Why don't East Midlands Trains stop at St Albans?

[CaptainHaddock]

I had a lovely day out in St Albans yesterday - it’s a great place if you like walking, history and real ale! Yet to get there from Sheffield you have to change at Leicester, Kettering and Luton, even though it’s on the same line. I was wondering therefore why EMR don’t stop at St Albans even though it’s a sizeable city which attracts plenty of tourists?

Looking at an old thread on here, ( https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/did-inter-city-stop-at-st-albans-in-the-timetable.167483/ ) I can see that Intercity services from Sheffield did stop there back in the 1970s and 1980s but were withdrawn once the electrified Bedford - St Pancras service was introduced.

However now the line is electrified through from Corby, EMR run two trains an hour from there, which stop at Bedford, Luton and Luton Airport Parkway then run fast to St Pancras. Surely there’s a market for at least one or both of these to call at St Albans? Or perhaps even one of the Nottingham - St Pancras trains, which would enable travellers from the North to change just once at Leicester?

 

[jfollows]

It's like Watford Junction, isn't it? In that hardly anything stops there any more but there are (more expensive) fares via London instead. I certainly would (reluctantly) pay more to avoid the three changes you describe.
I also remember the services which used to stop, before electrification I agree. I once used one from London to Luton to meet my mother and grandmother returning from holiday. Unfortunately the return trip to London was a DMU which coincided nicely with the end of an England-Scotland game at Wembley so it ended up rather full after some point (Cricklewood?).

EDIT For Watford Junction, the timetable can't work unless either everything or (virtually) nothing stops there, so presumably Saint Albans is similar. Watford gets one stop an hour I think.

 

[John Webb]

I had a lovely day out in St Albans yesterday - it’s a great place if you like walking, history and real ale! Yet to get there from Sheffield you have to change at Leicester, Kettering and Luton, even though it’s on the same line. I was wondering therefore why EMR don’t stop at St Albans even though it’s a sizeable city which attracts plenty of tourists?

Looking at an old thread on here, ( https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/did-inter-city-stop-at-st-albans-in-the-timetable.167483/ ) I can see that Intercity services from Sheffield did stop there back in the 1970s and 1980s but were withdrawn once the electrified Bedford - St Pancras service was introduced.

However now the line is electrified through from Corby, EMR run two trains an hour from there, which stop at Bedford, Luton and Luton Airport Parkway then run fast to St Pancras. Surely there’s a market for at least one or both of these to call at St Albans? Or perhaps even one of the Nottingham - St Pancras trains, which would enable travellers from the North to change just once at Leicester?

Glad you enjoyed St Albans! I agree with your comment and wonder why the Sheffield trains don't at least stop at Kettering, which would eliminate one of the changes you had to make.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

Glad you enjoyed St Albans! I agree with your comment and wonder why the Sheffield trains don't at least stop at Kettering, which would eliminate one of the changes you had to make.

Yes, it is an odd one regarding Kettering. Every other Nottingham - St Pancras train stops there but none of the Sheffield - St Pancras ones do; they all run non stop from Leicester to London. If EMR consider Kettering a suitable interchange for the Corby - St Pancras service they really ought to have more trains from the north calling there.

 

[zwk500]

I believe the answer is that stopping the fast trains anywhere south of Bedford is extremely difficult to fit between the Thameslink services.

St Albans is a lovely town but the priority for Sheffield customers will be London.

 

[Verulamius]

I believe the answer is that stopping the fast trains anywhere south of Bedford is extremely difficult to fit between the Thameslink services.

St Albans is a lovely town but the priority for Sheffield customers will be London.

City!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I had a lovely day out in St Albans yesterday - it’s a great place if you like walking, history and real ale! Yet to get there from Sheffield you have to change at Leicester, Kettering and Luton, even though it’s on the same line. I was wondering therefore why EMR don’t stop at St Albans even though it’s a sizeable city which attracts plenty of tourists?

