 at Wellingboro'), and a suggestion above was that, at least on the previously-existing track (now the down slow), line speed would be somewhat less than 100 in places.
The 1750 St Pancras - Melton (an extension of the standard Corby service) is (or was!) timed at just over 100mph StoS Luton AP to Wellingborough. Bearing in mind the press release implied an improvement in journey times with electrification I wonder how this can be achieved - obviously, the Corby trains run F/L at the moment.

50/75mph in constantly changing lengths. The proposal for the Corby's is fast st.Pancras to Wellingborough north and then slow line to Kettering.
Southbound , slow Kettering to Wellingborough South then out on the fast. That's why they have reinstated platform 4.
There won't be an improvement in journey times for the Corby's as there going to be max 110 plus additional stop at Luton airport.

 

[sharpley]

Any chance they will swap Montsorrel loading from the fast side to the slow side before electrifying it?

They're electrifying the MML at Mountsorrel? Sounds expensive moving the Mountsorrel railhead to the slow side, will need a bridge or underpass to extend the conveyor from the quarry

 

[Bald Rick]

They're electrifying the MML at Mountsorrel? Sounds expensive moving the Mountsorrel railhead to the slow side, will need a bridge or underpass to extend the conveyor from the quarry

No electrification, at least not yet, and I don’t understand why the railhead would need to move.

 

[edwin_m]

No electrification, at least not yet, and I don’t understand why the railhead would need to move.

I guess ideally it would be better on the other side so trains could enter and exit on the Slows without crossing the Fasts. But it would be a huge cost to move it and there is no planned increase in the passenger service, so as it works now it should still work in the future.

 

[Hairy Bear]

No electrification, at least not yet, and I don’t understand why the railhead would need to move.

Over 30 years ago they wanted sidings and a loading area on the up slow side. Not on the cards anytime soon.

 

[Meerkat]

No electrification, at least not yet, and I don’t understand why the railhead would need to move.

I read something a while back that getting the loaded stone trains out across the fast lines was a bit of an issue.

 

[Bald Rick]

I read something a while back that getting the loaded stone trains out across the fast lines was a bit of an issue.

Not really, there is plenty of space on the graph to get them across, the issue is if something is running late, but it will only lose a few more minutes.

 

[Merle Haggard]

50/75mph in constantly changing lengths. The proposal for the Corby's is fast st.Pancras to Wellingborough north and then slow line to Kettering.
Southbound , slow Kettering to Wellingborough South then out on the fast. That's why they have reinstated platform 4.
There won't be an improvement in journey times for the Corby's as there going to be max 110 plus additional stop at Luton airport.

Thanks for that - it all makes sense now.

Except that; if Up trains are crossing to the fast at Wo' S perhaps they could have used platform 3 (Up slow > bi-directional > up fast) and avoided all that work on a new platform and footbridge extension? And, if the downs are using the fast line why extend Plat 3? But it's great to see railway investment in forgotten Northamptonshire, even if the trains will be slower...

 

[59CosG95]

Thanks for that - it all makes sense now.

Except that; if Up trains are crossing to the fast at Wo' S perhaps they could have used platform 3 (Up slow > bi-directional > up fast) and avoided all that work on a new platform and footbridge extension? And, if the downs are using the fast line why extend Plat 3? But it's great to see railway investment in forgotten Northamptonshire, even if the trains will be slower...

In the event of engineering works, or a breakdown, it'd be useful to maintain some flexibility...

Say the Fasts are blocked for emergency track repairs. Trains can still call at Wellingborough P3 and P4. Ditto for the Slows.

 

[edwin_m]

In the event of engineering works, or a breakdown, it'd be useful to maintain some flexibility...

Say the Fasts are blocked for emergency track repairs. Trains can still call at Wellingborough P3 and P4. Ditto for the Slows.

The Slows between Wellinborough South and north of Bedford (exclusive) won't have any scheduled passenger service except possibly the odd working like they have now. TBH I'm rather surprised they electrified them rather than cutting that part of the scheme and using the money saved to push on towards Leicester. On the fairly rare occasions of diversion the bi-modes could run on diesel.

 

[Mikey C]

The Slows between Wellinborough South and north of Bedford (exclusive) won't have any scheduled passenger service except possibly the odd working like they have now. TBH I'm rather surprised they electrified them rather than cutting that part of the scheme and using the money saved to push on towards Leicester. On the fairly rare occasions of diversion the bi-modes could run on diesel.

That would be massively inconvenient for the Corby trains though, which are electric only

 

[59CosG95]

The Slows between Wellinborough South and north of Bedford (exclusive) won't have any scheduled passenger service except possibly the odd working like they have now. TBH I'm rather surprised they electrified them rather than cutting that part of the scheme and using the money saved to push on towards Leicester. On the fairly rare occasions of diversion the bi-modes could run on diesel.

