MML Electrification: progress updates

[gerryuk]

If you're limited to 100mph then why not just use rolling stock like the class 350 units?

Supposedly once HS2 is built no one will be using the MML north of Leicester for long distance journeys anyway, so what's the point in bothering upgrading the speed here if London can be reached in an hour?

There is an election on the way. I would not be surprised if HS2 is kicked in to the long grass, particularly the eastern leg via Sheffield to Leeds. There is a deficit and money needs to be saved.
I think that the western leg will be built to Birmingham and Manchester, however the Eastern link will be put on hold to save money and will never see the light of day again.
The quicker the MML is electrified the better.

 

[HSTEd]

Even after all the cuts the entire cost of the entire scheme is about five months of the deficit - cancelling it would not make the slightest bit of difference to the Government's fiscal position/

 

[gerryuk]

Even after all the cuts the entire cost of the entire scheme is about five months of the deficit - cancelling it would not make the slightest bit of difference to the Government's fiscal position/

You could use that argument on any cuts to any department, but you have to start cutting some ware. There will be savage cuts to come and the railways will not be immune.

 

[21C101]

Almost. The solution is that south of Bedford, if they need to go above 100mph they drop the pans and run on the hybrid diesel.

I'm staggered. All IEP trains south of Bedford will need to go above 100mph. No wonder they've been so keen to have trains towing a heavy generator and tank of diesel around the countryside under the wires. If it wasn't someone near the front line like yourself I would assume that was a wind up.

 

[HSTEd]

You could use that argument on any cuts to any department, but you have to start cutting some ware. There will be savage cuts to come and the railways will not be immune.

Well yes, but the savage cuts are not really required to improve the Government's fiscal position - they are just because they want savage cuts.
For example Francis Maude is now saying he wants to privatise everything but policing and defence.
Growth of tax receipts will wipe out the deficit before it becomes too large to be a serious fiscal issue. Assuming the government doesn't do anything to reduce consumer spending and tax income - for example by laying off a million public sector workers or something like that.

 

[edwin_m]

I'm staggered. All IEP trains south of Bedford will need to go above 100mph. No wonder they've been so keen to have trains towing a heavy generator and tank of diesel around the countryside under the wires. If it wasn't someone near the front line like yourself I would assume that was a wind up.

Aren't we getting ahead of ourselves here? I've not seen anything resembling an official announcement that the MML will have IEP or IC225 or anything else. My money would be on a conventional EMU uprated for 125mph - the longest journey on the MML will be London to Sheffield which will be under 2hr so less than some of TPE's. It could be a 5-car with a pan on each end car so there is the best part of 200m between the pans when two units are coupled, compared with less than 80m on a coupled pair of 319s.

The existing Meridian/HST routes that won't be electrified (Sheffield-Leeds, Corby-Syston) are essentially stock positioning and will disappear with revised depot locations. The Lincoln route will also disappear as it isn't worth maintaining a micro-fleet of bi-modes just for two trains per day.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Well yes, but the savage cuts are not really required to improve the Government's fiscal position - they are just because they want savage cuts.
For example Francis Maude is now saying he wants to privatise everything but policing and defence.
Growth of tax receipts will wipe out the deficit before it becomes too large to be a serious fiscal issue. Assuming the government doesn't do anything to reduce consumer spending and tax income - for example by laying off a million public sector workers or something like that.

Has Francis Maude actually said that he wishes to privatise the NHS? Do you have a credible source for this?

 

[HSTEd]

Has Francis Maude actually said that he wishes to privatise the NHS? Do you have a credible source for this?

Here, he claims they would mostly be mutuals but as we have experienced in other fields, mutuals will rarely last very long before being swept up by Hedge Funds and similar.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm staggered. All IEP trains south of Bedford will need to go above 100mph. No wonder they've been so keen to have trains towing a heavy generator and tank of diesel around the countryside under the wires. If it wasn't someone near the front line like yourself I would assume that was a wind up.

Someone bit!

It's a rumour I'm starting, want to see if it catches on

 

[Tomnick]

The existing Meridian/HST routes that won't be electrified (Sheffield-Leeds, Corby-Syston) are essentially stock positioning and will disappear with revised depot locations. The Lincoln route will also disappear as it isn't worth maintaining a micro-fleet of bi-modes just for two trains per day.

Although the handful of passenger services north of Corby are indeed provided largely as a byproduct of positioning moves, the route has been (and continues to be) an important diversionary route, to allow the routine engineering access between Kettering and Wigston (every sixth week on nights, affecting the last few Down trains and the first Up, and usually at least one run of consecutive full Sundays) and for use during disruption. Indeed, I understand (open to correction!) that Network Rail cover at least some of the cost of providing and maintaining the necessary route knowledge that way. Removal of that well-used option would seem to me to be a big backward step, especially for the Sunday diversions.