This disconnect is caused by the fact that most EMRs don't stop at Bedford, which is in part because it doesn't have a platform on the up fast.

This could be fixed, but the real fix is to extend EMU services, possibly even Thameslink, to Leicester once the wires are up. Then anywhere on EMR is one change to most places on Thameslink (or at worst two), much like is the case with MKC for a number of key WCML destinations (albeit not quite all trains).

 

[Djgr]

It's the ongoing debate about whether "Intercity" trains are there fundamentally to serve cities out of London or its outer dormitory suburbs.

My personal view is the former.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's the ongoing debate about whether "Intercity" trains are there fundamentally to serve cities out of London or its outer dormitory suburbs.

It's not, it's about whether connectivity is important, and in my view it is.

Thus a stop (pick up/set down only if necessary) at the outer end of the suburban system for IC services is a very good thing. It also acts as a "parkway" station widening coverage.

 

[cle]

Watford and St Albans also have like 80% of their demand to London, and since the 70s, they have 8+ tph each. The service to London is far better, which covers most users.

Ideally, a call would be doable. I'm sure it would be popular. I would think a Leicester EMU slow (which could alt with Luton/LAP calls) in time, or a Sheffield.

Interestingly, Stevenage which is the ECML equivalent, has seen a reasonable renaissance of long distance calls with an hourly Leeds and York/Lincoln slow. Lumo too.

Digression but I think if Watford had a Manchester, that would be enough. For St Albans, maybe a longer distance (1tp2h Nott, 1tp2h Sheffield, like the old Watford days) - would be better to cover the key destination. As plenty of services to Luton/s to grab the Corby service.

But another view: Birmingham, Manchester, Edinburgh - arguably far more important for the Herts belt to access than Sheffield or Nottingham.

 

[bobster1001]

This disconnect is caused by the fact that most EMRs don't stop at Bedford, which is in part because it doesn't have a platform on the up fast.

This could be fixed, but the real fix is to extend EMU services, possibly even Thameslink, to Leicester once the wires are up. Then anywhere on EMR is one change to most places on Thameslink (or at worst two), much like is the case with MKC for a number of key WCML destinations (albeit not quite all trains).

Always thought that extending the connect service to Leicester (electrics permitting) would be a great idea. Improving services to Oakham and Melton, easier connections from Corby, probably helps some of the capacity problems on the intercity services

 

[Doctor Fegg]

It's the ongoing debate about whether "Intercity" trains are there fundamentally to serve cities out of London or its outer dormitory suburbs.

Technically St Albans is a city out of London...

 

[JonathanH]

The big difference between Watford Junction and St Albans City is that at Watford, almost all trains passengers can board to London go from platform 9, and it is relatively easy to control passengers not boarding set down only services on platform 7. At St Albans, the fast and slow line platforms are used for trains that can be boarded, so managing the set down only / pick up only restrictions that would need to be in place is a whole lot harder.

 

[InTheEastMids]

I believe the answer is that stopping the fast trains anywhere south of Bedford is extremely difficult to fit between the Thameslink services.

Going North on EMR intercity (let's say the XX02 Sheffield or XX05 Nottingham), it's pretty common to come to a grinding halt just South of Wellingborough, because your train has caught the preceding XX45 Corby service as it stands in Wellingborough P1. In theory the Corby is about 4-5 mins ahead, so a St Albans stop would add a similar amount, delaying both following EMR IC services unless the timetable is tweaked.

some of the capacity problems on the intercity services

The capacity problems EMR have are mostly due to not enough seats in not enough carriages. The majority of EMR IC services are 5 car 222s which are obviously a lot shorter than most IC services, and not space-efficient compared to an 80x.

the real fix is to extend EMU services, possibly even Thameslink, to Leicester once the wires are up.