Maybe it's a case of the DfT actually planning for the future, rather than constantly dancing to the tune of Her Majesty's Treasury...

The 360s would be scuppered if the Fasts were blocked and the Slows were unwired, of course (as @Mikey C says), but the lack of extension to Leicester (as it stands) primarily, AIUI, comes from dithering over what the scope for the Leicester Area Remodelling will entail.

Of course, Grayling certainly didn't help...

 

[edwin_m]

That would be massively inconvenient for the Corby trains though, which are electric only

I would guess there are enough bi-modes to run the Corby service as well on a Sunday or late at night.

Maybe it's a case of the DfT actually planning for the future, rather than constantly dancing to the tune of Her Majesty's Treasury...

The 360s would be scuppered if the Fasts were blocked and the Slows were unwired, of course (as @Mikey C says), but the lack of extension to Leicester (as it stands) primarily, AIUI, comes from dithering over what the scope for the Leicester Area Remodelling will entail.

Of course, Grayling certainly didn't help...

Much more likely that a certain scope had been defined for the first phase, including the Slows, Grayling cancelled everything beyond that scope, and nobody really thought about whether there was a better way of spending limited funds.

I don't think Leicester re-modelling was ever going ahead before electrification. The re-modelling wouldn't move many existing tracks to new alignments, just add new ones, so it would be reasonably easy to determine the footprint of the new stuff and place the OLE to avoid them where possible. For example Leicester to Syston could be done with four-track structures and only three tracks wired, and the use of portals or twin track cantilevers would allow the OLE on the bi-directional Slow line to be moved across if necessary if it was re-aligned to make room for a second Slow line.

 

[Merle Haggard]

The Slows between Wellinborough South and north of Bedford (exclusive) won't have any scheduled passenger service except possibly the odd working like they have now. TBH I'm rather surprised they electrified them rather than cutting that part of the scheme and using the money saved to push on towards Leicester. On the fairly rare occasions of diversion the bi-modes could run on diesel.

Sometimes I feel a bit like the child pointing out that the emperor had no clothes...
As you say, the slow lines will not be used for passenger trains and the speed restrictions limit their usefulness in that regard anyway; the practicability of any electric hauled freights is low. Platform 4 at Wellingborough has been re-instated and the footbridge extended to allow flexibility although, when the fast lines were blocked by either engineering work or mishap, the previous arrangement using Wellingboro' platform 3 worked fine - I've boarded and alighted from Up and Down HSTs there in the past.
Meanwhile, the lavatories on the platform have been temporarily closed since about 2005 (there's a temporary one in the forecourt with a very odd odour). The replacement Corby trains will be slower and with poorer facilities than the ones they replace, but their introduction will somehow increase demand to fill a 12 car train (though you won't be able to walk through if the particular unit you choose to board is crowded).
After a long period of neglect it's wonderful that money has been spent on railways in Northamptonshire but I am not sure that it's been used in the most effective way.

 

[D365]

(though you won't be able to walk through if the particular unit you choose to board is crowded).

At the risk of going off-topic, I don't see why that's an issue. Greater Anglia and Great Northern (among other TOCs) haven't suffered from a lack of cab-end gangways.

After a long period of neglect it's wonderful that money has been spent on railways in Northamptonshire but I am not sure that it's been used in the most effective way.

It wouldn't make sense to leave the slow lines unnelectrified, and then have to come back and put up the knitting later. Much more effective to do all lines in one fell swoop.

 

[edwin_m]

Hmm
Are the Bimodes still likely to run to Corby ?
I was under the perhaps mistaken impression that the Corby service was entirely cutting over to class 360s and their crews. I then thought the EMR "Intercity" trains would only divert that way when necessary but not call at Corby.

Yes, Corby will normally be electrics although it seems there could be a handful of bi-modes to maintain a service via Melton. My point was that at weekends and late at night there might be enough bi-modes spare to run whatever frequency the London-Corby service is at those times.

 

[yorkie]

Sorry to be a pain but this thread is already over three thousand posts long and it becomes unwieldy if we end up discussing lots of different things in one topic

So, can we try to stick to updates regarding the MML electrification on this thread please.

Feel free to create a new thread (if there isn't one already) in the relevant area to discuss anything else (such as traction & rolling stock updates, timetable updates or speculative ideas).

Thanks

 

[Merle Haggard]

It wouldn't make sense to leave the slow lines unnelectrified, and then have to come back and put up the knitting later. Much more effective to do all lines in one fell swoop.

