Which re-opening would have the best Business Case?

[edwin_m]

You could have the tram leave Waterloo over Waterloo Bridge on a reserved lane occupying what is now the fast lanes of the dual carriageway bridge then use the Kingsway Subway as far as Southampton Row, then its a short street run up Woburn Place (which could be closed to through traffic with local traffic only) to Euston.

You wouldn't be able to use the old stations due to the DDA, but building new underground tram stations at Aldwych and Holborn should not be beyond the wit of man.

The Cross River Tram was intended to run on the surface at Kingsway. Probably the tram subway would require significant widening to accommodate modern trams and safety/accessibility standards (the stop platforms don't look much wider than the stairs that access them). The disruption this would cause would be similar to the construction of a cut and cover tunnel.

 

[tbtc]

I would imagine at some-point the Scottish government will look into reopening the Edinburgh Suburban and Southside Junction Railway for passenger services with a couple of the old stations re-opening

There are 3 problems with reopening the south sub in increasing difficulty of solving them:

1 Freight services. To compete with buses at least a 4tph service would be required that would need to be carefully timetabled to aloe freight to continue to use the south sub.

2 Journey times. Because the route is indirect Journey times from Cameron Toll / Morningside struggle to be competitive with existing bus services.

3 Waverley capacity. The west approach at Waverley is basically full (especially on the south lines. Reopening the south sub is never going to justify paying for the Almond Chord to rebalance the western throat and if capacity is created that way it will be to use if for more services elsewhere e.g. High Speed Rail.

The only way you could imagine the south sub reopening would be to create a new terminus platform at the south side of Haymarket station to avoid using up track capacity in Waverley Western approaches.

I agree with Altnabreac - I don't think that the "Sub" would really solve very much - you'd have to run a "turn up and go" train service to compensate for the indirect route, and there really aren't the paths for that.

And, if there were the paths then the "Sub" would have to compete with Gorebridge/ East Lothian/ Fife etc for them - all of which would have a good case.

Not a reopening but a missing link ...

Bradford cross rail

But not a hope in **** when Bradford council can't the benefits and seem to be disinterested in rail services beyond Low Moor or Apperley Bridge. Bradford will miss out on HS2 and HS3 and links thereto without a murmur from local politicians.

What would Bradford Cross Rail "solve" though? Is there a big market to get from Ilkley to Halifax, for example?

It'd be nicer to have all Leeds-bound services depart from the one Bradford station (just like all Bradford-bound services currently depart from the one Leeds station), but this is a very expensive project for a "nice to have".

I suppose it'd make things easier for Leeds fans desperate to get home after their embarrassing League Cup exit tonight though

Tottenham South Curve is an existing, indeed electrified, double track line linking South Tottenham to the line south from Tottenham Hale. To connect Tottenham Hale to GOBLIN would need the North curve, currently mainly a scrapyard, rebuilt. But then you'd be trying to run trains onto an already hilariously congested bit of track. If you want an impractical and highly expensive upgrade for the area, you'd run a fully grade separated pair of tracks from Hackney Down to Harlow Town, take out all the level crossings and then you'd have capacity for metro-type operations to go on to GOBLIN.

Cheers - I'm getting my curves mixed up!

I like the idea of freeing up capacity at Liverpool Street/ encouraging better links between GOBLIN and the rest of the network though (GOBLIN goes frustratingly close to a lot of lines without interchanging very well).

One of the curious things about these discussions is that the absence of a bus link is taken as a lack of demand and used as a justification not to construct a railway, whereas if a frequent bus service exists, it's said that there's no need to have a railway because the bus is there.

I'm inclined to think that Uckfield and Crowborough (and potentially Tunbridge Wells) would create a steady flow of passengers towards Lewes and Brighton throughout the day, much like Eastbourne, Hastings and Bexhill, as opposed to the more peak focused London traffic.

The line should be extended and the opportunity taken to upgrade the existing section at the same time.

