MML vs ECML some thoughts

[cactustwirly]

The ECML is seen as the premier Intercity line, and the MML isn't seen as important.

However the station usage figures(17/18) are quite interesting, actually the MML stations aren't too far off the ECML.
I'm comparing Peterborough, Doncaster, York, Darlington, Durham & Newcastle; with Leicester, Loughborough, Nottingham, Derby, Chesterfield & Sheffield.

ECML:

Peterborough: 4.909 million; pop 198,900; ua 198,900
Doncaster: 3.857 million; pop 109,805; ua 308,900
Wakefield Westgate: 2.477 million; pop 99,251; ua 325,800
Leeds: 31 million; pop 784,800; ua 1,901,934
York: 9.834 million; pop 208,200; ua 208,200
Darlington: 2.325 million; pop 92,363; ua 92,363
Durham: 2.748 million; pop 48,069; ua 48,069
Newcastle: 8.757 million; pop 295,800; ua 879,996
Edinburgh: 23.334 million; 464,990; ua 513,210

Total: 89.214 million; 2,292,178; ua 4,477,972

MML:

Leicester: 5.392 million; pop 329,839; ua 508,916
Loughborough: 1.297 million; pop 59,317; ua 59,317
Nottingham: 7.859 million; pop 321,500; ua 915,977
Derby: 4.089 million; pop 248,700; ua 270,500
Chesterfield: 1.859 million; pop 104,600; ua 104,600
Sheffield: 9.668 million; pop 577,800; 685,368

Total: 30.164 million; 1,614,756; ua 2,544,678

Quite interesting that York, Durham and Darlington usages are higher than expected, but I suspect that York's figures are highly skewed towards tourists (like Bath, Oxford etc)

 

[Kettledrum]

What makes this especially remarkable is that the MML passenger numbers at those stations is suppressed by an appauling service

 

[apinnard]

They didn't call it the "Cinderella line" for nothing. Historically the Midland Mainline has been a rags to rags route that has always had to make do. Even the ongoing electrification is a bit of a half-job.

 

[VT 390]

What makes this especially remarkable is that the MML passenger numbers at those stations is suppressed by an appauling service

I agree that some MML stations have a terrible service (especially on Sundays) but stations such as Leicester I think have quite a good weekday service it could just do with longer trains.

 

[cle]

Yep very interesting, and it is definitely overshadowed by both ECML and WCML. I suspect that the MML could do more, in terms of once wired, offering alternative routing/competition to Leeds, and reviving Rio service to Manchester, more for the interim journeys.

But yes, there have been a lot of improvements and once 4 tracking and wiring advance, it will be more attractive. And when you add in Corby and the stations north of Bedford, and Market Harborough too, it's definitely underserved and under-appreciated!

 

[Bald Rick]

The MML has the best service it has ever had. It’s not so very long ago there were 3 trains every two hours at best.

 

[apinnard]

I live in a small town pretty much equidistant to Kettering and Huntingdon. If I am going to London, I always chose Huntingdon. For so many reasons it's a better option than the Midland Mainline.

 

[Royston Vasey]

Because the MML is to a great extent a commuter line.

Cambridge has almost 11,000,000 and is only served by suburban EMUs and a few DMUs to Mordor

 

[Iskra]

The ECML has had/is having a step change due to the new Franchise that was awarded to VTEC. It's unfair to compare the current service provision with the MML, as the MML service is still based on provision made before 2007, whereas the ECML is not.

The station usage figures quoted above ignore the fact that provision for Leeds and Edinburgh passengers (usage statistics conveniently not given) is a massive driver of the service level on the ECML.

Could the MML be improved; yes. Is it terrible, or woefully inadequate; no. I'd still put sorting the XC franchise ahead of the MML if we are prioritising based on urgent passenger needs.

@cactustwirly do you have an agenda to declare regarding EMT/MML as you are a consistent and very vocal critic?

 

[cle]

The MML has the best service it has ever had. It’s not so very long ago there were 3 trains every two hours at best.

Agreed. So it should be grateful? Is that the angle and sentiment?

Surely both WCML and ECML also have the best services they've ever had? GWML and Chiltern too. Note I refer to frequency, not reliability or comfort!

