Sheffield train electrification cancellation hidden by tories.

[Obelix]

Unfortunately you have missed the point.

You seem to be re-hashing some HS2 argument which is not relevant here.

Trains on the Midland Mainline will be at least ten minutes slower for the reasons stated above and with the cancellation of the electrification will mean we will have the dirtiest, slowest and oldest mainline trains in the country with no improvement now planned.

 

The business case I made has nothing whatsoever to do with individuals. It is to do with the competitiveness of Sheffield with other northern cities. Trains will be/are faster and newer and longer to Manchester and Leeds from London.

 

Considering the amount of money that Leeds generates compares to Sheffield the reason why should be obvious...

[Annie Bynnol]

…

You are already able to get from London to Sheffield in 2 hours or London to Doncaster in 1 hour 40 . How quick do you want it?

 

Certainly not slower- which is going to happen.

Would it be acceptable to have a 55 mph speed limit on the M1?

 

Are you confusing the HS2 argument of 5 minutes faster with the effect of 15-20 minutes slower of cancelling MML electrification?

 

The whole point you are missing is that you will not be travelling in 2 hours or even the present 2 hours 15 but closer to 2 hours 30 on the oldest and dirtiest train fleet on mainline railways- which will become less reliable.

Worst still is that there are no realistic improvement track or rolling stock plans now electrification has been cancelled.

All the current and planned works are to make the timetable more robust.

 

The equivalent on the Motorway would be to reduce the maximum speed from 70 to 55 mph.

[1978]

Certainly not slower- which is going to happen.

Would it be acceptable to have a 55 mph speed limit on the M1?

 

Are you confusing the HS2 argument of 5 minutes faster with the effect of 15-20 minutes slower of cancelling MML electrification?

 

The whole point you are missing is that you will not be travelling in 2 hours or even the present 2 hours 15 but closer to 2 hours 30 on the oldest and dirtiest train fleet on mainline railways- which will become less reliable.

Worst still is that there are no realistic improvement track or rolling stock plans now electrification has been cancelled.

All the current and planned works are to make the timetable more robust.

 

The equivalent on the Motorway would be to reduce the maximum speed from 70 to 55 mph.

 

This may be unduly pesimistic. However, the plain fact is that the Midland mainline has never been a fast track to rival ECML, WCML or the Great Western routes to the west. That's why even Cross-Country got HSTs before we did. At the time there was no section to run them at over 100 mph and there are still few opportunities for sustained running at anywhere near 125.

 

St Pancras has 15 platforms, 2 for Thameslink, 3 for Javelin local trains on HS1 and 7 for international trains with only 4 platforms for the Midland mainline services, taking up to 13 carriages in each. (Neighbouring Kings Cross has 11 platforms and Euston 18.) Juggling two Meridians into a platform means they're intensively used and delays are inevitable.

 

In a previous post I suggested a fast service could do Sheffield - St Pancras in 1 hour 45 minutes, and so it could. However, it has rightly been pointed out that Nottingham and Derby also want fast trains at about the same time of day, so there'd be line congestion and platform congestion at St Pancras. Any late running by one woud impact the rest. Beeching's report highlighted that slower trains delay fast trains - which is why we've hardly any stations left between Derby and Sheffield.

 

At this moment we don't know how soon bi-mode trains can be produced. It looks as though HSTs may have to be given a stay of execution as it's almost impossible to get them made compliant within the current deadlines. Over 40 years since I first travelled down to Bristol, Cardiff and Swansea on them, so they've done well. Bi-modes are still in the design stages but the specification is supposed to demand performance equivalent to at least what we're going to lose. We'll have to see if that's possible, but they will be new units.

 

Even if full electrification were to be confirmed tomorrow it would probably take at least 6 or 7 years to complete with delays all along the way. The Great Western fiasco is making everyone very wary and experience with electrification in the North West doesn't add any confidence. Network Rail hasn't the cash (something only the government can change significantly) but it also hasn't the staffing resources to complete other projects currently in hand - like the much less expensive Hope Valley improvements.

 

That cash crisis was building up for quite some time but it seems the enormity of the situation sank in very slowly at Network Rail, the DfT and finally to government. The bad news must have been seeping out before the day the full situation was realised and things like the Midland mainline electrfication aborted. And that's where we now are.

 

The good news is that once we get these bi-modes built and they prove to be as good as the trains they replace we'll be saving some diesel, and have new trains. Their versatility should make them popular as they'll be able to use almost any diversionary route.

 

Once bi-modes start operating the clamour to electrify to Leicester, then Derby, Sheffield, Doncaster and Leeds will build. Original HS1 units could operate on 3 electrical sytems, overhead in Britain and France and third rail into Waterloo. Other options such as battery or hydrogen migt be trialled.

 

Of course if the bi-modes are a flop we'll have more reason to push for full and earlier electrifcation.

 

Personally, 2 hours is enough for me to London. I grew up using the ECML and it is different, with a greater feel of urgency. Happy memories of taking on water from the troughs at Tollerton, but we've moved on.

