Wakefield Kirkgate refurb - any recent pictures?

[61653 HTAFC]

All the money frittered away at Kirkgate and Westgate has been wasted. The end result for both is unsatisfactory.
They should have bitten the bullet, flattened Kirkgate and rebuilt with 4 long through platforms, electrified,full facilities, M/S car park Then divert everything to run through there. Either shut Westgate or make into a halt for local services only.

hock: Is this a serious post? Both stations in Wakefield have been crying out for improvement for decades, the main reason it's taken so long to do it is a lack of funds, so I'm not sure how you'd manage to achieve such a radical change and have anything left to fund the services. It'd surely cost more to do that than what has been done and is currently planned. Re-routing ECML and XC services through Kirkgate would extend journey times to Leeds, and good luck flattening it for the rebuild, as the main building is Grade-2 listed: another reason it took so long to even get to where we are now.

Besides, what you've described with regard to switching longer distance services to Kirkgate is just reversing the decision taken in the 1960s and 1970s. One reason that didn't work was that neither station is big enough nor ideally situated for all the routes serving Wakefield, and making either one suitable would require massive investment in new junctions and connecting curves.

 

[Grumpy]

hock: Is this a serious post? Both stations in Wakefield have been crying out for improvement for decades, the main reason it's taken so long to do it is a lack of funds, so I'm not sure how you'd manage to achieve such a radical change and have anything left to fund the services. It'd surely cost more to do that than what has been done and is currently planned. Re-routing ECML and XC services through Kirkgate would extend journey times to Leeds, and good luck flattening it for the rebuild, as the main building is Grade-2 listed: another reason it took so long to even get to where we are now.

Besides, what you've described with regard to switching longer distance services to Kirkgate is just reversing the decision taken in the 1960s and 1970s. One reason that didn't work was that neither station is big enough nor ideally situated for all the routes serving Wakefield, and making either one suitable would require massive investment in new junctions and connecting curves.

Really serious. Although could have been better expressed-at Kirkgate keep the fancy frontage but change everything behind. You mention lack of funds-I'm not surprised as there cant be any return.
You mention the 1960/70’s. At that time the line through Kirkgate was heavily used by freight, predominantly coal. Now most of that’s been lost so the issues re congestion/crossing paths aren’t so serious. However the trackwork’s nearly all still there, so I believe you could get 4 through platforms in, and possibly additional bays.
Even with the money spent on the 2 stations you still have fundamental problems
• Poor connections from the South to Huddersfield and Halifax etc. partly due to the time to run between the stations and reverse.
• Inability to run the Pontefract/Knottingley trains to Westgate meaning no connections for them
• Similar inability to connect Castleford/Normanton
• Operational shambles at Westgate due to lack of platform capacity
• Passenger confusion e.g. which station to go to for Leeds or Sheffield
By concentration you would
• Get better value from the booking staff with clearly a big improvement for present Kirkgate users
• Similarly the other facilities such as catering/retail/taxi
I accept you’d have to electrify down from Hare Park, and this could add a couple of minutes or so to journey times-but how many times do you arrive at Westgate and the train stand outside the station waiting for a platform? And diesels would have a choice of route into Leeds.
If you want to save money shut the line from Hare Park to Westgate over the viaduct. Replace Sandal with Agbrigg.
Clearly none of this will happen now, but it would have been a better use of money

 

[AndyHudds]

Some of your points could be easily remedied by construction on a bay or bays at Westgate. Secondly, a second Huddersfield service increase to two an hour and a Sunday service would improve the situation and a Manchester service would also improve connections to Halifax from Brighouse, Elland (should it ever be built) or Hebden Bridge.

The Sheffield situation, both Westgate and Kirkgate have Sheffield services but Kirkgate has more services per hour with Westgate just the XC service, I suppose it depends on how quick you want to get there.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Back in the late 80s/early 90s when the Featherstone services were restarted, the reason they only ran to Kirkgate was a lack of capacity for termination/reversal at Westgate... Despite the main line through Westgate being considerably less busy than it is today. Crossing from P3 to the curve at Kirkgate was less of an issue then, and indeed even today the timetable has an extended turnaround at Kirkgate to allow for the Westgate extension.

