What has been the fallout - if any - on the EMR "Connect" services to Corby?

[43066]

Isn't it 110 mph max? If so there's only a couple of places on the MML where you can do that anyway, and the superior accleration of the 360's means the journey times from Wellingborough are are about 52 mins.

Pretty much the entire route on the fasts between Wellingborough and London is 110mph+ linespeed for non EMU traffic, apart from the Lutons, St Albans and south of Cricklewood.

 

[Magdalia]

Is the Thameslink service that reduced now? Certainly on the GN side things are returning to 100% of the pre-Covid Thameslink service provision as of the new May timetable.

I know the Midland side isn’t quite back there yet (on the GN side the cuts have been borne by Great Northern branded services, leaving Thameslink intact), but this can’t leave that many 700s sitting spare now.

I’m sure there would be sufficient units to extend two of the Bedfords north (assuming the infrastructure is or can be made 12-car compliant?), though I’m not sure the already disgruntled Wellingborough users would welcome ironing boards and more stops!

24tph have never ran though. Max was 22tph.

There really aren't any spare class 700's in the peaks. On the East Coast side Thameslink is now back to a full timetable in the peaks.

And on the EM side, they are pretty close to full with the only thing missing a few Bedford - East Grinstead/Littlehampton workings.

Were the Class 700s procured to deliver 24tph through the Thameslink core, or not?

In the highest peak hour there are 5 fewer trains north and 5 fewer south.

As the trains are off the core often far more than an hour, the actual number may be nearer to 20 than 10.

It is quite hard to untangle how far away the current Thameslink timetable (starting today) is from the full timetable, as originally proposed.

The Cambridge-Maidstone East service continues to run to and from Kings Cross (hopefully forever). I think Cambridge-Maidstone East would have required 14 units but Cambridge-Kings Cross only requires 8 units, so I think there is a net saving of 6 here.

The peak Luton-Orpington service is not quite fully operational, some evening trains only work south of Blackfriars, but I think a full service may not require any more units.

The East Grinstead and Littlehampton services have a token one train each going north in the morning and south in the evening. I don't know how many East Grinstead and Littlehampton services were in the original proposal, so can't draw a conclusion on how many units are saved by this.

But the total number of units not utilised is near to 10 and nowhere near 20.

 

[bramling]

It is quite hard to untangle how far away the current Thameslink timetable (starting today) is from the full timetable, as originally proposed.

The Cambridge-Maidstone East service continues to run to and from Kings Cross (hopefully forever). I think Cambridge-Maidstone East would have required 14 units but Cambridge-Kings Cross only requires 8 units, so I think there is a net saving of 6 here.

The peak Luton-Orpington service is not quite fully operational, some evening trains only work south of Blackfriars, but I think a full service may not require any more units.

The East Grinstead and Littlehampton services have a token one train each going north in the morning and south in the evening. I don't know how many East Grinstead and Littlehampton services were in the original proposal, so can't draw a conclusion on how many units are saved by this.

But the total number of units not utilised is near to 10 and nowhere near 20.

I suspect the missing part of Cambridge-Maidstone is balanced out by the extra units which are needed to cover Rainham. Luton-Rainham uses a fair few units, more so than Tattenham Corner and Caterham would have done.

 

[Mikw]

Pretty much the entire route on the fasts between Wellingborough and London is 110mph+ linespeed for non EMU traffic, apart from the Lutons, St Albans and south of Cricklewood.

Yes, that's what i thought, Just out of interest can you tell me the rough time difference between a 360 and 222 if they both did a theoretic non stop from Kettering to London?

 

[baz962]

Yes, that's what i thought, Just out of interest can you tell me the rough time difference between a 360 and 222 if they both did a theoretic non stop from Kettering to London?

That's a hard one. 222 will hit Kettering in around 45 minutes. Not sure about the 360 . The 360 in service is around an hour or over and even the ECS ones are diagrammed at an hour plus.

 

[nw1]

Not strictly related to Corby, but related to some of the points under discussion here:

What was the reasoning for the recast (a good few years before the electrification) which removed the 2-fast, 2-stopper flighted pattern out of St Pancras, with the stoppers being looped at Leicester to allow the following fast to overtake, and allow connections between fast and slow?