I'm of the opinion that new stations have worked where there was a good bus service along that corridor (Ebbw Vale, Alloa...), so it seems like a good benchmark of whether a train can be sustained (if you can convince hundreds of people an hour to use one form of public transport between two places then they can form a good baseline for a train - whilst motorists may be harder to win over).

However my reluctance for re-opening the Uckfield line is for more practical reasons - as outlined by Bald Rick - if we can't fit existing passengers through bottlenecks like East Croydon then trying to squeeze further numbers isn't going to work.

It's a more boring answer to say "lets focus on improving existing services because we don't have the luxury of being able to worry about fantasy re-openings", but that's my position, sorry.

Subject to the Rotherham Parkgate trial being successful, I could see the possibility of Sheffield to Stocksbridge being reopened as a tram-train route... One of the several reasons a reopening of the whole route has never got off the ground is the difficulty in reaching Midland station from the stub of the Woodhead line. Tram-trains of course wouldn't have this problem, and could join the existing tram network either at Wadsley Bridge/Hillsborough or somewhere closer to the city centre near the site of Victoria. Of course if the freight to Stocksbridge drops off completely a regular tram route would be just as likely.

Would that be opened or reopened. I didn't think the Stocksbridge Branch (as opposed to the GCR line to Penistone) had ever had a passenger service.

I would guess t you would probably need an on street extension into the town centre from the old? steelworks.

I'm not sure about Stocksbridge.

The alignment of the Deepcar line manages to avoid many areas of population in the ten-ish miles to Sheffield, it would approach Sheffield from the wrong direction (coming through the current Victoria site, joining the Darnall line heading out of town), any station at Stocksbridge would be quite a walk to most of the areas of population (it looks close on a map, but try climbing the hill to East Whitwell/ Garden Village etc), so some kind of shuttle bus may be required (and we already have a shuttle bus connecting with SuperTram every ten minutes with modern buses).

IF you want to extend SuperTram then there are better places (Herdings Park to Batemoor? Halfway to Killamarsh?)

Ignoring the main-line station, Liverpool Street will have same number of XR and Met etc and more Central Line trains than Farringdon will have TL, but I don't like being pedantic

I don't like to be pedantic either (but I don't think that the Central Line would count as "trains" when we are making such comparisons, otherwise we'd be talking about a station on several Underground lines already beating Liverpool Street).

How I see it is that on top of the Altnabreac conditions for success, which are mostly those that deal with the economic/commuter market, there is another, lesser condition of the tourist and cultural value of a location. I don't doubt that Witney may be a nice place to live but it's not really that 'special' in the grand scheme of things. Places like St Andrews, on the other hand, would benefit far more from a tourist aspect if connected to the rail network. On top of that there is actually a housing market justification because the town is tiny, full of students (meaning high rents) and to top that off a large enough proportion of the student population is rich enough that there is no real limit on how much they will pay for accommodation. A standard four-bedroom house for rent can easily be £400 per person per month to rent on a student contract, which makes it basically impossible for locals to afford living there and since the town is so small and public transport is relatively poor, it's not like in a larger town or city where it is most often possible to live in a non-student area where rents are relatively normal. If you built the railway, it would basically open up the whole of Fife and Dundee to house people living or working there, which would then work well with the enhanced job possibilities from increased tourism (it would be madness for the ICEC operator to extend a few Edinburgh IEPs up there, with the golf and everything).

St Andrews is a tricky one.