I don't agree. Whilst I do agree that a journey like St Albans - Sheffield is badly served by the current setup, I don't think there's enough demand, but if there was, then the alternative is...
1. Swap the destinations of the XX32 and XX35 from St Pancras so that the XX32 went to Nottingham (first stop Leicester) and the XX35 went to Sheffield with first stop Kettering (and hope the negative impact on Derby/Sheffield journey times isn't too big a hit) and then...
2. Extend a TL to Kettering to provide a single change.

But, is there really enough demand for this to make it worthwhile running an additional 8-12 car EMU between Bedford and Kettering? The open data doesn't fill me with hope.

I know some people here are in favour of extending Connect in order to delete Kettering and/or Harborough calls on the IC services, but firstly this significantly degrades the train service from these two destinations (e.g. Connect are 15 minutes slower than IC between St Pancras and Kettering) and secondly doesn't address the issue of pathing slower Connect services stopping 6 times between London and Leicester (say 1h 25 - 1h 30 journey time) that are mixed in with non-stop IC services that are < 1h 5 mins.

An alternative rationale for extending TL north of Bedford is to find something to do with Platform 3 at Wellingborough, whilst perhaps decongesting Bedford station a bit.

 

[liamf656]

1. Swap the destinations of the XX32 and XX35 from St Pancras so that the XX32 went to Nottingham (first stop Leicester) and the XX35 went to Sheffield with first stop Kettering (and hope the negative impact on Derby/Sheffield journey times isn't too big a hit) and then...

If the XX32 and XX35 trains swapped destinations it would imbalance the timetable (more than currently) north of Leicester. For example leaving Sheffield and Derby both trains to St Pancras would leave too close to each other, likewise for Nottingham. I think the current setup is the best you can get for now

2. Extend a TL to Kettering to provide a single change.

I'd lean more towards this or even wait for wires to be up as far as Leicester and do 1tph to Corby (other TPH can be a Kettering shuttle if the demand is there) and 1tph to Leicester as a stopper, with the latter calling at St Albans to answer the OP's question

 

[Bletchleyite]

The big difference between Watford Junction and St Albans City is that at Watford, almost all trains passengers can board to London go from platform 9, and it is relatively easy to control passengers not boarding set down only services on platform 7. At St Albans, the fast and slow line platforms are used for trains that can be boarded, so managing the set down only / pick up only restrictions that would need to be in place is a whole lot harder.

It's no easier or harder because 9 is the other half of an island, you can't just close it off. It doesn't however particularly matter southbound, and in reality most people behave.

 

[cle]

I'd lean more towards this or even wait for wires to be up as far as Leicester and do 1tph to Corby (other TPH can be a Kettering shuttle if the demand is there) and 1tph to Leicester as a stopper, with the latter calling at St Albans to answer the OP's question

I would do this too. Especially if Leicester gained a fifth platform. It makes way more sense and solves a lot of the bad connection issues.

If Corby needs second tph, a shuttle to Kettering would be just fine. Maybe that could come from afar, like a little DMU from Nottingham via Oakham once per hour.

Or go further, and originate an Oxford-Bedford EWR service there... and give those links to Kettering and Wellingborough too, once an hour.



If a TL solve, I think 1tph to Wellingborough, Kettering and/or Corby (and send the other Corby to Leicester) wouldn't be terrible either. The new slow lines and platforms are underused north of Bedford. But yes, if a fast Bedford, likely 12 cars.

 

[InTheEastMids]

If the XX32 and XX35 trains swapped destinations it would imbalance the timetable (more than currently) north of Leicester. For example leaving Sheffield and Derby both trains to St Pancras would leave too close to each other, likewise for Nottingham. I think the current setup is the best you can get for now

I agree with this point. The "slow" Sheffield would have 5 more stops than the fast (Kettering, Harborough, Loughborough, East Mids, Long Eaton) so be 20-25 min slower than a fast one, and be fairly hopeless for Sheffield/Chesterfield/Derby to London), particularly in a scenario where EMR may see competition from Hull Trains.