 

[swt_passenger]

Yep very interesting, and it is definitely overshadowed by both ECML and WCML. I suspect that the MML could do more, in terms of once wired, offering alternative routing/competition to Leeds, and reviving Rio service to Manchester, more for the interim journeys.

We discussed a while ago, possibly in an earlier thread on the same subject, that the East Midlands franchise ITT TSR tables don’t actually require any services to Leeds at all, Leeds is not mentioned in the ITT text either. Presumably DfT consider Leeds to London to be an ECML only role.
AIUI the services provided now are a side effect of the HSTs being maintained at Neville Hill.

 

[cactustwirly]

The ECML has had/is having a step change due to the new Franchise that was awarded to VTEC. It's unfair to compare the current service provision with the MML, as the MML service is still based on provision made before 2007, whereas the ECML is not.

The station usage figures quoted above ignore the fact that provision for Leeds and Edinburgh passengers (usage statistics conveniently not given) is a massive driver of the service level on the ECML.

Could the MML be improved; yes. Is it terrible, or woefully inadequate; no. I'd still put sorting the XC franchise ahead of the MML if we are prioritising based on urgent passenger needs.

@cactustwirly do you have an agenda to declare regarding EMT/MML as you are a consistent and very vocal critic?

Well the ECML has always got all the investment because it's seen as a 'golden goose'
But looking at those stats the MML isn't very far behind, especially if you consider the inferior service it gets in terms of speed and frequency, to the ECML.

I deliberately missed out Leeds and Edinburgh, because they would skew the usage, as LNER is the minority operator, the usage figures would be heavily skewed towards Non ECML services.

I think the MML is an excellent railway, with a lot of potential, it should have much higher usage figures than the ECML (serving bigger places) but it has a substandard timetable and a substandard operator, and a systemic lack of investment.

 

[cactustwirly]

Because the MML is to a great extent a commuter line.

Cambridge has almost 11,000,000 and is only served by suburban EMUs and a few DMUs to Mordor

How is it a commuter line?

Cambridge is what, 50 miles from London?
Leicester is 100 miles, Nottingham 130, and Sheffield is 200 miles from London!
Leicester is more comparable to Swindon than Cambridge (in terms of service level)

It's clearly an intercity line, it should have equal importance to the GWML at least!

 

[LeeLivery]

I wouldn't say it's not considered important but I've always considered the ECML as UK's flagship railway, even above the WCML. Very well built (OHLE is hit and miss but it's almost straight as an arrow south of Newcastle); serving London King's Cross - probably the most well known station in the UK (along with Paddington); connecting two capitals; serving the railway homes of York and Doncaster and it's route of the Mallard, Flying Scotsman and Deltic. Growing up partly in a town on the Midland, it's the line that made me interested in rail but, I always knew it couldn't compare in importance and even the history of it shows the difference.

I got my hands on the Oct '89 InterCity timetable and it's quite clear the difference in service between then and now. Of course, the population has greatly increased, but also, students. The MML benefits massively from growing student numbers. Nottingham, West Bridgford, Beeston, etc., has 60,000 students combined. Get on an HST from London to Nottingham in the last week of September and it's like a student union.

The timetable isn't that bad, it does its job and but could be better; Sunday is rubbish and since May, Wellingborough and Kettering are laughable. I'll miss the VP-185 HSTs, but the Midland just needs a new fleet (8-9 car units) and a reworked timetable. Electrification would be great, but not an end all. It has potential, and if we can get a EWR XC service along it then I think most would be rather happy.

Edit: Bedford could do with extra platforms and an extra track between Leicester and Syston wouldn't be a bad thing either. I'd also push for a few extra stations (Clapham - Oakley, Desborough, Kibworth, Rushden).

 

[Iskra]

Well the ECML has always got all the investment because it's seen as a 'golden goose'
But looking at those stats the MML isn't very far behind, especially if you consider the inferior service it gets in terms of speed and frequency, to the ECML.

I deliberately missed out Leeds and Edinburgh, because they would skew the usage, as LNER is the minority operator, the usage figures would be heavily skewed towards Non ECML services.

