MML Electrification: progress updates

[Roast Veg]

That whole paragraph is very out of date - the electric spine is no longer happening, and class 387s are no longer being produced (and are all spoken for, apart from maybe the LTS six). They would be the first electric trains to be used by the franchise, but current thinking is that they are likely to be 379s or some equivalent.

 

[grumpyoldman01]

I haven't read the NAO report on the MML electrification yet, but it was reported on BBC TV's 'East Midlands News' on 29th March that the decision to cancel the scheme was taken in March 2017.

As Chris Grayling was recorded on video when electioneering before the last general election saying that the only way to guarantee electrification of the MML was to vote Conservative, has BBC got the date wrong or was, as politicians say, the Secretary of State for Transport being "economical with the truth"?

Surely, if a decision had already been made to cancel before he was caught on camera giving the promise he did, he would have known about it?

And if the NAO knows that the trains he promised don't exist, does anyone know why he keeps repeating his claims about bi-modes?

 

[muddythefish]

I haven't read the NAO report on the MML electrification yet, but it was reported on BBC TV's 'East Midlands News' on 29th March that the decision to cancel the scheme was taken in March 2017.

As Chris Grayling was recorded on video when electioneering before the last general election saying that the only way to guarantee electrification of the MML was to vote Conservative, has BBC got the date wrong or was, as politicians say, the Secretary of State for Transport being "economical with the truth"?

Surely, if a decision had already been made to cancel before he was caught on camera giving the promise he did, he would have known about it?

And if the NAO knows that the trains he promised don't exist, does anyone know why he keeps repeating his claims about bi-modes?

.....because failing Grayling is a deceitful, lying politician, who will say anything to stay in power.

 

[InTheEastMids]

I haven't read the NAO report on the MML electrification yet, but it was reported on BBC TV's 'East Midlands News' on 29th March that the decision to cancel the scheme was taken in March 2017.

As Chris Grayling was recorded on video when electioneering before the last general election saying that the only way to guarantee electrification of the MML was to vote Conservative, has BBC got the date wrong or was, as politicians say, the Secretary of State for Transport being "economical with the truth"?

Surely, if a decision had already been made to cancel before he was caught on camera giving the promise he did, he would have known about it?

And if the NAO knows that the trains he promised don't exist, does anyone know why he keeps repeating his claims about bi-modes?

The report on nao.org.uk seems to make 4 things clear, I don't think the first 3 Are really news to forum regulars

1: NR Had run out of money and could not afford to do the electrification of the MML in addition to the other projects in the work attack
2: furthermore, the baseline BCR of the project had plunged
3: When it canceled the scheme, DfT did not know if the industry could deliver bimodes that can the speed benefits (ie matching 222 performance on diesel)
4: The decision to cancel was taken in March 2017, before the May GE, but not announced until July 2017

Bit of a smell around #4?

 

[Domh245]

There's a bit of a smell around #2 as well IMO. It seemed to be suggested that the DfT massaged the BCRs to get the answer that they wanted (less than 1.0) by neglecting certain benefits.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I haven't read the NAO report on the MML electrification yet, but it was reported on BBC TV's 'East Midlands News' on 29th March that the decision to cancel the scheme was taken in March 2017.

As Chris Grayling was recorded on video when electioneering before the last general election saying that the only way to guarantee electrification of the MML was to vote Conservative, has BBC got the date wrong or was, as politicians say, the Secretary of State for Transport being "economical with the truth"?
Surely, if a decision had already been made to cancel before he was caught on camera giving the promise he did, he would have known about it?
And if the NAO knows that the trains he promised don't exist, does anyone know why he keeps repeating his claims about bi-modes?

Here is an extract of what I posted on the NAO thread here NAO report into cancellation of electrification of three lines

NAO report --- Point 3.8 - March 2017 ministers agreed to cancel projects but not announced until July 2017 (the General Election was June 2017) - Labour and Liberals will surely absolutely jump all over that one. Early on it was a 2015 MANIFESTO commitment ! Oh dear

 

[Senex]

Here is an extract of what I posted on the NAO thread here NAO report into cancellation of electrification of three lines

NAO report --- Point 3.8 - March 2017 ministers agreed to cancel projects but not announced until July 2017 (the General Election was June 2017) - Labour and Liberals will surely absolutely jump all over that one. Early on it was a 2015 MANIFESTO commitment ! Oh dear

Isn't that exactly the sort of dishonesty one (unfortunately) expects in British politics? Though not being surprised certainly doesn't make this decision any more palatable.