 

[HSTEd]

Unless you are proposing to electrify that too it seems rather excessive to maintain a fleet of bimodes just for use on diversions - at that point we might as well just have the entire electric fleet replaced with them.

 

[21C101]

Someone bit!

It's a rumour I'm starting, want to see if it catches on

Many years ago a now long retired colleage started a rumour that Southern and Western regions were going to be merged and housed in a large new office block in Basingstoke. He casually mentioned this upcoming reorganisation to a colleague several times while in different packed lifts at Southern House.

It spread like wildfire and legend has it almost became a reality after senior management got to hear the rumour and thought "that's a good idea"
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Unless you are proposing to electrify that too it seems rather excessive to maintain a fleet of bimodes just for use on diversions - at that point we might as well just have the entire electric fleet replaced with them.

Or (cross fertilizing from the East West thread) extend the Oxford Bedfords to Peterborough via Corby and a Manton Chord as the Bedford Bletchley bit is not going to be electrified any time soon.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Although the handful of passenger services north of Corby are indeed provided largely as a byproduct of positioning moves, the route has been (and continues to be) an important diversionary route, to allow the routine engineering access between Kettering and Wigston (every sixth week on nights, affecting the last few Down trains and the first Up, and usually at least one run of consecutive full Sundays) and for use during disruption. Indeed, I understand (open to correction!) that Network Rail cover at least some of the cost of providing and maintaining the necessary route knowledge that way. Removal of that well-used option would seem to me to be a big backward step, especially for the Sunday diversions.

I wonder whether class 67's could be adapted to drag EMU's given that they are all based at Toton?

 

[edwin_m]

The diversions via Harringworth are potentially a big issue with no obvious solution. Haulable EMUs are an interesting idea as this was done with the 325 as well as the 442 I think. Or could EMT's diesel fleet provide some workings to connect with EMUs at Kettering when they are not employed elsewhere?

Otherwise it will be a case of making use of the bi-di signalling that's been there since 1987, most of it probably replaced at least once in the meantime but hardly used. When both tracks are under posession or single line is too difficult for some other reason then it'll be back to buses.

 

[NotATrainspott]

There is an election on the way. I would not be surprised if HS2 is kicked in to the long grass, particularly the eastern leg via Sheffield to Leeds. There is a deficit and money needs to be saved.
I think that the western leg will be built to Birmingham and Manchester, however the Eastern link will be put on hold to save money and will never see the light of day again.
The quicker the MML is electrified the better.

The same reasoning would have someone trade in their working car for a cheaper and far less reliable one, despite the fact they need one to get to work everyday. The arithmetic might make it look like a no-brainer but the actual result of doing it would be worse. HM Treasury can issue bonds until the cows come home if they're to be used to finance schemes with huge economic benefits.

Aren't we getting ahead of ourselves here? I've not seen anything resembling an official announcement that the MML will have IEP or IC225 or anything else. My money would be on a conventional EMU uprated for 125mph - the longest journey on the MML will be London to Sheffield which will be under 2hr so less than some of TPE's. It could be a 5-car with a pan on each end car so there is the best part of 200m between the pans when two units are coupled, compared with less than 80m on a coupled pair of 319s.

The existing Meridian/HST routes that won't be electrified (Sheffield-Leeds, Corby-Syston) are essentially stock positioning and will disappear with revised depot locations. The Lincoln route will also disappear as it isn't worth maintaining a micro-fleet of bi-modes just for two trains per day.

That Sheffield is only 2 or so hours away doesn't make IEP a bad idea. Standard EMUs are good on routes that will see some level of standing at peak times, but for long distance MML runs the emphasis is on providing seats. Providing large numbers of seats is best done with 26m carriages and end doors, and since 200km/h running is necessary, the electric Class 801 would appear to be an ideal fit. In the worst case scenario Hitachi could whip up a Class 802 based on it but removing all bi-mode capability to reduce costs further. If normal Class 801s were used, it wouldn't be difficult at all to have a small fleet of bi-mode Class 800s mixed in with the fleet until the branches are electrified properly, as the same maintenance facilities are needed for both kinds given that the electric ones have the single diesel generator carriage included as well.

 

[HSTEd]

HS2 will likely make conventional London trains to Sheffield via the MML redundant - if for no other reason than the far less crowded East Coast would be able to compete by diverting one of the now unnecessary Leeds trains to Sheffield - it would appear that it would be able to match or beat the MML time. (EC would nearly manage it now even with their inferior accelerating loco hauled trains/HSTs).

At which point the rationale for 125mph running starts to look quite weak - especially when DfT are apparently considering running London trains to Nottingham via Grantham.
Could drop to 110mph and use conventional flat front units.

