Freight fights capacity constraints

Speaking of paths, Amos says there is pressure to give them up. Sometimes trains will not run because the demand for product isn’t always there. That could then have a detrimental effect on business, because it raises the question of paths availability. The freight company says they are valuable, but so do the passenger operators.

If a path isn’t used for 90 days, it must be given up. But what if there is a surge in the building industry’s requirements? What if there is slack in what the industry requires? Both can affect trains.

“Anything I don’t use, there is pressure,” says Amos. “If the volume drops, there is a risk the path could go. How do you cope and allocate as the market fluctuates?”

He asks that rhetorically, as this is a debate the industry needs to have (and quickly, in GBRf’s opinion). Amos highlights that AI has won a deal from its Tinsley facility to supply product to work being carried out on the M1 motorway, which means more trains must serve the Sheffield site. Such fluctuations ignite the path/capacity debate.

Says Amos: “We need to be careful as an industry and work together. The debate, it seems, is surrounding the thought process. Continual passenger trains is a good thing, we think. But is it? What do they achieve? They are fantastically convenient, but is that what we actually want?”

He adds: “Who has priority? That is one for Network Rail. This is where we need the co-ordinated voice.”

He suggests that pathing across the capital for freight traffic should also be considered: “There is perhaps a wider issue for whoever succeeds Boris Johnson as London Mayor, as I thought they wanted to facilitate freight as well as passenger.”

Amos believes that the freight industry has matured, with companies now working together. “We have to, as there are things that will affect us more and more. People like the RFG are very important, and they do a great job. It is about using and assisting them. The RFG has been a strong co-ordinated voice. The battle for services will need that influence.”

Back to the train, and the unloading is going well. The single-road shed is home to two men - a GBRf shunter and an AI controller. A hammer is sometimes used to ensure product is dislodged from inside the wagon. Today it is needed once.

Mark Keeble, the driver for today’s train, is based at Toton. The plan (eventually) is that Bardon Hill-based drivers will take over the train, but that is an ongoing process.

Today’s train should leave at 0947, and is due at Bardon Hill at 1347. Hauled by 66702 Blue Lightning, the train must wait at Neasden while the ‘66’ runs round the train, having drawn it out of the loading facility. It will then climb a short incline to the freight-only route via Acton Canal Wharf, where the ‘66’ again runs round its train, before heading north to the Midland Main Line. Keeble explains that usually with this train there is a 20-minute wait at Brent and a further five minutes at Kettering.

We depart Neasden terminal on time, but are delayed when running round the train. The blue ‘66’ waits on its train for what seems like an eternity. London Underground and Chiltern Railways trains, including a new Class 68, whizz by as we wait.

Finally, at 1046, we draw forward. It turns out that a DB Schenker train running from Cricklewood is on the freight line, and there is a conflict, one that Amos vows to investigate. Keeble suggests that already, we probably won’t be able to make the time back.

Up on the freight-only section, it is hard to believe that we are in London. The route is still signalled by semaphores, and there are manned signal boxes. Our two-track branch runs to Acton, but we still have to wait as a DB ‘66’ passes with an Acton-St Pancras stone train. Once that passes, 66702 is uncoupled from its train and runs to Canal Wharf (crossing the West Coast Main Line) to run around its train. Looking down to his left, Amos sees a GBRf stone train at Willesden for Calvert.

We set off for Brent, where the line joins the MML opposite Cricklewood depot. There is an incline to the MML. By now the train is more than 30 minutes late. As we wait for a new path, the MML capacity problem becomes clear - even in off-peak there are East Midlands Trains expresses and Govia Thameslink Railway suburban trains racing north and south along the line.

Our GBRf stone train is routed via the Slow Lines, which means it must cross the MML. Here, the line speed is 20mph running to a junction, but there is a frustrating speed restriction, dropping it to 10mph. This will not help us get the time back.

Amos highlights more issues that affect freight on this line, both now and in the future: “The MML needs electric freight capacity, and capacity north of Bedford, where it is three tracks. The signal headways need improving. Quarrying will be there for the next 30 to 40 years, so it is not going away. You need the fourth line - it needs parallel investment.”

Keeble says of the route: “Bedford can be a bottleneck. Trains terminate there. If you come Down to Bedford and cannot get through before 0730, then you cannot get through until after 0900. EMT and Thameslink use the fast lines.”