I'd lean more towards this or even wait for wires to be up as far as Leicester and do 1tph to Corby (other TPH can be a Kettering shuttle if the demand is there) and 1tph to Leicester as a stopper, with the latter calling at St Albans to answer the OP's question

But I disagree with this
- Corby is seeing demand growth (0.3M in 18/19 to 0.4M in 22/23) - one of relatively few stations where usage is greater than before the pandemic
- the growth looks sustainable (relatively low house prices, significant housebuilding)
- Fares are high to the main destination (£127 rtn to London, annual season is £9,700)
There needs to be pretty strong evidence of an untapped St Albans to East Midlands market to jeopardise this.

To put it another way, stations with similar usage include places like Apsley (WCML), Knebworth (ECML) and Warwick Parkway. They all have 2tph and I haven't seen people here suggesting they be pared back to 1tph with a shuttle.

If there's real conviction about demand from St Albans then another possibility is for Connect to swap St Albans calls with Luton (arguing that Luton is already served by Parkway).

 

[JonathanH]

It's no easier or harder because 9 is the other half of an island, you can't just close it off. It doesn't however particularly matter southbound, and in reality most people behave.

People at Watford wanting London don't casually go to platform 7 thinking they can just board the next train. Yes, there will be people on platform 8 but they aren't looking to go south.

If a train came into platform 3 at St Albans saying London on the front and sides people would board it, rather than waiting for Thameslink services, because they would already be waiting there.

 

[Bald Rick]

Two very simple reasons:

1) Extending all EMR journey times by 4 minutes to enable them to call would cause significant disbenefit to all the passengers who use them (and a reasonable drop in revenue), for comparitivelyvery minor benefit in terms of additional revenue from the tiny number who would use the services going north.

2) Filling EMR trains with London - St Albans passengers would not be a good use of their capacity. You could make them pick up / set down only, but enforcing that when an EMR pulls into Platform 3 with 500 people waiting for a following Thameslink - well good luck.

 

[Travelmonkey]

As much as we'd all like a direct train it isn't always possible. I do wish that the Sheffields called at Kettering, I often unfortunately have to travel to Burton On trent from Kettering and it was so much nicer when I could change at Derby instead of Nottingham, tbh the one train I do miss is the Derby-Corby runs via Oakham.

 

[MCR247]

I think if EMR were looking at adding extra stops into the fast services then Luton Airport Parkway would be more likely and probably more useful too.

 

[Travelmonkey]

I think if EMR were looking at adding extra stops into the fast services then Luton Airport Parkway would be more likely and probably more useful too.

Well it'd be more useful than East Midlands parkway at least there is a active airport connection, EMD is more a glorified park & ride than a meaningful airport interchange,

 

[liamf656]

But I disagree with this
- Corby is seeing demand growth (0.3M in 18/19 to 0.4M in 22/23) - one of relatively few stations where usage is greater than before the pandemic
- the growth looks sustainable (relatively low house prices, significant housebuilding)
- Fares are high to the main destination (£127 rtn to London, annual season is £9,700)
There needs to be pretty strong evidence of an untapped St Albans to East Midlands market to jeopardise this.

One thing I did forget to mention is that I'd only be in favour of my point regarding this if St Albans really does have the demand that those in this thread say, even if it stays as 2tph to Corby and 1tph calling at St Albans. Otherwise I'd keep it as it is.

Realistically, if you travel (for example) from Derby leaving at 10:09 you can change 3 times at Leicester, Kettering and Luton, or once if you go to St Pancras and double back but the journey time is almost the same either way. Without looking, I believe someone mentioned above that going via London would understandably be more expensive but the option is there for those that wish to change as little as possible

It'd be interesting to find out what the demand is from St Albans to anywhere north of Kettering

 

[Bald Rick]

It'd be interesting to find out what the demand is from St Albans to anywhere north of Kettering

Not much. Even though the most popular universities for kids from St Albans appear to be Loughboro’ / Nottingham / Nottingham Trent.