One factor not mentioned in this thread before is the "are there any existing services that can be extended" criterion. Given the lack of spare paths over the Forth Bridge (which means no extra services through Fife any time soon), serving St A would have to be one of:

• A shuttle from St Andrews to Leuchars (at least two/hour, to connect with the two/hour to Edinburgh/ Dundee)
• A regular service from St Andrews to Dundee
• Diverting (some of) the existing Edinburgh - Dundee/ Aberdeen services into/out of St Andrews (which would mean a couple of reversals, adding the best part of half an hour for longer distance passengers - which would be a big chunk out of a journey like Kirkcaldy to Dundee)

There's clearly a market there (nine buses an hour through Guardbridge) and the market has grown in recent years (people used to commute from St Andrews to Dundee, now the relative markets and house prices have changed which mean more people seem to commute from Dundee to St Andrews), Students and tourists travel long distances to St Andrews (regular Stagecoach coaches to Edinburgh and Glasgow, six "fast" buses an hour to Dundee) but I'm not sure how best to meet that demand.

Also, some other practicalities - would it be a single track line (which would make it harder to fit in longer distance services and restrict frequencies)? Would you demolish the current car parks in this busy town to put the station back where it used to be? Or build an "out of town" station near the Old Course Hotel (which would still require buses/ taxis)? Is the Tay Bridge still restricted to one train on its central section at any time (which may restrict the idea of a frequent service from St A/ Leuchars to Dundee)?

I dunno. There's definitely a "problem", but I don't know how we solve that with heavy rail. Meanwhile, Leven/ Methil doesn't have the tourism, doesn't have the Students, but would be a lot easier to serve by rail (extending Fife Circle services from the Glenrothes/Thornton area to Levenmouth).

 

[NotATrainspott]

St Andrews is a tricky one.

One factor not mentioned in this thread before is the "are there any existing services that can be extended" criterion. Given the lack of spare paths over the Forth Bridge (which means no extra services through Fife any time soon), serving St A would have to be one of:

• A shuttle from St Andrews to Leuchars (at least two/hour, to connect with the two/hour to Edinburgh/ Dundee)
• A regular service from St Andrews to Dundee
• Diverting (some of) the existing Edinburgh - Dundee/ Aberdeen services into/out of St Andrews (which would mean a couple of reversals, adding the best part of half an hour for longer distance passengers - which would be a big chunk out of a journey like Kirkcaldy to Dundee)

There's clearly a market there (nine buses an hour through Guardbridge) and the market has grown in recent years (people used to commute from St Andrews to Dundee, now the relative markets and house prices have changed which mean more people seem to commute from Dundee to St Andrews), Students and tourists travel long distances to St Andrews (regular Stagecoach coaches to Edinburgh and Glasgow, six "fast" buses an hour to Dundee) but I'm not sure how best to meet that demand.

Also, some other practicalities - would it be a single track line (which would make it harder to fit in longer distance services and restrict frequencies)? Would you demolish the current car parks in this busy town to put the station back where it used to be? Or build an "out of town" station near the Old Course Hotel (which would still require buses/ taxis)? Is the Tay Bridge still restricted to one train on its central section at any time (which may restrict the idea of a frequent service from St A/ Leuchars to Dundee)?

I dunno. There's definitely a "problem", but I don't know how we solve that with heavy rail. Meanwhile, Leven/ Methil doesn't have the tourism, doesn't have the Students, but would be a lot easier to serve by rail (extending Fife Circle services from the Glenrothes/Thornton area to Levenmouth).

The Tata Steel report into the a reopening makes for promising reading. The report says that paths exist for 1tph to Edinburgh and 1tph to Dundee, both of which with significantly improved journey times over buses. The line would realistically be a new railway, but it would use the former alignment in the town itself and could sustain a platform up to 257m long, with passive provision for a run-around loop and a second platform for charter trains (as with the Borders line). With total capital costs of around £100m the line would then be revenue-neutral, even with the abstracted demand from Leuchars (which in any case would still be served by long distance trains as it is today, and would still have a decent bus link to St Andrews due to the geography of the roads).

If I had to bet money I would guess that Leven and St Andrews would be done together as part of the Fife Circle electrification, especially if that electrification and future resignalling would enable more paths and capacity across the Forth Bridge and through Fife.