 

Full electrification of existing routes is very disruptive. The relatively short section to Kings Lynn was easier to do because it's almost flat with few bridges of any sort. The Midland mainline will be electrified but in shorter sections over more years. Bi-modes will prove popular if deployed to best effect and the seats are comfortable.

 

Fewer but longer trains mean shorter periods of occupied track and should allow more passengers to avoid rail congestion. That will be part of the more immediate future. Piling on more trains is likely get us to M25 style grid lock more quickly. In the short term most of us would be happy to get a seat and arrive on time to catch a connection, get to a social or sporting evenrt, or get to a meeting. Mr Grayling says we'd not like all the disruption for full early electrification, and he's probably right.

[sheffbag]

Unfortunately you have missed the point.

You seem to be re-hashing some HS2 argument which is not relevant here.

Trains on the Midland Mainline will be at least ten minutes slower for the reasons stated above and with the cancellation of the electrification will mean we will have the dirtiest, slowest and oldest mainline trains in the country with no improvement now planned.

 

The business case I made has nothing whatsoever to do with individuals. It is to do with the competitiveness of Sheffield with other northern cities. Trains will be/are faster and newer and longer to Manchester and Leeds from London.

 

And how does that make Sheffield less competitive? Is Doncaster a booming place because it is 20 minutes quicker to get to from London than Sheffield?

 

Work - We live in a digital age where transport matters little now

 

Tourism? You think it will affect the tourist market if people have to travel 10 min longer or be on a slightly older train? Its not the travel mechanism, its the place that attracts people (and lets be honest, how many people come from London to visit Sheffield for the day?)

 

People living here travelling out? - Is there really a measureable cost benefit?

 

I would rather they spent the money on improving the line across the country than downwards. You are already able to get from London to Sheffield in 2 hours or London to Doncaster in 1 hour 40 . How quick do you want it?

 

Certainly not slower- which is going to happen.

Would it be acceptable to have a 55 mph speed limit on the M1?

 

Are you confusing the HS2 argument of 5 minutes faster with the effect of 15-20 minutes slower of cancelling MML electrification?

 

The whole point you are missing is that you will not be travelling in 2 hours or even the present 2 hours 15 but closer to 2 hours 30 on the oldest and dirtiest train fleet on mainline railways- which will become less reliable.

Worst still is that there are no realistic improvement track or rolling stock plans now electrification has been cancelled.

All the current and planned works are to make the timetable more robust.

 

The equivalent on the Motorway would be to reduce the maximum speed from 70 to 55 mph.

 

I'm not confusing it with HS2 at all (another massive white elephant) but you still haven't answered why Sheffield would be at a disadvantage. you can use the reverse argument of it been a slower service causing a disadvantage but you havent given an actual credible back up that is relative to the economy nor did you explain why doncaster isnt booming because it has a service that is currently quicker than Sheffield.

 

If you are saying we will be at a disadvantage when the trains are slower then how are we at one now in comparison to local cities that already have a quicker existing service.

 

What reduction are you anticipating if the electrification doesnt occur.

 

The present hourly service is 2 hours 2 min if you get the 29 min past train not 2hr15.

 

And i would argue that if you were travelling from London SP to Sheffield in a car your average speed would be lower than 55MPH given the existing roads and speed restrictions in place.

Edited April 5, 2018 by sheffbag

[Guest busdriver1]

I'm not confusing it with HS2 at all (another massive white elephant) but you still haven't answered why Sheffield would be at a disadvantage. you can use the reverse argument of it been a slower service causing a disadvantage but you havent given an actual credible back up that is relative to the economy nor did you explain why doncaster isnt booming because it has a service that is currently quicker than Sheffield.

 

If you are saying we will be at a disadvantage when the trains are slower then how are we at one now in comparison to local cities that already have a quicker existing service.

 

What reduction are you anticipating if the electrification doesnt occur.

 

The present hourly service is 2 hours 2 min if you get the 29 min past train not 2hr15.

 

And i would argue that if you were travelling from London SP to Sheffield in a car your average speed would be lower than 55MPH given the existing roads and speed restrictions in place.

There are currently 3 stretches of the M1 with 50 mph speed restrictions in place over lengthy stretches. When these are done more will follow. Eventually the whole M1 will have been done, in the same way there will be restrictions during improvements on MML. A non argument again.

[alchresearch]

North's transport body takes up powers at first meeting

A body created to overhaul transport in northern England is to meet for the first time as it takes up new powers.

 

Transport for the North (TfN) will hold its first board meeting in Liverpool with Transport Minister Jo Johnson.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-43645472

[Annie Bynnol]

I'm not confusing it with HS2 at all (another massive white elephant) but you still haven't answered why Sheffield would be at a disadvantage. you can use the reverse argument of it been a slower service causing a disadvantage but you havent given an actual credible back up that is relative to the economy nor did you explain why doncaster isnt booming because it has a service that is currently quicker than Sheffield.

 

If you are saying we will be at a disadvantage when the trains are slower then how are we at one now in comparison to local cities that already have a quicker existing service.

 

What reduction are you anticipating if the electrification doesnt occur.