 

[Magdalia]

Looking at an old thread on here, ( https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/did-inter-city-stop-at-st-albans-in-the-timetable.167483/ ) I can see that Intercity services from Sheffield did stop there back in the 1970s and 1980s but were withdrawn once the electrified Bedford - St Pancras service was introduced.

That's not quite right. It was the hourly St Pancras-Derby/Nottingham "sweeper" trains that called at St Albans, not the fast Sheffield trains. St Albans-Sheffield could be done with one change, at Leicester. From 1977 that was reduced when the St Albans stops were taken out of most of the Nottingham trains.

Another key factor in the early 1980s MML timetable changes was the introduction of HSTs.

Interestingly, Stevenage which is the ECML equivalent, has seen a reasonable renaissance of long distance calls with an hourly Leeds and York/Lincoln slow. Lumo too.

The near equivalent of St Albans on the ECML is Welwyn Garden City not Stevenage. The MML near equivalent of Stevenage is Luton.

Extend a TL to Kettering to provide a single change.

For the sake of resilience of the Thameslink service this is definitely not a good idea!

 

[richa2002]

The MML timetable has been useless ever since Dec 2008 when they removed the intermittent Luton/Bedford stops from Sheffield services. The requirement to change twice for Nottingham or thrice for Sheffield if travelling from a Home Counties station makes it a very unappealing prospect. Going into London and back out is pricier too and psychologically not nice.

 

[edwin_m]

2) Filling EMR trains with London - St Albans passengers would not be a good use of their capacity. You could make them pick up / set down only, but enforcing that when an EMR pulls into Platform 3 with 500 people waiting for a following Thameslink - well good luck.

This is illustrated on Sundays when the hourly Nottingham train stops at Bedford and is packed out between there and London. A weekday call at St Albans would be far worse.

I think if EMR were looking at adding extra stops into the fast services then Luton Airport Parkway would be more likely and probably more useful too.

I suggested this in the consultation on the current timetable, as Luton Airport offers a much better range of flights than East Midlands and I guess gets quite a lot of catchment from that region. It would also mean one change fewer between St Albans and north of Bedford. It does however introduce the same problem of overcrowding with London passengers.

Well it'd be more useful than East Midlands parkway at least there is a active airport connection, EMP is more a glorified park & ride than a meaningful airport interchange,

That was exactly its purpose - the airport was mostly just talk to get local support for it. The re-development of the power station site should however create some demand right next to it.

 

[A Mammal]

I don't have any answers but do wish it were easier to interchange between Thameslink and EMR services.
Your post caught my eye as I am un St Albans - I'm glad you enjoyed your day here!

My in-laws live close to Loughborough, and until a few years ago it was possible to catch a Thameslink train to Luton Airport Parkway and change to the EMR which called at Loughborough.
I'm not sure when it changed, but now the choices from St Albans are to go into London St Pancras and back out again, or to change twice - at Luton or Bedford onto the EMR electric train, then at Wellingborough or Kettering (can't remember which!) onto the EMR diesel train.
As others have said, it is also either more expensive (London route) or less reliable (multiple changes route).

This has effectively removed the train as an option for us, and we now drive every time.

It's interesting to read the EMR trains did stop at St Albans 40 odd years ago. I don't think bringing this back would be a good idea (London-St Albans commuters), but I would like it if something changed to make this route a little easier to use. I don't expect it will though!

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Read with interest to say the least.

Agreed the incentive (even with free travel) - to go north on East Midlands means a change twice or circulate via St Pancras which basically is a "no" - a few timetables ago there was a Luton Airport Parkway stop on the slow Nottingham which worked very well (and that call always seemed to pick up around 50 or so passengers so it seemed reasonable and provided decent connectivity) - in other words a good compromise. It could be investigated again in my opinion. I have mentioned this several times before.

Yes the market is modest - and someone mentioned the university flow - add in Sheffield as being quite popular from here - !