 

[Busaholic]

That was one of the attractions of the Cross River Tram. But if went as slowly as the buses do in Central London (over an hour from Victoria to KX recently, mid-afternoon so not the busiest time) it wouldn't be worth bothering with.

As to depth, newer lines usually have to go deeper than any existing stuff in order to pass beneath everything (though from the Crossrail TV programme I gather it is above the Northern at TCR, otherwise all that threading the needle stuff wouldn't apply).

Both the old London County Council and the City of London Corporation were pretty savvy about which roads in Central London could support trams and, at a later stage, trolleybuses. Most of these roads still exist, at their original width or, in some cases, artificially narrowed as far as road traffic is concerned. There was never any connection between north and
south London via the centre with the sole exception of the Kingsway Tram Subway, and this was only constructed for operational reasons rather than for the passenger, although they were able to benefit from it. Personally, I think the Edinburgh tram project would seem like a picnic compared to trying to build a new tramline from Euston to Waterloo, let alone to Peckham. With Paris's penchant for new public transport projects of all modes it's noticeable they're not attempting any street trams in the centre, even if with all those traffic lanes you'd think the Champs Elysses might succumb.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

I suspect the Witney cost would explode as everyone would jump on the back of it. The first thing someone would try and tack on to the cost is redoubling of the Cotswold line to at least Yarnton if not a complete re-double as they would claim its needed.

The current plan for the Cotswold Line is a passing loop at Hanborough rather than full redoubling between Charlbury and Wolvercote. (Neatly sidesteps the problem of what to do about Finstock and Combe.) Agree that redoubling to Yarnton would be likely, but that will be less horrendous when Oxford resignalling is achieved.

The car park would need to be huge as it would become a huge draw which would probably need road improvements at the A40/A415 junction.

Possible, but bear in mind that the A40 accesses are set to be completely redone over the next few years (new sliproads at Shores Green, entirely new at-grade junction at Downs Road) which is likely to relieve the current pressure on the A415 junction.

It looks to me like rebuilding Hanborough as Witney Parkway with a very large car park and the no.233 bus service increased from hourly to half hourly between Witney and Long Hanborough Station, with evening services, would be a more realistic option.

That's already Oxfordshire County Council's intention (the passing loop I referred to above is the same plan) and they're talking to FGW and NR about it.

The new slip-roads at Shores Green will go some way to providing for this - at present Bridge Street in Witney pretty much rules out any extra traffic on the A4095 - but ultimately it's a small, twisty road which has finite capacity. An expanded Hanborough is a medium-term sticking plaster for Witney-Reading/London passengers, but little else.

Charlbury - Charlbury & Chipping Norton Parkway
Shipton - Burford Parkway
Kingham - Stow Parkway

Kingham, not Charlbury, is the railhead for Chippy.

How much government support does Witney need? Many reopenings are suggested primarily to boost the economy of areas that have seen problems, by giving them access to jobs in large cities and enabling their young people to stay and commute to work rather than need to move out and increase housing pressure elsewhere. If there's a social case for putting Witney on the map then it is a perfectly reasonable scheme but if it's just to mean that people don't have to drive as far to get to the train that would take them to London anyway then it should be more of a scheme for a franchise to invest in, like Evergreen 3, rather than a priority of the DfT.

The issue here is the recent Strategic Housing Market Assessment, which states: lots more houses in the South-East; in particular, lots more houses in Oxfordshire; in particular, lots more houses in West Oxfordshire; and in particular, lots more houses in Witney and Carterton.

The two towns are set to expand vastly. The A40 is already over capacity and the Cotswold Line car parks are full - even the newly expanded ones at Charlbury and Hanborough (FGW is already considering a second deck at Charlbury).

Personally I agree with you that funds should be directed to areas of greatest social need, but we have a Conservative Government (yes, we do) which doesn't give a flying frog about areas of great social need, so I don't hold out much hope of that priority being reflected in spending any time soon.