 

The present hourly service is 2 hours 2 min if you get the 29 min past train not 2hr15.

 

And i would argue that if you were travelling from London SP to Sheffield in a car your average speed would be lower than 55MPH given the existing roads and speed restrictions in place.

 

As I have already said:

The MML is electrified to Bedford and is being electrified to Kettering (then branches to Corby).

MML electrification north from Kettering has been cancelled as has the proposed order for the electric trains.

The maximum speed permitted between Bedford and London is 125 mph for diesels and 100 mph for all electrics. As most of the section is four track the fast diesels are currently separated from the slower and stopping electrics meaning 125 mph is possible all the way from Sheffield to London.

The Corby semi-fasts are going to be using the same tracks as our diesels thus reducing our Meridian and HST to 100 mph and less as they follow the slower and stopping new Corby electrics. Poor acceleration of the heavy old diesels means even more time losses and pathing problems. Current work will only make the current timetable more robust in dealing with delay.

 

A new timetable will have to include this problem.

Solutions are:

fewer trains

fewer stops

new trains

Bi-modes are not the solution as the current design suggests that they will have maximum speeds of about 110 with very poor acceleration and so much heavy wear and tear on track that there will be many speed restrictions introduced.

 

To average 55 mph on any journey would require some travel at higher speeds to balance the slower speeds.

Reducing the max. speed to 55 would obviously reduce the average speed of the whole journey.

 

Ease of journey is always a positive factor in business to business dealings and choices.

[sheffbag]

As I have already said:

The MML is electrified to Bedford and is being electrified to Kettering (then branches to Corby).

MML electrification north from Kettering has been cancelled as has the proposed order for the electric trains.

The maximum speed permitted between Bedford and London is 125 mph for diesels and 100 mph for all electrics. As most of the section is four track the fast diesels are currently separated from the slower and stopping electrics meaning 125 mph is possible all the way from Sheffield to London.

The Corby semi-fasts are going to be using the same tracks as our diesels thus reducing our Meridian and HST to 100 mph and less as they follow the slower and stopping new Corby electrics. Poor acceleration of the heavy old diesels means even more time losses and pathing problems. Current work will only make the current timetable more robust in dealing with delay.

 

A new timetable will have to include this problem.

Solutions are:

fewer trains

fewer stops

new trains

Bi-modes are not the solution as the current design suggests that they will have maximum speeds of about 110 with very poor acceleration and so much heavy wear and tear on track that there will be many speed restrictions introduced.

 

To average 55 mph on any journey would require some travel at higher speeds to balance the slower speeds.

Reducing the max. speed to 55 would obviously reduce the average speed of the whole journey.

 

Ease of journey is always a positive factor in business to business dealings and choices.

Still not said why its a disadvantage. How is your final sentence quantifiable in monetary terms as you are claiming it will "put Sheffield at a disadvantage"?

No point talking about other towns. Tell me why it will put it Sheffield down.

 

i'll comment on your last sentance another way. In both my jobs i deal with both customers and suppliers form all over the UK and abroad. about 20% of these are based in South Yorkshire. I have never said "i wont deal with a company due to the train link" as a reason for turning down business or rejecting a supplier, nor have i ever heard anyone say it in my earshot. I work with people who travel to Sheffield by train from Hull, Stockport and West Yorkshire and it hasnt stopped them from choosing to work here or been offered a position.

Edited April 5, 2018 by sheffbag

[pss60]

As I have already said:

The MML is electrified to Bedford and is being electrified to Kettering (then branches to Corby).

MML electrification north from Kettering has been cancelled as has the proposed order for the electric trains.

The maximum speed permitted between Bedford and London is 125 mph for diesels and 100 mph for all electrics. As most of the section is four track the fast diesels are currently separated from the slower and stopping electrics meaning 125 mph is possible all the way from Sheffield to London.

The Corby semi-fasts are going to be using the same tracks as our diesels thus reducing our Meridian and HST to 100 mph and less as they follow the slower and stopping new Corby electrics. Poor acceleration of the heavy old diesels means even more time losses and pathing problems. Current work will only make the current timetable more robust in dealing with delay.

 

A new timetable will have to include this problem.

Solutions are:

fewer trains

fewer stops

new trains

Bi-modes are not the solution as the current design suggests that they will have maximum speeds of about 110 with very poor acceleration and so much heavy wear and tear on track that there will be many speed restrictions introduced.

 

To average 55 mph on any journey would require some travel at higher speeds to balance the slower speeds.

Reducing the max. speed to 55 would obviously reduce the average speed of the whole journey.

 

Ease of journey is always a positive factor in business to business dealings and choices.

People in Sheffield and South Yorkshire don't want rail links modernising and swish new electric trains, not only to London but to other major towns and cities, like Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, Bristol, Newcastle, Glasgow etc. They'd go back to the horse and cart if they could, while still moaning about the South East getting this and that.

[sheffbag]

We do but as i put, i would rather the money spent on cross country services to Manchester, Liverpool, the North West, Scotland, etc than obsessing over getting to and from London