I think the MML is an excellent railway, with a lot of potential, it should have much higher usage figures than the ECML (serving bigger places) but it has a substandard timetable and a substandard operator, and a systemic lack of investment.

It's the fastest route between two capital cities. It's always going to be prestigious. It's also fairly flat and straight, so investment goes further than the same amount on a twistier and curvier mainline...

I think you have deliberately skewed the stats, to suit your ideological position. Leeds and Edinburgh have considerable usage, which doesn't suit your stance.

I do not agree that LNER are a minority operator at Leeds. They run the longest trains out of Leeds which are expresses to the capital city. In terms of total customers, I'd expect them to be in or around 2nd place after Northern. Using the same logic as you, EMT are the minority operator at Sheffield... If we're worried about skewed usage figures, there are plenty of issues in the MML stations you have chosen; Derby and Sheffield being good examples.

The MMl has had investment, we now have: 125mph running and electrification is progressing.

Hopefully we will see an improvement when the details of the next franchise are announced. I think we will.

 

[cactustwirly]

I wouldn't say it's not considered important but I've always considered the ECML as UK's flagship railway, even above the WCML. Very well built (OHLE is hit and miss but it's almost straight as an arrow south of Newcastle); serving London King's Cross - probably the most well known station in the UK (along with Paddington); connecting two capitals; serving the railway homes of York and Doncaster and it's route of the Mallard, Flying Scotsman and Deltic. Growing up partly in a town on the Midland, it's the line that made me interested in rail but, I always knew it couldn't compare in importance and even the history of it shows the difference.

I got my hands on the Oct '89 InterCity timetable and it's quite clear the difference in service between then and now. Of course, the population has greatly increased, but also, students. The MML benefits massively from growing student numbers. Nottingham, West Bridgford, Beeston, etc., has 60,000 students combined. Get on an HST from London to Nottingham in the last week of September and it's like a student union.

The timetable isn't that bad, it does its job and but could be better; Sunday is rubbish and since May, Wellingborough and Kettering are laughable. I'll miss the VP-185 HSTs, but the Midland just needs a new fleet (8-9 car units) and a reworked timetable. Electrification would be great, but not an end all. It has potential, and if we can get a EWR XC service along it then I think most would be rather happy.

But why is the ECML seen as a flagship railway?
It doesn't make any sense, as the MML, and definately the WCML and GWML serve bigger more important settlements!

 

[Iskra]

But why is the ECML seen as a flagship railway?
It doesn't make any sense, as the MML, and definately the WCML and GWML serve bigger more important settlements!

It makes sense if you stop ignoring Leeds and Edinburgh. Then there's Bradford, Sunderland, Hull, Glasgow and Aberdeen too.

 

[cactustwirly]

It's the fastest route between two capital cities. It's always going to be prestigious. It's also fairly flat and straight, so investment goes further than the same amount on a twistier and curvier mainline...

I think you have deliberately skewed the stats, to suit your ideological position. Leeds and Edinburgh have considerable usage, which doesn't suit your stance.

I do not agree that LNER are a minority operator at Leeds. They run the longest trains out of Leeds which are expresses to the capital city. In terms of total customers, I'd expect them to be in or around 2nd place after Northern. Using the same logic as you, EMT are the minority operator at Sheffield... If we're worried about skewed usage figures, there are plenty of issues in the MML stations you have chosen; Derby and Sheffield being good examples.

The MMl has had investment, we now have: 125mph running and electrification is progressing.

Hopefully we will see an improvement when the details of the next franchise are announced. I think we will.

I get your point, but the skewing happens to a smaller extent at Sheffield than at Leeds.
Leeds has a dense commuter rail network and obviously has XC and TPE as well, so it's difficult to make a direct comparison.
If you have figures for LNER passengers at Leeds I'll happily include them.
Edinburgh again has a lot of Scotrail services, which makes direct comparisons to the ECML difficult

 

[cactustwirly]

It makes sense if you stop ignoring Leeds and Edinburgh. Then there's Bradford, Sunderland, Hull, Glasgow and Aberdeen too.

But Bradford, Sunderland, Hull etc aren't anywhere near as important as Leicester, Nottingham, Birmingham, Manchester, Bristol etc.