 

[najaB]

Is the Tay Bridge still restricted to one train on its central section at any time (which may restrict the idea of a frequent service from St A/ Leuchars to Dundee)?

Currently, yes, but one output of the work currently being done on the bridge is to remove that restriction.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Don't /think/ anyone has mentioned it yet in this thread, but what business case would re-opening Blackpool South to Blackpool Central have? As far as I'm aware, there are no massive physical obstacles in the way - so it should be a relatively[1] inexpensive one, and there's every reason to think it would be very well used, so it would look very favourable at first sight.

I'm guessing one issue is that - I don't know whether that extension would make the Blackpool South line too long to run an hourly service without adding a passing loop at some point, and requiring and additional train? On the other hand, I suspect if you did re-open it, patronage on that line would almost immediately increase so much that you'd need to increase the frequency anyway.


[1] Emphasis on relatively - obviously, almost anything that involves laying track is going to be very expensive in absolute terms.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Don't /think/ anyone has mentioned it yet in this thread, but what business case would re-opening Blackpool South to Blackpool Central have? As far as I'm aware, there are no massive physical obstacles in the way - so it should be a relatively[1] inexpensive one, and there's every reason to think it would be very well used, so it would look very favourable at first sight.

I'm guessing one issue is that - I don't know whether that extension would make the Blackpool South line too long to run an hourly service without adding a passing loop at some point, and requiring and additional train? On the other hand, I suspect if you did re-open it, patronage on that line would almost immediately increase so much that you'd need to increase the frequency anyway.

[1] Emphasis on relatively - obviously, almost anything that involves laying track is going to be very expensive in absolute terms.

I don't believe there are any plans to electrify the Blackpool South line. In my own opinion the best option would be for the entire branch to be removed from the rail network and the alignment handed over to the trams. This would allow significantly cheaper service improvements and would allow a turn-up-and-go frequency at low cost.

In the long term there will be a Preston Interchange HS2 station adjacent to the planned Preston Western Distributor Road on the M55. That's only a few kilometres from Kirkham and Wesham over flat and empty terrain, so a further extension of the Blackpool tram to interchange with HS2 is not at all an implausible idea.

 

[edwin_m]

I'm guessing one issue is that - I don't know whether that extension would make the Blackpool South line too long to run an hourly service without adding a passing loop at some point, and requiring and additional train? On the other hand, I suspect if you did re-open it, patronage on that line would almost immediately increase so much that you'd need to increase the frequency anyway.

This would almost certainly be the case because the journey from Kirkham to Blackpool South and back is only just under an hour. With existing service patterns the service is through-routed to Colne, and a very similar situation applies between there and Rose Grove.

So (leaving the tram option aside) anything like this would probably trigger a recast of the service, employing an extra unit and with passing loops needed in the Lytham area and somewhere between Rose Grove and Colne. Splitting into two services either side of Preston might avoid the extra loops but would still need at least one extra unit and could run into problems with platform occupancy on the Slow side of Prestion station. Unfortunately this one is not quite the no-brainer it first appears!

The tram option has been looked at several times and does make a lot of sense, but to be worth doing would probably need to extend as a tram-train through to Preston.

 

[yorksrob]

I'm of the opinion that new stations have worked where there was a good bus service along that corridor (Ebbw Vale, Alloa...), so it seems like a good benchmark of whether a train can be sustained (if you can convince hundreds of people an hour to use one form of public transport between two places then they can form a good baseline for a train - whilst motorists may be harder to win over).

However my reluctance for re-opening the Uckfield line is for more practical reasons - as outlined by Bald Rick - if we can't fit existing passengers through bottlenecks like East Croydon then trying to squeeze further numbers isn't going to work.

It's a more boring answer to say "lets focus on improving existing services because we don't have the luxury of being able to worry about fantasy re-openings", but that's my position, sorry.