 

[RichmondCommu]

HS2 will likely make conventional London trains to Sheffield via the MML redundant - if for no other reason than the far less crowded East Coast would be able to compete by diverting one of the now unnecessary Leeds trains to Sheffield - it would appear that it would be able to match or beat the MML time. (EC would nearly manage it now even with their inferior accelerating loco hauled trains/HSTs).

At which point the rationale for 125mph running starts to look quite weak - especially when DfT are apparently considering running London trains to Nottingham via Grantham.
Could drop to 110mph and use conventional flat front units.

That goes against what both the DfT and Network Rail have previously stated. They have both suggested that the MML is likely to remain pretty much as it is now after the completion of HS2.

 

[HSTEd]

That goes against what both the DfT and Network Rail have previously stated. They have both suggested that the MML is likely to remain pretty much as it is now after the completion of HS2.

Which is, for the most part, a <=110mph railway.

The 125mph/120mph running is not really that extensive compared to the East Coast.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Which is, for the most part, a <=110mph railway.

The 125mph/120mph running is not really that extensive compared to the East Coast.

You seem to have conveniently forgotten that a lot of effort has gone into improving line speeds between Sheffield and London including 125 mph running along much of the route.

Are you suggesting that the DfT and Network Rail are wrong in what they have stated?

 

[edwin_m]

HS2 will likely make conventional London trains to Sheffield via the MML redundant - if for no other reason than the far less crowded East Coast would be able to compete by diverting one of the now unnecessary Leeds trains to Sheffield - it would appear that it would be able to match or beat the MML time. (EC would nearly manage it now even with their inferior accelerating loco hauled trains/HSTs).

At which point the rationale for 125mph running starts to look quite weak - especially when DfT are apparently considering running London trains to Nottingham via Grantham.
Could drop to 110mph and use conventional flat front units.

But none of that would happen until 2032ish. I don't think it's a reason to decelerate the service over 10 years beforehand. The stock could be changed for something more appropriate in 2032 if necessary.

However, HS2 doesn't benefit Leicester-London at all, so the Leicester people will be looking for faster MML journeys to keep them competitive with other places. Depending on what happens with the Hub station, a bit of acceleration could also keep MML competitive with HS2 for London to central Derby or Nottingham. It may be better to encourage this rather than having these people occupy seats on longer-distance HS2 trains for a small part of the journey. A routeing via Grantham could do this for Nottingham but not Leicester or Derby.

 

[HSTEd]

You seem to have conveniently forgotten that a lot of effort has gone into improving line speeds between Sheffield and London including 125 mph running along much of the route.

So much so that as far as I can tell the main 125mph section south of Bedford is passed in under ten minutes.
It is not really making a big difference to journey times, despite what people at the DfT would like people to think.

Are you suggesting that the DfT and Network Rail are wrong in what they have stated?

No, I am suggesting that the realities of the route's economics will start to bear down on them. Ordering IEPs which will run at 110-105-100mph for very large fractions of the route is going to look rather bad for the franchise payments, especially when high speed trains on other routes can take over much of the long distance load.

But none of that would happen until 2032ish. I don't think it's a reason to decelerate the service over 10 years beforehand. The stock could be changed for something more appropriate in 2032 if necessary.

110mph stock is going to lose something like two minutes on end to end journey time compared to 125mph, unless there is going to be a huge project to double or treble the length of 125mph running. Which I haven't heard anything about.
Additionally by the time the MML electrification is completed it seems highly likely that HS2-2 construction will have commenced in earnest.
Spending hundreds of millions on 125mph interim stock sounds wasteful to me.

A routeing via Grantham could do this for Nottingham but not Leicester or Derby.

But Nottingham has a population several times that of Derby's - Derby's prominence on the railway is a result of historical factors regarding the routing of the main Midland Line to Sheffield.
Nottingham is the important destination out of the two.

As for Leicester - it would be more likely to benefit from increased numbers of services and drastically increased capacity than a couple of minutes shaved off by the current 125mph running.

 

[edwin_m]

That Sheffield is only 2 or so hours away doesn't make IEP a bad idea. Standard EMUs are good on routes that will see some level of standing at peak times, but for long distance MML runs the emphasis is on providing seats. Providing large numbers of seats is best done with 26m carriages and end doors, and since 200km/h running is necessary, the electric Class 801 would appear to be an ideal fit. In the worst case scenario Hitachi could whip up a Class 802 based on it but removing all bi-mode capability to reduce costs further. If normal Class 801s were used, it wouldn't be difficult at all to have a small fleet of bi-mode Class 800s mixed in with the fleet until the branches are electrified properly, as the same maintenance facilities are needed for both kinds given that the electric ones have the single diesel generator carriage included as well.