 

[Iskra]

I get your point, but the skewing happens to a smaller extent at Sheffield than at Leeds.
Leeds has a dense commuter rail network and obviously has XC and TPE as well, so it's difficult to make a direct comparison.
If you have figures for LNER passengers at Leeds I'll happily include them.

Sheffield gets more XC services than Leeds...

I would love to have that information, but I don't.

Sorry, but the way you have presented figures selectively does not stand up to the slightest scrutiny.

 

[Iskra]

But Bradford, Sunderland, Hull etc aren't anywhere near as important as Leicester, Nottingham, Birmingham, Manchester, Bristol etc.

That's a matter of opinion. Manchester, Birmingham and Bristol aren't on the MML.

 

[LeeLivery]

But why is the ECML seen as a flagship railway?
It doesn't make any sense, as the MML, and definately the WCML and GWML serve bigger more important settlements!

For the reasons I've said.

1. Connects two capitals - London and Edinburgh, also two other major cities - Newcastle and Leeds and a branch to Cambridge.
2. It's history - the Flying Scotsman, Mallard and Deltic.
3. Doncaster, York, Darlington - railway Mecca.
4. London King's Cross is world famous.
5. Built very straight, 125mph throughout south of Newcastle and electrified throughout.

Maybe I'm not explaining it well, but honestly, I can't ever claim the Midland is on the same level, no matter how much I love it.

 

[cactustwirly]

For the reasons I've said.

1. Connects two capitals - London and Edinburgh, also two other major cities - Newcastle and Leeds and a branch to Cambridge.
2. It's history - the Flying Scotsman, Mallard and Deltic.
3. Doncaster, York, Darlington - railway Mecca.
4. London King's Cross is world famous.
5. Built very straight, 125mph throughout south of Newcastle and electrified throughout.

Maybe I'm not explaining it well, but honestly, I can't ever claim the Midland is on the same level, no matter how much I love it.

The MML serves large cities in the East Midlands, Nottingham is slightly bigger than Newcastle for example.
St Pancras is also world famous
The MML also has 125mph sections, and quite a few 120mph sections.

My point exactly, it's often overlooked because it didn't have famous locos like the Mallard, Flying Scotsman, City of Truro, GWR King classes etc

 

[Kite159]

And how many of those passengers quoted for Nottingham actually are from the MML services from London rather than local commuters from the Grantham/Lincoln/Worksop/Chesterfield direction?

Likewise for Derby, how many used the EMT services to/from London rather than the more frequent XC services

 

[sheff1]

The MML has the best service it has ever had. It’s not so very long ago there were 3 trains every two hours at best.

Where and when were these 3 trains every 2 hours ?

I certainly don't claim to remember the timetable for every year since the mid 70s when I first started to use the route, but seem to recall that back then there were alternate 'fast' services from Sheffield to St Pancras via Derby and Nottingham. These had cross platform interchanges at Leicester into/out of semi-fasts from Nottingham/Derby respectively meaning journey possibilities to Market Harborough/Kettering/Wellingborough/Bedford/Luton were much more frequent and seamless than today.

Even when the cross platform connections were removed, I thought there were still 4 trains every 2 hours from Leicester to St Pancras.

>>>>>>

Going back to the OP, ECML numbers which exclude Leeds (and Wakefield) cannot give the full picture.

 

[LeeLivery]

The MML serves large cities in the East Midlands, Nottingham is slightly bigger than Newcastle for example.
St Pancras is also world famous
The MML also has 125mph sections, and quite a few 120mph sections.

My point exactly, it's often overlooked because it didn't have famous locos like the Mallard, Flying Scotsman, City of Truro, GWR King classes etc

I know, I know, it's the Main Line I've travelled the most by far and I've lived in Nottingham for a few years. St Pancras is famous, but people around the world definitely know King's X better. I also think length is a factor. The ECML is what? Roughly double the length of the MML? 125mph is far more important to it than the Midland. I remember people on twitter baffled they spent millions on 125mph for the Midland to save a few minutes that quite frankly isn't very noticeable and just causes more of a headache with Thameslink timetabling.