As far as I'm aware, London trains from Uckfield aren't currently 12 carriages long, which is generally the maximum for the Souther Region. Also, whereas the BML2 proposal envisages large numbers of additional London bound travellers (and proposes increased infrastructure to match), a more modest opening would more likely generate travel from the Weald to Brighton and the South Coast.

I'm all for improving existing services, but there's only so much you can do with a long single track branchline. The Uckfield route stands a far better chance of receiving further investment as part of a fully integrated route to the coast.

 

[Bald Rick]

As far as I'm aware, London trains from Uckfield aren't currently 12 carriages long, which is generally the maximum for the Souther Region. Also, whereas the BML2 proposal envisages large numbers of additional London bound travellers (and proposes increased infrastructure to match), a more modest opening would more likely generate travel from the Weald to Brighton and the South Coast.

I'm all for improving existing services, but there's only so much you can do with a long single track branchline. The Uckfield route stands a far better chance of receiving further investment as part of a fully integrated route to the coast.

The peak Uckfield trains will be 10 x 23m long, ie 11.5 'normal' coaches, in the next couple of years, and all indications are that they will be full pretty quickly.

 

[21C101]

The peak Uckfield trains will be 10 x 23m long, ie 11.5 'normal' coaches, in the next couple of years, and all indications are that they will be full pretty quickly.

Maybe its about time the Uckfield line fares were equalled with the other lines

Annual Season Tickets to London Terminals

• Uckfield £2,748

• Robertsbridge £4,548

• Haywards Heath £3,504

Not hard to detect why the demand on that line has gone up so much.

 

[route:oxford]

How much government support does Witney need? Many reopenings are suggested primarily to boost the economy of areas that have seen problems, by giving them access to jobs in large cities and enabling their young people to stay and commute to work rather than need to move out and increase housing pressure elsewhere. If there's a social case for putting Witney on the map then it is a perfectly reasonable scheme but if it's just to mean that people don't have to drive as far to get to the train that would take them to London anyway then it should be more of a scheme for a franchise to invest in, like Evergreen 3, rather than a priority of the DfT.

I drove from Carterton to Oxford this morning at 10.30am. It took me 55 minutes to reach the Wolvercote roundabout - a journey of around 10 miles. No accidents or issues - just sheer volume of traffic.

It's the same day in, day out.

Don't forget that it costs £27 a day to park in central Oxford. Cash only.

 

[Silversmith]

Is there any scope for re-openings in the Somerset region?

I'm thinking of possible reconnections to the railway network for the likes of Wells, Glastonbury, Street, Cheddar, Shepton Mallet, Somerton etc.

Although the bus service from First is generally good, it does seem that Somerset (and indeed the South West in general) is crying out for better infrastructure, improved journey times etc.

I would've thought that Wells (a cathedral city), Glastonbury and the Cheddar Gorge area would be a prime candidate for re-introducing railway services, particularly for tourism and to relieve congestion on the roads. The traffic during the Glastonbury Festival alone might make this an idea worth exploring, and the town itself is a New Age mecca attracting visitors all year round.

Have there been any proposals from Network Rail on this? Any feasibility studies?

Thanks.

 

[yorksrob]

The peak Uckfield trains will be 10 x 23m long, ie 11.5 'normal' coaches, in the next couple of years, and all indications are that they will be full pretty quickly.

Fair point, but I still contest that the majority of potential passengers for the route would be between the South Coast and the Weald (and visa versa), rather than the South Coast and London.

 

[21C101]

Is there any scope for re-openings in the Somerset region?

I'm thinking of possible reconnections to the railway network for the likes of Wells, Glastonbury, Street, Cheddar, Shepton Mallet, Somerton etc.

Although the bus service from First is generally good, it does seem that Somerset (and indeed the South West in general) is crying out for better infrastructure, improved journey times etc.

