MML vs GCML

[Matt P]

I know the merits of the GCML as a HS2 alternative and various what if the GCML hadn't closed topics have been discussed here and elsewhere. By asking my question I am not intending to stray into either.

What I am hoping to find out is which of the two routes afforded the quickest journeys to Nottingham and Sheffield prior to the closure of the GCML (and quite possibly prior to the focus of traffic on the MML).

 

[6Gman]

Ironically I believe the quickest route from Sheffield to London at various times was via Retford to Kings Cross!

But I think the MML was generally quicker than the GC.

 

[RT4038]

Trains ran much less frequently then, but it was generally faster by MML - often by quite a margin. [MML Nottingham trains ran via Melton and Sheffield trains via Erewash Valley]. However, because of the relative infrequency, a GC line train may have been more convenient at the time you wanted to travel.

 

[30907]

This is Summary Table 2 from the 1958 ER timetable, when the Master Cutler was still a GC service (it swapped to the GN a year or so later IIRC). The best Midland trains beat it by half an hour; the GN route was only occasionally competitive pre dieselisation.

https://timetableworld.com/ttw-viewer.php?token=c37af6ca-47cd-49b3-8db0-b08756a86bef

 

[Magdalia]

This is Summary Table 2 from the 1958 ER timetable, when the Master Cutler was still a GC service (it swapped to the GN a year or so later IIRC).

Ironically I believe the quickest route from Sheffield to London at various times was via Retford to Kings Cross!

The Master Cutler ran via Retford to/from Kings Cross starting in September 1958, with end to end journey times of 2 hours 45 minutes. The Sheffield Pullman end to end journey times were 2 hours 55 minutes, these also calling at Peterborough and Grantham.

 

[midland1]

As post 3 puts it "Trains ran much less frequently then" there were only 5 daytime fasts up and down the GC, not the every hour service people would expect today! Looks more like a strike timetable!

 

[Merle Haggard]

This may be relevant to journey times comparisons. I travelled from Derby and Nottingham to Sheffield on expresses on quite a number of occasions in the middle & late 1960s. and progress then was slow because of speed restrictions caused by subsidence. This was due to the extent of mining in the area, but I remember that the fast lines were kept something like level by very large amounts of ballast being used to raise the line back to level where the alignment had dropped. Most sections were 4 tracks, and the goods lines were usually left to subside but with much lower speed restrictions, and I remember that it was very interesting to watch the undulations of the goods lines to give an idea if just how much ballast there was under the fast lines. There were occasional up or down 'ramps' on the fast lines, presumably where the coal face was moving in the same direction as the line.

Not having used the route for many years I caught a Voyager from Derby soon after their introduction and was surprised how comparatively soon the announcement that the train was approaching Chesterfield was made. My recollection was that, in the 1960s, that distance took about an hour (though then there was a lot more interest; Westhouses and Hasland, the distinctive smell of Avenue Coking Plant, the three level Horns Bridge, the loco scrapyard just North of Chesterfield tp pass the time!).

I never travelled on the G.C. but possibly it also had the same problems.

 

[MisterSheeps]

I caught a Voyager from Derby

If you went from Derby you would only have had a slow journey north of Clay Cross Jn to south of Chesterfield (Hasland). The Erewash line from Trowell Jn was slow most of the way, other than through Alfreton tunnel, and worst from Langley Mill to Pye Bridge. The GC likewise through Heath was slow.

In general, the main problem with the GC was the Metropolitan section, Harrow to Aylesbury (95 Metropolitan, 21 GC trains each way Harrow - Watford S Jc in 1950) (or the GW & GC route via Princes Risborough). The main use of the GC was north of Woodford Halse with traffic from Banbury ... 29 freights each way north of Woodford, 21 for Banbury, 7 to Neasden, 1300 wagons a day (figures from BR Steam Operating, vol 3 Marylebone - Rugby, P Stears, Xpress Publishing).

 

[RT4038]

If you went from Derby you would only have had a slow journey north of Clay Cross Jn to south of Chesterfield (Hasland). The Erewash line from Trowell Jn was slow most of the way, other than through Alfreton tunnel, and worst from Langley Mill to Pye Bridge. The GC likewise through Heath was slow.