I guess the market will decide. Up-speccing an existing EMU platform, possibly even with a 450-style bodyshell, versus what Hitachi might do with the IEP design based on a few years service and free from the constraints of the DfT spec. I wouldn't be too surprised if the two ended up looking very similar.

 

[HSTEd]

Did anything ever come out of that 115mph/189kph Desiro Express thing?
This looks like a nice place for it - the benefits of flat front EMUs and it reduces the time gains for 200km/h operate to almost nill.

 

[RichmondCommu]

So much so that as far as I can tell the main 125mph section south of Bedford is passed in under ten minutes.
It is not really making a big difference to journey times, despite what people at the DfT would like people to think.

So are you suggesting that the introduction of 125 mph running south of Bedford has been a complete waste of time? Of course it doesn't help that it starts to undermine the case for HS2 replacing services on the MML.

No, I am suggesting that the realities of the route's economics will start to bear down on them. Ordering IEPs which will run at 110-105-100mph for very large fractions of the route is going to look rather bad for the franchise payments, especially when high speed trains on other routes can take over much of the long distance load.

In other words you are suggesting that the Dft was wrong to spend money on the MML and that their assumptions regarding the MML after the introduction of HS2 are wrong. Who has confirmed that IEP's will be ordered for the MML?

How can you justify increasing journey times from London to Leicester. Or indeed Leicester to Nottingham or Leicester to Sheffield? Just wondering.

 

[Brian Aylott]

I wonder whether class 67's could be adapted to drag EMU's given that they are all based at Toton?

Class 67s are based at Crewe (CE)
Brian

 

[HSTEd]

So are you suggesting that the introduction of 125 mph running south of Bedford has been a complete waste of time? Of course it doesn't help that it starts to undermine the case for HS2 replacing services on the MML.

No, it is not a waste of time. This is like saying that the electrification to Hazel Grove is a waste of time just because it is no longer used.
I am just saying that it will likely cease to be utilised significantly after the completion of electrification.
And I doubt HS2 will directly replace many MML services, just pointing out that the ECML will be in a position to more efficiently provide many of the end to end journeys now provided by the MML.

In other words you are suggesting that the Dft was wrong to spend money on the MML and that their assumptions regarding the MML after the introduction of HS2 are wrong. Who has confirmed that IEP's will be ordered for the MML?

That is not what I am saying - I just believe that the high speed operations will be better served by other routes once HS2 is available - however this has not yet occurred. If nothing else it is a useful hedge.
Noone has confirmed IEPs for anything, which is why I am offering the opinion that IEPs will not be ordered for the MML.

How can you justify increasing journey times from London to Leicester. Or indeed Leicester to Nottingham or Leicester to Sheffield? Just wondering.

Simple - needs of the many, this speed costs money.
Those flows are not enormous and in any case most of those journey times will not be effected significantly by the reduction in speed from 125mph maximum to 110/115mph. (Aren't many of the Leicester/Nottingham trains operated by HSTs? I bet they will come out slower than a 110/115mph multiple unit would end to end).
Leicester is not going to miss a few seconds on its end to end timings.
Especially when it appears to only have a handful of nonstop trains anyway - with the savings in capacity from a more uniform speed profile you could probably give it additional nonstop trains.

 

[RichmondCommu]

110mph stock is going to lose something like two minutes on end to end journey time compared to 125mph, unless there is going to be a huge project to double or treble the length of 125mph running. Which I haven't heard anything about.
Additionally by the time the MML electrification is completed it seems highly likely that HS2-2 construction will have commenced in earnest.
Spending hundreds of millions on 125mph interim stock sounds wasteful to me.

MML electrification is due to be completed by 2019. Are you suggesting that construction work on the route from Birmingham to Leeds will have started by that date?

 

[Martin222002]

Just to put this out there but there is about 56 miles worth of 125mph running on the MML now south of Trent Junction/East Midlands Parkway. Yes in comparison to the ECML actually stretches of 125mph aren't as long, but as a total amount this is still reasonable amount of the lines route, and this doesn't include the stretches of 120/115/110mph along the rest of the MML.

 

[HSTEd]

MML electrification is due to be completed by 2019. Are you suggesting that construction work on the route from Birmingham to Leeds will have started by that date?

And I am due to obtain the office of Prime Minister of the Moon by 2020 - it doesn't mean its going to happen.
The fact that almost no actual work has commenced on this project seems to suggest that that completion date is something of a joke.

 

[Martin222002]

Leicester is not going to miss a few seconds on its end to end timings. Especially when it appears to only have a handful of nonstop trains anyway - with the savings in capacity from a more uniform speed profile you could probably give it additional nonstop trains.

I think you will find that there are 2tph which run non-stop from Leicester to London, which I'd call more than a handful.