 

[SPADTrap]

Isn't that exactly the sort of dishonesty one (unfortunately) expects in British politics? Though not being surprised certainly doesn't make this decision any more palatable.

Nothing surprises me anymore, it is almost normalised now.

 

[Flying Phil]

I posted this on the NAO thread but it probably is more relevant here.
Re the Grid Feeder at Braybrooke, there is a planning notice at the location, but it is about 4 or 5 miles along the MML from the Kettering branch off to Corby. If there are no wires up along that section of the MML, do they run an underground link to the Corby wires or an overhead 25kV pylon route? The feeder is only about a mile to Market Harborough, so it would seem very practical/economical/sensible to put wires up Kettering to Harborough.

 

[38Cto15E]

Does the OHLE have to be upgraded between Bedford and St Pancras to enable 125mph running? if so, when is this work scheduled to be completed?
Is the new OHLE between Bedford and Corby suitable for 125mph running? I would expect the speed on the slows to be less than the fasts.
I am just trying to get a picture in my mind what will be happening come 2022 on the MML.

 

[Hophead]

I posted this on the NAO thread but it probably is more relevant here.
Re the Grid Feeder at Braybrooke, there is a planning notice at the location, but it is about 4 or 5 miles along the MML from the Kettering branch off to Corby. If there are no wires up along that section of the MML, do they run an underground link to the Corby wires or an overhead 25kV pylon route? The feeder is only about a mile to Market Harborough, so it would seem very practical/economical/sensible to put wires up Kettering to Harborough.

Checking the OS map, there seems to be 9 road / track bridges over the railway between Kettering and Market Harborough. Whether is is worthwhile extending the limit of electrification may well depend upon the cost of dealing with these.

 

[swt_passenger]

I posted this on the NAO thread but it probably is more relevant here.
Re the Grid Feeder at Braybrooke, there is a planning notice at the location, but it is about 4 or 5 miles along the MML from the Kettering branch off to Corby. If there are no wires up along that section of the MML, do they run an underground link to the Corby wires or an overhead 25kV pylon route? The feeder is only about a mile to Market Harborough, so it would seem very practical/economical/sensible to put wires up Kettering to Harborough.

I don’t think there is a single right answer. Melksham is an example where the grid supply runs underground for a couple of miles between the relevant National Grid site and the railway installation at Thingley Junction. If an ‘along track supply’ is needed it can be run on normal looking OHLE stanchions, or in a ground level cable trunk, I expect it depends on clearance as mentioned in the previous post.

 

[hwl]

Checking the OS map, there seems to be 9 road / track bridges over the railway between Kettering and Market Harborough. Whether is is worthwhile extending the limit of electrification may well depend upon the cost of dealing with these.

Many of the bridges the more southerly non - electrified part of the MML had already been sorted before the project was canned north of Glendon South Jn (where the the Corby Line splits off).

It is probably worth while scanning through the earlier posts on the thread to see which ones have been sorted and which hadn't. Some almost as far north as Trent Jn had been sorted before cancellation.

 

[Class 170101]

Isn't that exactly the sort of dishonesty one (unfortunately) expects in British politics? Though not being surprised certainly doesn't make this decision any more palatable.

And people in politics wonder why turn out is low and falling.

 

[SPADTrap]

And people in politics wonder why turn out is low and falling.

Those people in politics are more than happy for that to be the case.

 

[InTheEastMids]

Many of the bridges the more southerly non - electrified part of the MML had already been sorted before the project was canned north of Glendon South Jn (where the the Corby Line splits off).

It is probably worth while scanning through the earlier posts on the thread to see which ones have been sorted and which hadn't. Some almost as far north as Trent Jn had been sorted before cancellation.

There are 3 bridges around Market Harborough/Great Bowden that were to be worked on as part of the MH Station/Linespeed project. I guess they're still within scope of that project, but nothing's been done yet, but they are all North of Harborough station.

Checking the OS map, there seems to be 9 road / track bridges over the railway between Kettering and Market Harborough. Whether is is worthwhile extending the limit of electrification may well depend upon the cost of dealing with these.

3 stand out as giving little cause for concern. 2 are recent (A6 at Desborough and a footbridge at Braybrooke). And then I found this

The video is Bridge SPC3-44 at Rushton being demolished for replacement in 2013, and additional info on MML bridge works:
https://www.northantstelegraph.co.u...way-bridges-to-close-for-demolition-1-5045805

Remember that back in 2013, the expectation was to switch on Corby by December 2017, and presumably were expecting to do this with power via the Braybrooke supply point. Since they did no other bridge replacements pre-Hendy/Grayling, does it seems reasonable to believe that the other bridges needed no work, or could be dealt with by lowering the track bed?