I would've thought that Wells (a cathedral city), Glastonbury and the Cheddar Gorge area would be a prime candidate for re-introducing railway services, particularly for tourism and to relieve congestion on the roads. The traffic during the Glastonbury Festival alone might make this an idea worth exploring, and the town itself is a New Age mecca attracting visitors all year round.

Have there been any proposals from Network Rail on this? Any feasibility studies?

Thanks.

I woudl have thought reopening Somerton would serve Glastonbury and Street well.

For Shepton and Wells I reckon the best bet would be extending the east somerset railway and then doing a "Swanage" on the grounds that there really is no feasible justification unless local people essentially raise the money and do it themselves.

 

[CockneySparrow]

I don't believe there are any plans to electrify the Blackpool South line. In my own opinion the best option would be for the entire branch to be removed from the rail network and the alignment handed over to the trams. This would allow significantly cheaper service improvements and would allow a turn-up-and-go frequency at low cost.

In the long term there will be a Preston Interchange HS2 station adjacent to the planned Preston Western Distributor Road on the M55. That's only a few kilometres from Kirkham and Wesham over flat and empty terrain, so a further extension of the Blackpool tram to interchange with HS2 is not at all an implausible idea.

What's happening with the reopening of the other branch line on the north branch, last stop before Blackpool, went past the other day and the line is still connected but looking overgrown past the signal box

 

[Abpj17]

Is there any scope for re-openings in the Somerset region?

I'm thinking of possible reconnections to the railway network for the likes of Wells, Glastonbury, Street, Cheddar, Shepton Mallet, Somerton etc.

Although the bus service from First is generally good, it does seem that Somerset (and indeed the South West in general) is crying out for better infrastructure, improved journey times etc.

I would've thought that Wells (a cathedral city), Glastonbury and the Cheddar Gorge area would be a prime candidate for re-introducing railway services, particularly for tourism and to relieve congestion on the roads. The traffic during the Glastonbury Festival alone might make this an idea worth exploring, and the town itself is a New Age mecca attracting visitors all year round.

Have there been any proposals from Network Rail on this? Any feasibility studies?

Thanks.

Possibly not the decade to consider it in. Infrastructure spend would be better spent on sorting out flooding defences first.

And the population densities aren't particularly high. A one weekend event would be difficult to justify a major spend on. The area *might* be ripe for a heritage type line akin to Swanage.

 

[edwin_m]

What's happening with the reopening of the other branch line on the north branch, last stop before Blackpool, went past the other day and the line is still connected but looking overgrown past the signal box

Fleetwood? If so it has recently been abandoned and presumably the junction at Poulton won't be included in the resignalling. Fleetwood will however have a tram connection to Blackpool North station when they get round to building it.

 

[Bald Rick]

Maybe its about time the Uckfield line fares were equalled with the other lines

Annual Season Tickets to London Terminals

• Uckfield £2,748

• Robertsbridge £4,548

• Haywards Heath £3,504

Not hard to detect why the demand on that line has gone up so much.

Concur. But DfT won't go there.

 

[The Planner]

Fleetwood? If so it has recently been abandoned and presumably the junction at Poulton won't be included in the resignalling. Fleetwood will however have a tram connection to Blackpool North station when they get round to building it.

Correct, it wont be included. Last I heard was that it was trying to be bought as a preserved line.

 

[Busaholic]

Maybe its about time the Uckfield line fares were equalled with the other lines

Annual Season Tickets to London Terminals

• Uckfield £2,748

• Robertsbridge £4,548

• Haywards Heath £3,504

Not hard to detect why the demand on that line has gone up so much.

If this was known about in the area, would imagine some living a few miles from Robertsbridge in the general direction of Uckfield might consider switching railway lines, with the added bonus of more chance of a seat from the off. I've no idea what road conditions are like in that area (probably horrendous in peak hours) but if more passengers started using Uckfield who live in areas well to the south it might increase the pressure for the reopening. You might have thought having an ex-Transport Minister (Norman Baker) as MP for Lewes would help, but it could work against the rail campaigners in the area if he is considered 'toxic'.