The slow lines between Sharnbrook and Irchester follow a different alignment from the fast ones - getting on for a mile away at the furthest point; I would suggest that there's not much commonality of electrification infrastructure between the two routes.
I am puzzled about what electric hauled trains will use the slow lines in the future. Passenger trains (many of which will be bi-modes) would suffer from the slow line speeds, and freight trains routed slow line because the fast line will be fully occupied would presumably be routed via Melton to Syston avoid the similarly fully occupied two track bottleneck between Kettering and Leicester.
All this has been thought through, I'm sure, but I'm just trying to make sense of it. Not wanting to reject investment in railways, but, in other parts of the network, a fill in section of electrification over a similar distance would provide quickly realised benefits. whereas here the future use seems a little hazy.

 

[Bald Rick]

The slow lines between Sharnbrook and Irchester follow a different alignment from the fast ones - getting on for a mile away at the furthest point; I would suggest that there's not much commonality of electrification infrastructure between the two routes.
I am puzzled about what electric hauled trains will use the slow lines in the future. Passenger trains (many of which will be bi-modes) would suffer from the slow line speeds, and freight trains routed slow line because the fast line will be fully occupied would presumably be routed via Melton to Syston avoid the similarly fully occupied two track bottleneck between Kettering and Leicester.
All this has been thought through, I'm sure, but I'm just trying to make sense of it. Not wanting to reject investment in railways, but, in other parts of the network, a fill in section of electrification over a similar distance would provide quickly realised benefits. whereas here the future use seems a little hazy.

Most freight will be Main Line Kettering to Kilby Bridge, not least because some of it is heading for Nuneaton, and it is easier to send it that way then path it through Leicester. It’s less than 20miles from Kettering North to Kilby Bridge, and there’s only 4tph to fit around.

 

[Ploughman]

If the Fasts and the slows are all wired, then you have a built in divert route.
Many comments have been made about the lack of such a divert route, not just on this line but nationwide.
Now there is one (Or will be in the future) we have comments about it not being needed.

 

[D365]

It also means that the “electrification army” don’t need to come back to that section of track.

 

[edwin_m]

If the Fasts and the slows are all wired, then you have a built in divert route.
Many comments have been made about the lack of such a divert route, not just on this line but nationwide.
Now there is one (Or will be in the future) we have comments about it not being needed.

It's frequently said on here that diversions aren't enough to make a business case for electrification.

To add to what I said above on this, at the time the MML electrification was agreed there was also talk of an "electric spine" including 25kV conversion from Southampton to Basingstoke and electrification via Reading and Oxford to EWR and Bedford. Assuming the electrification had also been linked into some actual freight terminals at the northern end, that might have generated some electric freight on the MML Slow lines. But I suspect the electrification people were just told not to carry on northwards from Kettering, rather than anyone thinking more deeply about how to maximise the benefit if there wasn't the money to build the full scheme. The issues about whether to continue to the feeder at Market Harborough (still not officially resolved I believe) are another symptom of this.

 

[Domh245]

The slow lines between Sharnbrook and Irchester follow a different alignment from the fast ones - getting on for a mile away at the furthest point; I would suggest that there's not much commonality of electrification infrastructure between the two routes.

Perhaps not in terms of physical structures (indeed even though it's a 4 track railway it seems like the 2 pairs are often at different heights!) but in terms of electrical feeding arrangements, earthing, immunisation, etc there will be a lot of crossover and commonality - there's more to electrification than just the gantries and wires

 

[Aictos]

The Up Fast though Bedford is still unwired, did ask one of the team on the OHL test train if they knew of when it would be done, sadly no dates available.

 

[Bald Rick]

Perhaps not in terms of physical structures (indeed even though it's a 4 track railway it seems like the 2 pairs are often at different heights!) but in terms of electrical feeding arrangements, earthing, immunisation, etc there will be a lot of crossover and commonality - there's more to electrification than just the gantries and wires

Exactly this. The majority of the cost of electrification is not wired and masts. It’s design, prep works (site compounds, utilities,) route clearance (bridge works etc), power supplies, signalling alterations, and more. In the case of Bedford - Wellingboro’, almost all of this was completed, or contracted, or required regardless of whether 2 or four tracks were electrified, at the time of the decision to ‘pause’ the MML electrification.

Which makes the non electrification of the fast lines from Kings Norton to Barnt Green really annoying!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It's frequently said on here that diversions aren't enough to make a business case for electrification.

I understand but it also does not harm the business case either. If government are serious about CO2 etc, that has to start being added to the business case too,

 

[TheWalrus]

So as I understand it, we will likely see electrification North of Market Harborough to Derby and Nottingham, also between Clay Cross and Sheffield but not between Derby and Clay Cross?