So it was something like Sheffield fast and Sheffield slow, then Nottingham fast and Nottingham slow.

Such a pattern on the face of it seemed to be a good one: it gave Leicester 2 non-stops an hour, the intermediate stations from Luton to Market Harborough 2 services an hour, and good connections at Leicester. Naively (as an outside observer, I'm not a regular user of this line) this seemed the obvious pattern for this route. It would have provided one fast train per hour to each of Sheffield and Nottingham, with a second train per hour available via Leicester connection (or, maybe, cheap advances on the stoppers all the way through for those money-sensitive but not time-sensitive).

Then the initial diesel Corby could have been slotted in at some other point in the hour, wherever paths permitted - its stopping pattern would not be so critical given the other services described above, and could be whatever was most convenient to path. Perhaps (and controversially) the Corby could then later have become a Thameslink extension (given Wellingborough and Kettering would have 2tph ICs with the pattern above), though not sure 700s would be so suitable for such a long service. 387s would probably have been fine though.

 

[jayah]

It is quite hard to untangle how far away the current Thameslink timetable (starting today) is from the full timetable, as originally proposed.

The Cambridge-Maidstone East service continues to run to and from Kings Cross (hopefully forever). I think Cambridge-Maidstone East would have required 14 units but Cambridge-Kings Cross only requires 8 units, so I think there is a net saving of 6 here.

The peak Luton-Orpington service is not quite fully operational, some evening trains only work south of Blackfriars, but I think a full service may not require any more units.

The East Grinstead and Littlehampton services have a token one train each going north in the morning and south in the evening. I don't know how many East Grinstead and Littlehampton services were in the original proposal, so can't draw a conclusion on how many units are saved by this.

But the total number of units not utilised is near to 10 and nowhere near 20.

If the fleet was built for 24tph each way, then at 19tph it cannot be less than 10 units.

In any case more than enough for them to run to Corby without this anomalous outer suburban EMR service with EMUs maintained off their network.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 May 2022 ==

From the new timetable in the highest peak there are two trains an hour fewer, not 5 so I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers from.

38 trains booked at City Thameslink today 0730-0830.

Thameslink and the Class 700 fleet was built for 24tph. So 5tph each way are missing.

Even if they travelled just 30 mins from City they would not return in that hour.

10 units.

 

[nw1]

I suspect the missing part of Cambridge-Maidstone is balanced out by the extra units which are needed to cover Rainham. Luton-Rainham uses a fair few units, more so than Tattenham Corner and Caterham would have done.

Always thought Rainham was an odd one, very messy and well away from TL's South Central focus - and, as has been discussed before, by stopping everywhere is much slower than the old Gillingham '62' which was limited-stop to Gravesend then all stations.

 

[Watershed]

38 trains booked at City Thameslink today 0730-0830.

Thameslink and the Class 700 fleet was built for 24tph. So 5tph each way are missing.

Even if they travelled just 30 mins from City they would not return in that hour.

10 units.

You need to consider that some routes have been extended, e.g. Rainham. Others have been split or curtailed in such a way that few units are saved (though usually saving more in terms of traincrew).

 

[43066]

Judging by the build up in traffic since Easter, even on Mondays and Fridays, their forecasts may need adjusting.

I can forsee Tuesdays to Thursdays overtaking pre pandemic levels by Christmas at this rate.

Yes, I think quite a few on here are unaware of current useage levels. There is certainly an agenda in some quarters to downplay the recovery - presumably to add weight to the “railway is too costly, let’s close it” arguments that are sometimes made on here!

You need to consider that some routes have been extended, e.g. Rainham. Others have been split or curtailed in such a way that few units are saved (though usually saving more in terms of traincrew).

From memory the GTR 700 order was criticised as being quite tight for the (admittedly incomplete) service that was running in 2019. As passenger numbers continue to pick up it’s difficult to really imagine there ever being enough stock to make Corby extensions viable, unless the 360s were transferred across.