In general, the main problem with the GC was the Metropolitan section, Harrow to Aylesbury (95 Metropolitan, 21 GC trains each way Harrow - Watford S Jc in 1950) (or the GW & GC route via Princes Risborough). The main use of the GC was north of Woodford Halse with traffic from Banbury ... 29 freights each way north of Woodford, 21 for Banbury, 7 to Neasden, 1300 wagons a day (figures from BR Steam Operating, vol 3 Marylebone - Rugby, P Stears, Xpress Publishing).

It was about 15 min faster London-Leicester on MML rather than the fastest train on the GC. But Leicester-Sheffield via Erewash Valley or London-Nottingham via Manton was always faster than Leicester-Nottingham-Sheffield or London-Leicester-Nottingham. The GC 'fast' trains tended to have more stops (Aylesbury, Brackley, Rugby, Loughborough etc) , whereas the MML expresses had none or fewer.

 

[Western Lord]

The Great Central route between London and Leicester via Aylesbury was around four miles longer than the Midland. If routed via High Wycombe it was around eight miles longer.

 

[hexagon789]

Worth bearing in mind also, the MML had a linespeed of 90/80mph (depending how far north you were); the GC was only 75mph and only 60 through many of the intermediate stations with island platforms.

At least those were the speeds I've seen in Sectional Appendices.

 

[Taunton]

Key issue was the GCML had been built without any connection to other relevant railways, not only for through running but even for connections. The line from Woodford to Banbury formed a connection, but its main purpose was to keep through traffic between GC/LNER and GWR points off the Midland/LMS, and thus to keep revenue sharing between just themselves. Come 1948 and that need disappeared.

The additional stations built were, inevitably by 1900, at the periphery of the built-up area then. Rugby is a classic, the town had a major LNWR station with branches in all directions, but the unconnected GCR station way separated, down a side road in the suburbs.

 

[70014IronDuke]

Worth bearing in mind also, the MML had a linespeed of 90/80mph (depending how far north you were); the GC was only 75mph and only 60 through many of the intermediate stations with island platforms.

At least those were the speeds I've seen in Sectional Appendices.

Presumably that was a post-WW2 line speed, imposed after the hardships of the war itself. That implies that immediately post war and even in the early 50s the Eastern Region was not willing to put too much investment into raising the line speeds, thinking, perhaps, that even at that early stage the line might be for the chop. And of course, they needed to invest into the GN and GE main lines, which took priority.

Was there a 60 mph limit through the island platform station pre WW2? If these restrictions were common, and really needed to be there because of the track geometry, it is little wonder that - apart from the limited number of A3s allocated to the line - even the South Yorkshireman was blessed with nothing more than a B1 in charge most of the time.

 

[hexagon789]

Presumably that was a post-WW2 line speed, imposed after the hardships of the war itself. That implies that immediately post war and even in the early 50s the Eastern Region was not willing to put too much investment into raising the line speeds, thinking, perhaps, that even at that early stage the line might be for the chop. And of course, they needed to invest into the GN and GE main lines, which took priority.

Was there a 60 mph limit through the island platform station pre WW2? If these restrictions were common, and really needed to be there because of the track geometry, it is little wonder that - apart from the limited number of A3s allocated to the line - even the South Yorkshireman was blessed with nothing more than a B1 in charge most of the time.

Pre-WW2, recorded maximum speeds of 80 were usual but whether 80 was the linespeed or simply the practical effects of judging 75mph without a speedometer.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

It is always surprising that the LNER, given their financial situation, did not cull a lot of the hopeless intermediate stations on the GC London Extension in the 1930s, as they ruthlessly did on the ECML. BR only got round to it just a few years before closure. As designed, the 'island' stations had sufficient land take for straight fast lines to be added as the traffic built up, which of course never came due to the grouping and changed circumstances. As to the siting of stations; yes Rugby was bad but Nottingham Victoria and Leicester Central were equally as good as the rival establishments. Lutterworth Central was actually much nearer to the town than the Midland station. North of Nottingham to Sheffield the original GC line suffered badly from mining subsidence and was heavily speed restricted.