A word pun for you Francophiles while we're in Quarante-ine...and the 40th update of this list!

MML Wiring Progressometer 40.1 (Updated as of 21st of April 2020)
Mileages are from St. Pancras. Unless mentioned otherwise, all reference to the "Fast" side refers to tracks on the western side of the "10-foot" (centre of the track pairs), and the "Slow" side for the tracks on the eastern side.
All 2,248 foundations are now installed.

South of Bedford

• In the Cricklewood area, around 13 new structures are gradually being erected; these are confirmed to be part of the works for the new Brent Cross West station.
• Just south of Sundon FS, Lower Farm Rd (Chalton) FS has now been commissioned (and brought online?)- this will allow for a increase in electric traction (i.e. the EMR Electrics) on the route.
  While I believe passive provision for AT operation has been made possible, there's currently no sign of an autotransformer on site; my assumption is that that will come prior to the 810s coming on stream.
• From structure "SPC1 79/659/DF", just north of the Great Ouse Viaduct, new masts are going up on either side of the Fast tracks to support Bonomi Omnia (i.e. S2/UKMS) cantilevers. All of them appear to be up.
• Just south of the new Sectioning AT site south of Bedford, 2 pairs of spanwire Feeder masts (for switching) are being (have been?) installed.

Bedford (49m 65ch) - Wellingborough (65m 09ch)

• The wires are now through Bedford on the Down Fast (P4), but have yet to be erected over the Up Fast. Additionally, the existing wires on Platforms 2 & 3 have not yet been extended to overlap with the 'offline' wires, that were extended down from north of Bromham Road O/B some weeks ago. Those on P1 have been extended.
• All lines have been wired from Bromham Rd O/B to Wellingborough station.
• Bromham Rd O/B closure extended until the summer.
• Irthlingborough Road Bridge has now been replaced - its reopening date has yet to be confirmed.
• North of Templars Way overbridge, Sharnbrook, an AT switching site (Track Section Cabinet until AT operation) has been constructed in the former works compound. As of 20/4/20, it has now gone live.
• The Up Slow from Wellingborough to Sharnbrook is due to enter service on 23/4/20.
• The switching/feeder site at Wymington now looks structurally complete. (It could also be live...)

Wellingborough (65m 09ch) - Kettering (72m 01ch)

• Work to return the 4th platform (P4) at Wellingborough to public use is now well advanced.
• All lines are now wired within Wellingborough station. These continue along all lines to Kettering station.
• North of Wellingborough, the Down Goods Loop (west of the Down Fast) and the Arrival/Departure Line (adjacent to the not-yet-in-service Up Slow) are now wired, along with the westernmost siding in Wellingborough Up Yard. There doesn't seem to be any concrete plan to put northern access into the yard yet, though.
• A new feeding/switching site is going in at the former Finedon Sidings (near Burton Latimer); six pairs of spanwire feeder masts are now all up on either side of the line where the switching equipment will be suspended. The feeder wires now await connection.
• Work to transform the former Kettering Yard into an EMU stabling facility (KES; Kettering Electric Stabling) is nearly complete: the anchor portal boom has now gone up. Wires are awaited...

Kettering (72m 01ch) - Glendon Jct (74m 00ch) - Corby (79m 40ch)

• All 4 lines are now wired through Kettering station. On the Fasts, wires finish about 500m north of the platforms, while those on the Slows continue to Glendon Jct & Corby, and thence to the planned limit of wiring.
• At Glendon, the new Kettering North SATS (Sectioning Autotransformer Site; TSC until 810s arrive) awaits connection to the OLE.

Glendon Jct (74m 00ch) - Market Harborough (82m 74ch)

• Braybrooke Substation approved. To be located here: (https://goo.gl/maps/fuy1uZeDjdQ2).
• Enabling Works happened; the land has now been returned to its original state.
• The extent of wiring towards Market Harborough has now been as good as confirmed to reach the station. Approval has been given for final design work to be carried out on that section of route.

The Future - Midlands Engine Rail (Midlands Connect) & HS2

• Electrification proposed from Market Harborough to Leicester, Loughborough, Nottingham & Derby; as part of the Midlands Connect strategy. The March 2020 Budget committed to the scheme; details are alleged to be found in the July Spending Review. When this will actually be released (what with COVID-19) remains to be seen.
• Electrification proposed from Clay Cross HS2 Connection to Sheffield (Midland) as part of HS2 works.
• Currently, no electrification is proposed between Clay Cross HS2 Connection & Nottingham, or Tupton & Derby (via Belper).
  
  Any updates would be greatly appreciated.