 

[bramling]

Yes, I think quite a few on here are unaware of current useage levels. There is certainly an agenda in some quarters to downplay the recovery - presumably to add weight to the “railway is too costly, let’s close it” arguments that are sometimes made on here!



From memory the GTR 700 order was criticised as being quite tight for the (admittedly incomplete) service that was running in 2019. As passenger numbers continue to pick up it’s difficult to really imagine there ever being enough stock to make Corby extensions viable, unless the 360s were transferred across.

Pre-Covid I’d say the 700 fleet was very tight, not helped by the fact reliability has never quite picked up to where it was hoped to be. The 700/1 fleet in particular has found itself stretched.

I’d suggest Corby could, just about, be achieved with the timetables as they are, but leaving no room for recovery. No way it could be done with the pre-Covid timetables - not through the day at any rate, it might have been possible off-peak and late evening using the stock which stabled during the day off the Littlehampton / East Grinstead peak extras, though I’m not sure what value this would add.

The other way of doing it would be to remove the 8x 700/0 diagrams on the GN side which never see the core (this isn’t actually quite true now Welwyn/Sevenoaks has happened, but with things arranged differently it would still be viable). But this would require finding the equivalent of at least 16 4-car Electrostars to replace them on GN, doesn’t help with any 12-car running, and may introduce an issue of not enough 700/0s seeing Hornsey / 3B Depots in the natural course of their work.

 

[jayah]

You need to consider that some routes have been extended, e.g. Rainham. Others have been split or curtailed in such a way that few units are saved (though usually saving more in terms of traincrew).

They only go to Rainham every half hour.
There are 20 trains missing in the 2hr peak through the core, few of which are on the same diagram.

I think it has been ascertained a number of ways there is a significant number of Thameslink units available if they wanted to take advantage of the fact the wires don't end at Beford any more.

But despite having an EMU depot in Beford, the railway will continue running duplicate services, dragging EMUs to Northampton and make people change 3 times to get from St Albans to Sheffield, long after this conversion ends.

 

[Peregrine 4903]

They only go to Rainham every half hour.
There are 20 trains missing in the 2hr peak through the core, few of which are on the same diagram.

I think it has been ascertained a number of ways there is a significant number of Thameslink units available if they wanted to take advantage of the fact the wires don't end at Beford any more.

But despite having an EMU depot in Beford, the railway will continue running duplicate services, dragging EMUs to Northampton and make people change 3 times to get from St Albans to Sheffield, long after this conversion ends.

I'm sorry, but I don't think you have got your numbers right.

 

[A0]

That's a hard one. 222 will hit Kettering in around 45 minutes. Not sure about the 360 . The 360 in service is around an hour or over and even the ECS ones are diagrammed at an hour plus.

They're timetabled to do 1h 04m from Kettering to St Pancras with 4 intermediate stops.

If you said the time penalty for Wellingborough and Bedford was 3 mins each (1 min stopped plus 1 min for slow down / speed up) that would be reasonable. So that's 6 minutes, then you've got the two Lutons which are more difficult because they are so close together.

If you look at RTT a Meridian will cover Leagrave Junc to Harpenden Junc in 5.5 mins (non stop), the 360s are getting about 10 mins in which they stop twice. I think a non stop 360 would be close to the Meridian time so lets say there is 5 mins lost there as well.

That's 11 mins - suggesting ~50 mins is achievable with a 360 non stop St P to Kettering.

 

[baz962]

It would al

They're timetabled to do 1h 04m from Kettering to St Pancras with 4 intermediate stops.

If you said the time penalty for Wellingborough and Bedford was 3 mins each (1 min stopped plus 1 min for slow down / speed up) that would be reasonable. So that's 6 minutes, then you've got the two Lutons which are more difficult because they are so close together.

If you look at RTT a Meridian will cover Leagrave Junc to Harpenden Junc in 5.5 mins (non stop), the 360s are getting about 10 mins in which they stop twice. I think a non stop 360 would be close to the Meridian time so lets say there is 5 mins lost there as well.

That's 11 mins - suggesting ~50 mins is achievable with a 360 non stop St P to Kettering.