 

[RT4038]

It is always surprising that the LNER, given their financial situation, did not cull a lot of the hopeless intermediate stations on the GC London Extension in the 1930s, as they ruthlessly did on the ECML. BR only got round to it just a few years before closure. As designed, the 'island' stations had sufficient land take for straight fast lines to be added as the traffic built up, which of course never came due to the grouping and changed circumstances. As to the siting of stations; yes Rugby was bad but Nottingham Victoria and Leicester Central were equally as good as the rival establishments. Lutterworth Central was actually much nearer to the town than the Midland station. North of Nottingham to Sheffield the original GC line suffered badly from mining subsidence and was heavily speed restricted.

Lutterworth Central? Do you mean Loughborough? Rugby Midland Station was/is not that convenient for Rugby town Centre either.
On which section of the ECML did the LNER 'ruthlessly' close the intermediate stations? I thought it was on the York-Scarborough line that they did this?

 

[Taunton]

Presumably that was a post-WW2 line speed, imposed after the hardships of the war itself. That implies that immediately post war and even in the early 50s the Eastern Region was not willing to put too much investment into raising the line speeds, thinking, perhaps, that even at that early stage the line might be for the chop. And of course, they needed to invest into the GN and GE main lines, which took priority.

Was there a 60 mph limit through the island platform station pre WW2? If these restrictions were common, and really needed to be there because of the track geometry, it is little wonder that - apart from the limited number of A3s allocated to the line - even the South Yorkshireman was blessed with nothing more than a B1 in charge most of the time.

I don't think there was a speed restriction round all the GCR island platforms; I believe it was in one of Dick Hardy's books (who I think was shedmaster at Woodford Halse in the late 1940s during his career), who had a pioneer A2 out from Doncaster for trials, the inspector said "coal trials be blowed lets see what it can do", and they hammered down the line with the approaches to the islands looking like the tracks veered sideways!

There was a lengthy and nicely written article I still recall from Trains Illustrated, early 1960 (it's up at the back of my attic somewhere), of the final day of GC route expresses, December 31 1959, observed at Leicester Central, noting the varied locos (almost a different type on any train) and loads. The busiest was the York to Bournemouth, just one each way per day, which continued.

 

[etr221]

As to the siting of stations; yes Rugby was bad but Nottingham Victoria and Leicester Central were equally as good as the rival establishments. Lutterworth Central was actually much nearer to the town than the Midland station. North of Nottingham to Sheffield the original GC line suffered badly from mining subsidence and was heavily speed restricted.

Something that is only apparent when you look at old maps - dating from when railways were new - is the extent to which railways, and their stations were built on the (then) edge of towns (which then grew out around them. The GC was unusual in Nottingham and Leicester in actually building through the cities, with central stations: the Midland lines had been built on the (then) edges.

Something I have thought about Heathrow Express is that it was a fast link from the edge of 1830s London (where the GWR could fairly readily acquire land for its station) to that of 1930s London (where there was land for an airport)

 

[edwin_m]

Something that is only apparent when you look at old maps - dating from when railways were new - is the extent to which railways, and their stations were built on the (then) edge of towns (which then grew out around them. The GC was unusual in Nottingham and Leicester in actually building through the cities, with central stations: the Midland lines had been built on the (then) edges.

As a latecomer they had to offer the same sort of proximity to the major city centres as their rivals did, and property demolition was needed accordingly. Only the existence of the Metropolitan saved them from having to do this in London too.

The same was probably true, though to a lesser extent, when the Midland extended to St Pancras.

Apart from Loughborough, I think the one major place where the GC had the advantage on proximity to the centre would have been Derby. Ironically the home of the Midland, but also somewhere the GC was distinctly uncompetitive on journey time to London.

 

[Merle Haggard]

What doesn't seem to have been mentioned sp far is that the quickest route from Nottingham to London, the Midland one via Melton, also closed as a through route. Sixty years ago, the fastest trains between Nottingham and St Pancras via that route took 2 hrs 15m up and 2hrs 8 m down.