Back then though, Leeds to Sheffield via Barnsley and Kirkgate was 1tph and it's now 3, so even if a bay or bays were provided at Westgate, the issue now might be crossing the throat at the Barnsley end of Kirkgate station. A partial solution would be to remove the disused North end of P2 and build a connection allowing services to/from Crofton to access P2 as well as P3.

 

[HowardGWR]

Back in the late 80s/early 90s when the Featherstone services were restarted, the reason they only ran to Kirkgate was a lack of capacity for termination/reversal at Westgate... Despite the main line through Westgate being considerably less busy than it is today. Crossing from P3 to the curve at Kirkgate was less of an issue then, and indeed even today the timetable has an extended turnaround at Kirkgate to allow for the Westgate extension.

Back then though, Leeds to Sheffield via Barnsley and Kirkgate was 1tph and it's now 3, so even if a bay or bays were provided at Westgate, the issue now might be crossing the throat at the Barnsley end of Kirkgate station. A partial solution would be to remove the disused North end of P2 and build a connection allowing services to/from Crofton to access P2 as well as P3.

Just by the way, I looked up the services between Featherstone and Wakefield today and it said it could not sell me a ticket. I altered the day to Tuesday and a full service was displayed. I tried both on Northern and FGW websites, both gave the same answer.

Any ideas? Sorry a bit OT, just a bit.

 

[tom1649]

Just by the way, I looked up the services between Featherstone and Wakefield today and it said it could not sell me a ticket. I altered the day to Tuesday and a full service was displayed. I tried both on Northern and FGW websites, both gave the same answer.

Any ideas? Sorry a bit OT, just a bit.

There is no Sunday service from Featherstone.

 

[HowardGWR]

There is no Sunday service from Featherstone.

Thanks, excuse my ignorance (none from Knottingley at all I gather). In the week they give you a choice from Knottingley of changing via Castleford too.

I would like to ask 'why not' but I imagine that really would be OT on this infrastructure thread?

I cannot imagine a 'no Sunday' service rule applying 'dahn saath'.

 

[AndyHudds]

What is it about Wakefield and 'no Sunday service', there isn't one from Huddersfield either!!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

What is it about Wakefield and 'no Sunday service', there isn't one from Huddersfield either!!

Because neither of them serve Leedsopolis... :roll:

Then again, even the Huddersfield to Leeds local is only every 2 hours on Sunday.

Apologies for the off topic, still happened even with the above warnings!

 

[Welshman]

Back in the day, some services from Leeds-Kings Cross [& vv] used to serve Westgate & Kirkgate.

If it were the intention to concentrate all traffic on Kirkgate, Leeds-London services would either have to travel via Normanton and reverse, or travel via Ardsley [as now], and through the site of Westgate to reach Kirkgate.

That would mean the link between the two - singled during the 1970s - would need to be redoubled.

Considering the vast sums recently spent on restructuring Westgate, I can't really see it happening, unless Wakefield viaduct were found to be in a serious condition requiring closure. Otherwise I think the city of Wakefield has to resign itself to being one of those places where railway geography makes two stations inevitable.

 

[Mugby]

In BR days, until the mid 1980s, all cross country services used to stop at Westgate and then pass through Kirkgate (without stopping) to access the old Midland route to Sheffield via Cudworth.

 

[edwin_m]

If it were the intention to concentrate all traffic on Kirkgate, Leeds-London services would either have to travel via Normanton and reverse, or travel via Ardsley [as now], and through the site of Westgate to reach Kirkgate.

That would mean the link between the two - singled during the 1970s - would need to be redoubled.