NR's wording on where the wires will end is still pretty ambiguous, indicating they've yet to make a final decision. The 12/2017 Enhancement Delivery Update: "To develop solutions to provide traction power and other associated asset capability to allow 6 long distance high speed services to use electric traction between Market Harborough/Kettering and London in CP6."

 

[WymoWanderer]

Looks like a couple of masts have gone up between Milton Ernest and Sharnbrook.

 

[snowball]

Press release

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/feeds...ent-in-railway-in-northamptonshire-continues/

Network Rail is reminding motorists in Irchester, Wellingborough that a road bridge will close as they continue to upgrade the Midland Main Line.


The work to Station Road bridge is part of the Railway Upgrade Plan and the project to upgrade the Midland Main Line, which will see an additional line constructed between Bedford and Kettering, as well as the electrification of the line to Corby. The bridge needs to be raised to allow for the safe clearance of overhead lines.

Due to the nature of the work, the bridge will be closed to vehicles from Monday, 9 April until Thursday, 22 November and a clearly signposted diversion route will be in place. Pedestrian access will be maintained throughout the work via a temporary footbridge.

Rob McIntosh, Route Managing Director for Network Rail, said: “We appreciate that road closures are never ideal and we apologise for any inconvenience which this work causes.

“The work to this bridge is the latest stage in our project to upgrade the Midland Main Line; a project which is the biggest investment into the line since the Victorian era.

“This project is an investment of over £1billion to improve the railway and make sure that we meet the needs of the communities and economies that our railway serves.”

The picture shows that the bridge has two spans, one arched, but the arched span passes over a lower-lying pair of tracks (the fast lines, I think), so presumably it's the other span that's the problem.

 

[Senex]

Press release

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/feeds...ent-in-railway-in-northamptonshire-continues/

The picture shows that the bridge has two spans, one arched, but the arched span passes over a lower-lying pair of tracks (the fast lines, I think), so presumably it's the other span that's the problem.

So they continue to call it "upgrading the Midland Main Line" even though they say this bridge work is for electrification to Corby which is simply for the outer-suburban service for London.

 

[Chris125]

So they continue to call it "upgrading the Midland Main Line" even though they say this bridge work is for electrification to Corby which is simply for the outer-suburban service for London.

The Midland Mainline is the line used by the service to Corby, and it is being upgraded. I really don't see a problem.

 

[Senex]

The Midland Mainline is the line used by the service to Corby, and it is being upgraded. I really don't see a problem.

So when London-Colchester-Clacton was done, did you call it electrifying the Norwich Main Line? And why was electrifying to Bedford the Midland Suburban Electrification (MSE), not electrifying the Midland Main Line? The present PR offering smacks too much of trying to pretend there's something in it all for the main line proper, not just the outer suburban service. Like the harping on about the greener, quieter trains when they'll be noisy stinking diesels (try Sheffield station now when there are two of three of the things idling in the platforms).

 

[CdBrux]

Their wording is upgrading and not electrification, which is one part of an upgrade. And if bimodes are used then it will be electric there!
All twitter and other PR communications for almost any organisation will put a (overly) positive spin on things, it's just the way things are!

 

[Chris125]

Their wording is upgrading and not electrification, which is one part of an upgrade.

Exactly. Electrification is just one element of the work being done, they are also increasing capacity north of Bedford and remodelling Derby and Market Harborough to name but a few. Describing this as 'upgrading the Midland Mainline' seems fair enough to me.

 

[Flying Phil]

I think the point has been made before - but we have been promised an Electrified Midland Main Line for the past 40 years...It has been nearly started 3 or 4 times and when it was, at last, started, it was then "paused", and then restarted ...and then electrification was cancelled completely! (apart from Corby)...So please forgive the somewhat bitter taste when we are having our "Upgrade" being sold as acceptable as an improvement on what has been promised. But Yes - better than nothing.

 

[CdBrux]

In terms of the upgrade what extra would electrification north of Kettering bring to the passenger on top of what will happen?

 

[A0wen]

In terms of the upgrade what extra would electrification north of Kettering bring to the passenger on top of what will happen?

That is a very good question. It would depend how far north it went.

If it went as far as Leicester, you could conceivably run all Nottingham and Sheffield services fast to Leicester assuming paths could be found for a half-hourly Leicester - London EMU stopper covering all stops to Wellingborough at the very least. This would mean 8 tph leaving St Pancras high level - 2 each for Sheffield, Nottingham, Leicester and Corby - no idea whether that's doable? And before anyone say's 'that's too far on an EMU' it's a similar distance to Birmingham or Peterborough - and shorter than Weymouth.