Apart from Loughborough, I think the one major place where the GC had the advantage on proximity to the centre would have been Derby. Ironically the home of the Midland, but also somewhere the GC was distinctly uncompetitive on journey time to London.

Derby Friargate was G.N. pedantically, though allowing travel to London by changing in Nottingham onto the G.C...

Another lost Nottingham - London route was via the LNW/GN Joint and Northampton but its primary purpose was coal traffic.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Nottingham (London Road LL)-London was also fastest via Grantham and the GN.
In fact BR had to decide in the 1960s to keep Notts/Sheffield on the Midland to keep the MML in business.
If the GN/LNER had 4-tracked the Welwyn Viaduct, there would have been capacity on the ECML for Notts/Sheffield services.

The MS&L/GC route also carried GN services from Manchester to King's Cross via Woodhead and Retford until grouping.

 

[Merle Haggard]

Nottingham (London Road LL)-London was also fastest via Grantham and the GN.
In fact BR had to decide in the 1960s to keep Notts/Sheffield on the Midland to keep the MML in business.
If the GN/LNER had 4-tracked the Welwyn Viaduct, there would have been capacity on the ECML for Notts/Sheffield services.

The MS&L/GC route also carried GN services from Manchester to King's Cross via Woodhead and Retford until grouping.

The Midland seemed very precarious at that time - there was a scene to close Market Harborough to Kettering (or ?Wellingborough) with expresses diverted via Northampton and into Euston, and the St Pancras - Bedford d.m.u. service extended North to cover.

The Midland Railway's Leicester - Bedford section was built very much down to a price (the contractor bidding the lowest price was then told to reduce it considerably more) and wasn't a fast alignment as a result. It twists around to avoid hills (and, possibly, expensive landowners) except the unavoidable ones at Desborough and Sharnbrook.

Pedantically, the G.N. station for Grantham was High Level, the Low Level one was for Joint Line services towards Welham Jct

 

[edwin_m]

What doesn't seem to have been mentioned sp far is that the quickest route from Nottingham to London, the Midland one via Melton, also closed as a through route. Sixty years ago, the fastest trains between Nottingham and St Pancras via that route took 2 hrs 15m up and 2hrs 8 m down.

I assume that was because it didn't serve Leicester so a separate set of trains was needed to connect Leicester with London (assuming Derby/Erewash trains probably wouldn't have been enough) and Nottingham.

Pedantically, the G.N. station for Grantham was High Level, the Low Level one was for Joint Line services towards Welham Jct

London Road LL would have been the terminus for trains via Grantham before the opening of the line via HL to Victoria.

 

[Merle Haggard]

I assume that was because it didn't serve Leicester so a separate set of trains was needed to connect Leicester with London (assuming Derby/Erewash trains probably wouldn't have been enough) and Nottingham.

London Road LL would have been the terminus for trains via Grantham before the opening of the line via HL to Victoria.

Thanks, fair point - although perhaps Nottingham was the more important city in earlier days.

As an aside, the daily Northampton - Nottingham train, which ran until the Wellingborough branch closed in 1964, also took the Melton route, thereby avoiding one major traffic objective. Presumably it was intended to replicate the Joint Line service without acknowledging the reason for its failure, the lack of important intermediate stations.

I didn't realise Low Level was the original station for Grantham; I have old photos of Low Level (distinctive valence on the canopy, and a keen Nottingham photographer means there's more than a few) as part of my interest in the Joint Line and a bulb had now lit up - so that's what the G.N. locos were doing there!

 

[70014IronDuke]

I assume that was because it didn't serve Leicester so a separate set of trains was needed to connect Leicester with London (assuming Derby/Erewash trains probably wouldn't have been enough) and Nottingham.

That is as I understand it - after WCML electrification, the MML lost all but a handful of Manchester semi-fasts, so there was excess capacity. Leicester couldn't be left without a service, and Melton to Nottingham was deemed surplus to requirements.