It would also be different slightly in each direction. Much more 125 running northbound than South. But then it's slower through Bedford going North. Probably need a mathematician to get an accurate timing. But yes it wouldn't be far off the meridian time. Going southbound the meridian can hit 120 between Kettering and Wellingborough and then 80 through Wellingborough. The 360 is 100 max on the fasts and only 65 through Wellingborough.

 

[Dr Hoo]

It would al

It would also be different slightly in each direction. Much more 125 running northbound than South. But then it's slower through Bedford going North. Probably need a mathematician to get an accurate timing. But yes it wouldn't be far off the meridian time. Going southbound the meridian can hit 120 between Kettering and Wellingborough and then 80 through Wellingborough. The 360 is 100 max on the fasts and only 65 through Wellingborough.

Are the 360s subject to a lower passing speed at Wellingborough than the Meridian (i.e. 65 vice 80)?

I presume that you are comparing speeds on identical route/tracks/lines?

 

[A0]

It would al

It would also be different slightly in each direction. Much more 125 running northbound than South. But then it's slower through Bedford going North. Probably need a mathematician to get an accurate timing. But yes it wouldn't be far off the meridian time. Going southbound the meridian can hit 120 between Kettering and Wellingborough and then 80 through Wellingborough. The 360 is 100 max on the fasts and only 65 through Wellingborough.

Worth pointing out Kettering - Wellingborough is just under 7 miles - the difference between 100 mph and 120 mph is of the order of 45 seconds.

 

[43074]

What was the reasoning for the recast (a good few years before the electrification) which removed the 2-fast, 2-stopper flighted pattern out of St Pancras, with the stoppers being looped at Leicester to allow the following fast to overtake, and allow connections between fast and slow?

That kind of happened in two stages, the first kept the 2 fast/2 stopper pattern south of Leicester but removed the overtaking to improve performance and use 222 rather than 170 timing loads, that was about June 2005.

Then a combination of Corby opening (which diverted one of the stoppers away from north of Market Harborough), a desire to run two relatively fast trains per hour to Sheffield, and accelerating some of the faster services using 222s instead of HSTs followed in December 2008, subsequently improved on in December 2013 with the 125mph timetable.

 

[Class 170101]

It’s even worse if you are making this type of journey to or from somewhere like St. Albans with 3 changes and very long journey times. The M1 certainly wins.

I'm surprised that the MML semi fast trains to Nottingham and Sheffield don't and therefore would support them stopping at Bedford.

In terms of Class 700s what would happen if you extended north ofBedford to Corby as discussed but removed the Class 700s from the Wimbledon loop and providing either new or different stock to run between Blackfriars bays and the Wimbledon loop?

 

[Mikw]

That's a hard one. 222 will hit Kettering in around 45 minutes. Not sure about the 360 . The 360 in service is around an hour or over and even the ECS ones are diagrammed at an hour plus.

Thanks, that's with the 360 stopping four times. I wonder what they'd do it in on a non stopper?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 May 2022 ==

I must admit i'm finding the discussion of overall speed between the 360s and 222s very interesting.

I'm a fairly frequent user of the line and St Pancras to Kettering non stop on the 222 is usually about 49-54 mins, the same journey but stopping at the connect stations is usually an hour on the 360. So that suggests the time difference would only be a few minutes.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I'm surprised that the MML semi fast trains to Nottingham and Sheffield don't and therefore would support them stopping at Bedford.

I seem to recall from previous discussions here that the infrastructure at Bedford won't allow it. Looking at Google maps, it looks to me like there simply isn't a platform on the Southbound fast line, though I'm sure someone who knows the area can confirm.

You'd also need a platform design that allows you to enforce no local Bedford-London journeys, as I'm pretty sure you wouldn't want local commuters filling the seats on the long-distance trains.

Having said that, in the long run, if the infrastructure could be provided, that would seem like the ideal solution - especially once E-W Rail is serving Bedford.

In the short run, I think I'd be inclined to favour stopping all EMR services (the Sheffield ones, not just the Nottingham ones) at Kettering - the extra few minutes on the London-East Midlands journeys seems a small price to pay for better connections with - well - pretty much everywhere between St Albans and Kettering.