 

[Flying Phil]

In terms of the upgrade what extra would electrification north of Kettering bring to the passenger on top of what will happen?

I would refer you to post #1674 (3 Feb) by "Grumpyoldman01" for some of the financial arguments which could be used to keep passenger fares at a reduced level for electrification. The trains are quieter, can accelerate quicker and potentially allow for greater frequency to give passengers more choice of journey times. There is much less noise and atmospheric pollution at stations in towns and cities. I believe there are many studies which show the overall benefits of electric trains to all other railway systems.

 

[InTheEastMids]

I would refer you to post #1674 (3 Feb) by "Grumpyoldman01" for some of the financial arguments which could be used to keep passenger fares at a reduced level for electrification. The trains are quieter, can accelerate quicker and potentially allow for greater frequency to give passengers more choice of journey times. There is much less noise and atmospheric pollution at stations in towns and cities. I believe there are many studies which show the overall benefits of electric trains to all other railway systems.

Excellent question about passenger benefits. Certainly a big part of Grayling's message in July was re-framing electrification schemes in terms of passenger benefits rather than, say, operational or societal benefits. Customer centricity is great, but rail depends so much on state handouts, that it's a bit disingenuous to suggest that "society" or "taxpayers" do not receive benefits from the railway

Quieter: Yes, but I think that benefit is more for people living near the railway. Yes an EMU is quieter than an 800 is quieter than a 222, but the engine noise in a 222 is not too intrusive to me - I don't hear people complaining/clutching their ears. It's only a real benefit if shows up in more journeys or higher fares. I really don't think 99% of rail users care.

Acceleration: Agree... However, is an EMU really so much faster than a 222? A typical post-2023 EMT service with bimodes would probably only have 4-5 stops where it pulls away on diesel, so to me this feels like 2-3 minutes end-end? Remember it'll be all electric South of Kettering anyway, so should deliver operation/ resilience/ journey time improvements South of Bedford.

Greater frequency: I think the fiasco over the EMT timetable post-May means that, with the GTR timetable, you're never going to see more than 6tph EMT out of St Pancras. Even if you did, then it probably needs the Syston-Wigston Capacity scheme (which is not electrification) to get more than 4tph through Leicester, or have platform capacity to turn back EMT services.

I completely agree on local air quality. Standing on the platform at Leicester in calm weather is a deeply unpleasant experience. Although presumably new bimodes are a big step ahead of HST/222 in terms of NOx and particulates.

The compelling part for me is getting away from fossil fuels - The total cost of electricity is lower, and in the long-run will be less volatile than diesel (the wholesale electricity price is a declining part of NR's bill).
Plus the CO2 argument. Doesn't directly benefit the passenger, but hey, passengers are also inhabitants of planet Earth. It will be interesting to see if an upward CO2 price changes the BCR for electrification.

On the upside - given the HS2/Chesterfield-Sheffield, and the Kettering project, I think the MML is only one chunky infill scheme (LEI/DER/NOT) away from being an electric passenger railway, with the ability to use batteries to get across gaps e.g. Leicester-Kettering or Derby-Clay Cross, which would certainly be more innovative.

 

[Bald Rick]

That is a very good question. It would depend how far north it went.

If it went as far as Leicester, you could conceivably run all Nottingham and Sheffield services fast to Leicester assuming paths could be found for a half-hourly Leicester - London EMU stopper covering all stops to Wellingborough at the very least. This would mean 8 tph leaving St Pancras high level - 2 each for Sheffield, Nottingham, Leicester and Corby - no idea whether that's doable? And before anyone say's 'that's too far on an EMU' it's a similar distance to Birmingham or Peterborough - and shorter than Weymouth.

8tph isn’t doable:

1) not enough fast line capacity south of Bedford
2) not enough capacity at Wigston, nor at Leicester itself.
3) the ‘stoppers’ will take 16 - 20 minutes longer between St P and Leicester than a fast. Essentially this means there would have to be compromises on stopping patterns and/or journey times for stations south of Leicester.

 

[CdBrux]

8tph isn’t doable:

1) not enough fast line capacity south of Bedford
2) not enough capacity at Wigston, nor at Leicester itself.
3) the ‘stoppers’ will take 16 - 20 minutes longer between St P and Leicester than a fast. Essentially this means there would have to be compromises on stopping patterns and/or journey times for stations south of Leicester.

Would it help if Corby and Leicester trains split/join at Kettering? Assuming electric to Leicester and that actually gave good enough benefits