Oakham was far too small to worry about, and Melton folks could go to Leicester. I am a little surprised that they closed Corby without a whimper - you'd have thought they could have extended a Class 127 service beyond Bedford every two hours, but the order of the day was cut, cut, cut the weak and boost the strong. So St Pancras - Leicester got 2 TPH, one fast, one semi-fast - the latter being a big improvement over the previous 1TP2H, with extras in the peaks.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I didn't realise Low Level was the original station for Grantham; I have old photos of Low Level (distinctive valence on the canopy, and a keen Nottingham photographer means there's more than a few) as part of my interest in the Joint Line and a bulb had now lit up - so that's what the G.N. locos were doing there!

And, of course the GN originally used the Midland station at Nottingham until it built its own station next door at London Road.
It's a pretty tangled railway history around Nottingham, even without the GC extension!

 

[Merle Haggard]

I am a little surprised that they closed Corby without a whimper

Corby was a heavy industry town, people there didn't have much reason to travel except at holiday times.

In my spotting days, I discovered that there was an obscure overnight Friday night Barton coach from Corby to Glasgow for only £2. I imagined that it was a very niche service but when I turned up, the back of the queue was some distance outside the bus station, and from memory more than half a dozen coaches were on the departure. that is of course explained by the origins of the steel works. Barton had the advantage that they could use vehicles and drivers used on schools contracts during the week so (in the days before 'Barbara Castle Hours') it was much more marginal than anything B.R. could do. Bit bizarre, the thought of coaches and drivers usually ambling around very rural Northamptonshire in the week then haring flat out down the A1 (we went Scotch Corner - A6) at weekends.

I'm not sure why, but there was never any resistance to Northamptonshire rail closures. The only mention in the local papers was 'United Counties spokesman said that they have ample resources to provide replacements'.

 

[Western Sunset]

Horses for courses...

Think of the reliability of service, city location of respective stations, possible onward destination, chance of getting a seat, etc.

 

[RT4038]

I'm not sure why, but there was never any resistance to Northamptonshire rail closures. The only mention in the local papers was 'United Counties spokesman said that they have ample resources to provide replacements'.

I suspect that was because the trains had long ceased to have any real relevance to local transport needs, and were basically running around empty. Northants. was not by any means unusual in this regard. The closed lines to the west of Northampton (Leamington, Banbury, Stratford) were all early closures running through empty countryside with little discernable passenger movement [save for Daventry, which had a splendid frequent omnibus service direct to Northampton] , and without direct train service to Northampton. The Northampton-Bedford and Kettering-Cambridge trains were empty, the Northampton-Wellingborough and Wellingborough-Higham Ferrers lines were very well served by buses (and Wellingborough Station is well out of the town) , as was Kettering-Corby. The Northampton-Market Harborough line only had inconveniently sited local stations, with more convenient buses. In suspect that the Northampton-Peterborough service [and the Rugby-Peterborough where it touched Northants] were pretty poorly used except for holiday trains.

What competition did a dirty steam train down at Castle or Bridge Street stations give to a splendid Lodekka to & from the Derngate bus station? !!!! (in those days of little traffic congestion, by passes, roundabouts etc.....)

 

[Western Sunset]

I suspect that was because the trains had long ceased to have any real relevance to local transport needs, and were basically running around empty. Northants. was not by any means unusual in this regard. The closed lines to the west of Northampton (Leamington, Banbury, Stratford) were all early closures running through empty countryside with little discernable passenger movement [save for Daventry, which had a splendid frequent omnibus service direct to Northampton] , and without direct train service to Northampton. The Northampton-Bedford and Kettering-Cambridge trains were empty, the Northampton-Wellingborough and Wellingborough-Higham Ferrers lines were very well served by buses (and Wellingborough Station is well out of the town) , as was Kettering-Corby. The Northampton-Market Harborough line only had inconveniently sited local stations, with more convenient buses. In suspect that the Northampton-Peterborough service [and the Rugby-Peterborough where it touched Northants] were pretty poorly used except for holiday trains.

What competition did a dirty steam train down at Castle or Bridge Street stations give to a splendid Lodekka to & from the Derngate bus station? !!!! (in those days of little traffic congestion, by passes, roundabouts etc.....)

Like "The Titfield Thunderbolt"; shiny new road coach vs 14xx and dusty old coaches.