If you asked the average person, would they really be that unhappy with the service? It's quite reliable; maybe I've been lucky, but I never had a service cancelled in any memory whatsoever (same can't be said for the GEML or ECML). No one really complains about the London to Nottingham journey time, 1hr 45 could be better but it's still faster than any alternative, with very good advance fares - round trip, not even £20 with a railcard. Sheffield could be better but it's Northamptonshire which really has the biggest right to complain. However, as long as the next franchise is sensible, that should be improved without the need to promise the earth.

 

[Kettledrum]

I agree that some MML stations have a terrible service (especially on Sundays) but stations such as Leicester I think have quite a good weekday service it could just do with longer trains.

Yes - the fast services from Leicester are good. Journey times and average speeds from further North are so poor that passengers travel to Doncaster and Grantham to use the ECML and Tamworth to use the WCML in peak periods.

 

[LeeLivery]

Where and when were these 3 trains every 2 hours ?

I certainly don't claim to remember the timetable for every year since the mid 70s when I first started to use the route, but seem to recall that back then there were alternate 'fast' services from Sheffield to St Pancras via Derby and Nottingham. These had cross platform interchanges at Leicester into/out of semi-fasts from Nottingham/Derby respectively meaning journey possibilities to Market Harborough/Kettering/Wellingborough/Bedford/Luton were much more frequent and seamless than today.

Even when the cross platform connections were removed, I thought there were still 4 trains per hour from Leicester to St Pancras.

>>>>>>

Going back to the OP, ECML numbers which exclude Leeds (and Wakefield) cannot give the full picture.

Example of the Oct 1989 timetable (beautiful black cover) at hand shows from London:

Monday - Friday
11:00 London - Sheffield (Bed, Wel, Ket, M Har, Leic, Derby, C'field)
11:30 London - Nottingham (Luton, Leic, L'borough)
12:00 London - Sheffield (Ket, M Har, Leic, Derby C'field)
12:25 London - Nottingham (Bed, Wel, Ket, Leic)

The only 4tph was the 17:00 hour:
17:00 London - Sheffield (Leic, Derby, C'field)
17:05 London - Nottingham (Wel, Ket, Leic, L'borough)
17:25 London - Sheffield (Leic, L'borough, Notts, Alferton, C'field)
17:30 London - Derby (Wel, Ket, M Har, Leic)

Saturday was half hourly with only Leicester being served by both. Sunday hourly, alternating between Nottingham and Sheffield until 16:35 when it became half hourly until 21:05, then hourly until 23:05.

 

[cactustwirly]

Leeds has a usage of 31 million, which is more than the MML and almost all the rest of the ECML combined!
It's not really helpful to add it as ultimately Leeds is only a part of the ECML service pattern, and we have no idea how many ECML passengers there are, as I suspect most of those are commuters to the rest of West Yorkshire/Manchester.

 

[DanTrain]

The ECML is seen as the premier Intercity line, and the MML isn't seen as important.

However the station usage figures(17/18) are quite interesting, actually the MML stations aren't too far off the ECML.
I'm comparing Peterborough, Doncaster, York, Darlington, Durham & Newcastle; with Leicester, Loughborough, Nottingham, Derby, Chesterfield & Sheffield.

ECML:


MML:


Quite interesting that York, Durham and Darlington usages are higher than expected, but I suspect that York's figures are highly skewed towards tourists (like Bath, Oxford etc)

This argument is statistically ridiculous- you’re not comparing like-to-like. Leeds and Edinburgh may skew the stats wildly, but you can’t just ignore them and say all is fine and dandy whilst you happily include Sheffield (lots of Northern/XC/TPE passengers) and Derby (EMT locals and XC)! There is patently not enough info in the usage stats to gauge this...you would need stats on how much each route is used.

Yes - the fast services from Leicester are good. Journey times and average speeds from further North are so poor that passengers travel to Doncaster and Grantham to use the ECML and Tamworth to use the WCML in peak periods.

This is very true...it’s often cheaper and quicker to go via Donny/Tamworth than go MML - EMT are managing to lose out to competition on a franchised railway, which is about as close to a monopoly as governments will allow.