Considering the vast sums recently spent on restructuring Westgate, I can't really see it happening, unless Wakefield viaduct were found to be in a serious condition requiring closure. Otherwise I think the city of Wakefield has to resign itself to being one of those places where railway geography makes two stations inevitable.

The option of running through the site fo Westgate was considered by BR before electrification, driven I think by the possibility of getting rid of the viaduct. If nothing else, it was probably killed by the likely lengthening of the Leeds-London services by several minutes due to having to pass over several slow junctions.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In BR days, until the mid 1980s, all cross country services used to stop at Westgate and then pass through Kirkgate (without stopping) to access the old Midland route to Sheffield via Cudworth.

True, although there were some that didn't stop at either Wakefield or Leeds and just stayed on the Midland via Normanton and Castleford.

 

[Senex]

Really serious. Although could have been better expressed-at Kirkgate keep the fancy frontage but change everything behind. You mention lack of funds-I'm not surprised as there cant be any return.
You mention the 1960/70’s. At that time the line through Kirkgate was heavily used by freight, predominantly coal. Now most of that’s been lost so the issues re congestion/crossing paths aren’t so serious. However the trackwork’s nearly all still there, so I believe you could get 4 through platforms in, and possibly additional bays.
Even with the money spent on the 2 stations you still have fundamental problems
• Poor connections from the South to Huddersfield and Halifax etc. partly due to the time to run between the stations and reverse.
• Inability to run the Pontefract/Knottingley trains to Westgate meaning no connections for them
• Similar inability to connect Castleford/Normanton
• Operational shambles at Westgate due to lack of platform capacity
• Passenger confusion e.g. which station to go to for Leeds or Sheffield
By concentration you would
• Get better value from the booking staff with clearly a big improvement for present Kirkgate users
• Similarly the other facilities such as catering/retail/taxi
I accept you’d have to electrify down from Hare Park, and this could add a couple of minutes or so to journey times-but how many times do you arrive at Westgate and the train stand outside the station waiting for a platform? And diesels would have a choice of route into Leeds.
If you want to save money shut the line from Hare Park to Westgate over the viaduct. Replace Sandal with Agbrigg.
Clearly none of this will happen now, but it would have been a better use of money

Given that so much is being spent / has now been spent on both stations, the opportunity to do anything has probably been lost for another generation. But should the question of rationalising station provision in a moderate-sized city simply have been ignored (we have heard nothing to say that this time it was not), and what mechanism exists in today's railway to examine questions like station provision in Wakefield? The case put forward above seems to me sound.

In terms of operations my own experience of travelling through, mainly on XC services, is of depressingly frequent signal-checks into the station in both directions and a very slow approach from the south and exit to the north caused by a highly restrictive layout (nothing like as bad in the north-south direction).

Comparing the two routes, there is next to nothing in it in terms of distance -- a matter of a very few chains. The present route is 90 then 50 on the viaduct, dropping to 35 at Westgate Jn and then 25 for the turnout to the platform line. Nothing can be done to improve the final approach, as the WR&G line is the later line, joining into the back of the original curve round from Kirkgate. The route via Calder Bridge cannot fairly be compared at the moment as it is quite unmodernised. Maximum speed is 50, with 25 at Crofton West Jn, 20 at Oakenshaw Jn, and 25 at Kirkgate West Jn. But what could be achieved if this were made the main route and modernised accordingly? Impressions from travelling over it suggest that the maximum speed could be much higher and all three junctions could be relatively cheaply re-aligned (especially as there is no OLE in the way).

A new 4-platform station at Kirkgate keeping the fine frontage would no doubt have a good thoroughly modern track layout that should allow to and from the curves both east and west and over the platform lines. And if the viaduct line were abandoned, then there would be a much better speed over the curve at the Westgate Jn end. Which is all a long-winded way of saying that it seems to me timings could be as good as on the present route as long as no-one came up with the bright idea of two Wakefield stops.

Are there any other cases where concentrating traffic on one station could be done as simply as would have been possible in Wakefield?