 

[DelayRepay]

In terms of Class 700s what would happen if you extended north ofBedford to Corby as discussed but removed the Class 700s from the Wimbledon loop and providing either new or different stock to run between Blackfriars bays and the Wimbledon loop?

All hell would break lose with the local politicians, I expect. Didn't the original Thameslink plan see the Wimbledon loop being operated as a standalone service from Blackfriars, rather than having through trains to Luton, but the locals were up in arms about having to change trains if they wanted to go to St Pancras?

 

[TheBigD]

I seem to recall from previous discussions here that the infrastructure at Bedford won't allow it. Looking at Google maps, it looks to me like there simply isn't a platform on the Southbound fast line, though I'm sure someone who knows the area can confirm.

No platform on the up fast.

Platform on the down fast was added (I think) in 1999 for the new MML timetable with 170s on the new stopping services. Until then, down MML trains had to cross over and use platforms 1-3 before crossing back over to the Down fast.

 

[gabrielhj07]

All hell would break lose with the local politicians, I expect. Didn't the original Thameslink plan see the Wimbledon loop being operated as a standalone service from Blackfriars, rather than having through trains to Luton, but the locals were up in arms about having to change trains if they wanted to go to St Pancras?

It certainly would! Operating the Wimbledon/Sutton loop independent from the rest of TL makes a lot of logistical sense, and would free up units for more 'useful' deployment. I may be guilty of enjoying the TL service to St Albans/St Pancras though.

 

[baz962]

Are the 360s subject to a lower passing speed at Wellingborough than the Meridian (i.e. 65 vice 80)?

I presume that you are comparing speeds on identical route/tracks/lines?

Yes , 360 65 through Wellingborough on the fast and 222 80 on the fast.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 May 2022 ==

Thanks, that's with the 360 stopping four times. I wonder what they'd do it in on a non stopper?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 May 2022 ==

I must admit i'm finding the discussion of overall speed between the 360s and 222s very interesting.

I'm a fairly frequent user of the line and St Pancras to Kettering non stop on the 222 is usually about 49-54 mins, the same journey but stopping at the connect stations is usually an hour on the 360. So that suggests the time difference would only be a few minutes.

I guess it depends on the diagrammed times v actual. If a 222 doesn't have a 360 or a Thameslink in its way It can do it in 45-46.

 

[LCC106]

@baz962 I think you mean 65 on the slow. There’s no differential on the fast for EMUs I seem to think.

 

[baz962]

@baz962 I think you mean 65 on the slow. There’s no differential on the fast for EMUs I seem to think.

No . It's 65 through Wellingborough on the fast for a 360 and 80 for a 222. The slow is 60 everything on the up and 50 on the down.

 

[LCC106]

Ah thanks for that.

 

[A0]

I'm surprised that the MML semi fast trains to Nottingham and Sheffield don't and therefore would support them stopping at Bedford.

Bedford makes no sense at all - the *only* station south of Kettering on the fast EMR services which might make sense is Luton Airport Parkway, but it means slowing down services which are not that quick in the scheme of things on an already busy line, so it impacts other services.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 May 2022 ==

I don't know if there were ever significant passenger flows, but having to change twice to get from anywhere north of Leicester to wellingborough/bedford/luton is quite off-putting, especially for getting to Luton airport.

See my posts #80 and #85 about the likely demand for Luton Airport from the East Mids - basically it's very limited because the East Mids has other airports covering the same destinations which are *much* closer.

 

[Envy123]

Bedford makes no sense at all - the *only* station south of Kettering on the fast EMR services which might make sense is Luton Airport Parkway, but it means slowing down services which are not that quick in the scheme of things on an already busy line, so it impacts other services.

The issue is that Bedford is the limit of the outer suburbans from Thameslink. If electrification happened earlier, we might have seen Thameslink end at Corby, and first stop Kettering intercity services wouldn't be so much of an issue.

Sadly, even if there were paths to do so and the rolling stock, Wellingborough commuters would be fuming at having to ride the class 700s and pay intercity fares for doing so.