 

[Grumpy]

The option of running through the site fo Westgate was considered by BR before electrification, driven I think by the possibility of getting rid of the viaduct. .
[.

The electrification would have been planned in the early 1980's. At that time BR were churning out Class 56 and later Class 58 to handle the growing freight traffic. There was a lot of this trundling through Kirkgate. So I can understand why there wouldn't be much resistance to putting in the "too difficult" box.
However, as stated, freight through Kirkgate has been relatively insignificant for a few years now.

 

[Bantamzen]

Given that so much is being spent / has now been spent on both stations, the opportunity to do anything has probably been lost for another generation. But should the question of rationalising station provision in a moderate-sized city simply have been ignored (we have heard nothing to say that this time it was not), and what mechanism exists in today's railway to examine questions like station provision in Wakefield? The case put forward above seems to me sound.

In terms of operations my own experience of travelling through, mainly on XC services, is of depressingly frequent signal-checks into the station in both directions and a very slow approach from the south and exit to the north caused by a highly restrictive layout (nothing like as bad in the north-south direction).

Comparing the two routes, there is next to nothing in it in terms of distance -- a matter of a very few chains. The present route is 90 then 50 on the viaduct, dropping to 35 at Westgate Jn and then 25 for the turnout to the platform line. Nothing can be done to improve the final approach, as the WR&G line is the later line, joining into the back of the original curve round from Kirkgate. The route via Calder Bridge cannot fairly be compared at the moment as it is quite unmodernised. Maximum speed is 50, with 25 at Crofton West Jn, 20 at Oakenshaw Jn, and 25 at Kirkgate West Jn. But what could be achieved if this were made the main route and modernised accordingly? Impressions from travelling over it suggest that the maximum speed could be much higher and all three junctions could be relatively cheaply re-aligned (especially as there is no OLE in the way).

A new 4-platform station at Kirkgate keeping the fine frontage would no doubt have a good thoroughly modern track layout that should allow to and from the curves both east and west and over the platform lines. And if the viaduct line were abandoned, then there would be a much better speed over the curve at the Westgate Jn end. Which is all a long-winded way of saying that it seems to me timings could be as good as on the present route as long as no-one came up with the bright idea of two Wakefield stops.

Are there any other cases where concentrating traffic on one station could be done as simply as would have been possible in Wakefield?

You know, despite having commuted through Wakefield for almost 7 years over two spells, it's never really occurred to me why this hadn't been done. And I don't ever recall any great clamour in the city for such works. I'd always assumed that the existing alignment from Westgate south was the most logical, but having looked at the map I can see how not only would a single Wakefield station be possible, but actually preferable. Admittedly a lot of work would have been involved, and possibly some careful planning of the platforms to maximise the space between the two curves, but I can see it now.

And who knows, maybe it would have strengthened the case for a keeping the Manchester - Wakefield & beyond service, possibly heading to York or Selby/Hull? But like you said, with the money going towards the two separate redevelopments, any chance of of this is probably gone for some good time. Shame really.

 

[Mugby]

Didn't the curve from Westgate to Kirkgate used to be double track?

 

[Wolf]

Rejoining the HUD-Wakey to the HUD-MCV stopper is a non-starter in the short to medium term for a number of reasons... Firstly, the Colne Valley nodding donkey is set to be replaced by TPE semi-fasts soon. Secondly, I'm not sure how merging them would free up P4 at HUD anyway, as the Wakefield generally uses P5, which is too short for either of the Leeds stoppers much of the time.

Back on topic, it's great to see Kirkgate finally getting sorted out and re-staffed, though think how much easier it would be if it hadn't been allowed to fall into such disrepair in the first place!

Agreed. The reason the original Wakefield westgate to man Vic was split was because of pathing issues after the increase in the number of tpe services every hour. That was when tpe only ran 4 tph between Leeds and Manchester. Now they run 5 there's no chance paths for a non split stopper would ever work until more loops or quadrupling of track sections is completed.

 

[Welshman]

It did indeed.