 

[Chrisgr31]

If this was known about in the area, would imagine some living a few miles from Robertsbridge in the general direction of Uckfield might consider switching railway lines, with the added bonus of more chance of a seat from the off. I've no idea what road conditions are like in that area (probably horrendous in peak hours) but if more passengers started using Uckfield who live in areas well to the south it might increase the pressure for the reopening. You might have thought having an ex-Transport Minister (Norman Baker) as MP for Lewes would help, but it could work against the rail campaigners in the area if he is considered 'toxic'.

As a commuter on the Uckfield Line I am not a great fan of the fares going up!

The reality is that Robertsbridge to London is 10 minutes fasted than Uckfield to London and Haywards Heath has 8 trains an hour compared to one for Uckfield and Robertsbridge one, and not only that but the fastest Haywards Heath time is 45 mins (or 50% less) than the Uckfield time.

The reality appears to be that Uckfield is correctly priced, Robertsbridge is too expensive, and Haywards Heath too cheap!

There are of course historic reasons why Uckfield is cheap, the first being that all season tickets south of Edenbridge are the same. Then of course there is the historic service that was so awful especially following Cowden that fares were held low.

The road network in East Sussex is generally poor and its probably a 30 minute drive from Robertsbridge to Uckfield or any other station on that line. There are quite a few people who live in Tunbridge Wells and Wadhurst who go to Uckfield line stations, but equally I understand that it is still the case that 50% of Uckfield Line traveller (or those you would expect to use it) use the BML or Hastings line instead.

 

[steamybrian]

If this was known about in the area, would imagine some living a few miles from Robertsbridge in the general direction of Uckfield might consider switching railway lines, with the added bonus of more chance of a seat from the off. I've no idea what road conditions are like in that area (probably horrendous in peak hours) but if more passengers started using Uckfield who live in areas well to the south it might increase the pressure for the reopening. You might have thought having an ex-Transport Minister (Norman Baker) as MP for Lewes would help, but it could work against the rail campaigners in the area if he is considered 'toxic'.

A growing number of commuters from Tunbridge Wells do now drive the 4 miles to Eridge and travel to London from there. Not only do they save around £2,000 on their annual season ticket but the "early ones" know where to park free of charge at Eridge station and accordingly save another £1,000 on car parking charges compared with Tunbridge Wells.
Most other commuters who live between the London-Hastings line and London -Uckfield line obviously are aware of the comparable fares and accordingly the number of Uckfield line commuters is rising.
It is not only commuters who benefit but ordinary daytime off-peak travellers as well.

 

[CockneySparrow]

Correct, it wont be included. Last I heard was that it was trying to be bought as a preserved line.

If it isn't included in the resignalling then the line will be severed then, this might cause a problem for the preserved enthusiasts

 

[21C101]

If it isn't included in the resignalling then the line will be severed then, this might cause a problem for the preserved enthusiasts

They should be ok. The junction is immediately west of Pouldton Le Fylde station so they can build their own station just beyond it which would still be adjacent to the mainline station at Poulton.

 

[Essexman]

Best case I would say is Exeter - Okehampton - Tavistock - Plymouth.
Track still in place to Meldon, planned to reopen from Tavistock.
Justified as diversionary route as well as serving places en route plus access to Dartmoor.

Also high on the list I would have -

Maldon - Population 14,000 (district approx. 60,000)
Keswick - Population 5,000 plus many tourists & walkers

 

[The Planner]

No, don't start that one again....

 

[21C101]

No, don't start that one again....

I would go futher, reopen and electrify it,redouble Waterloo exeter plus electrify and flyover at woking to increase capacity. All intercities to go to waterloo via yeovil instead of paddington.

Single berks and hants plus newton abbot -plymouth taking the best track and leaving the worst and run some semi fasts with very unreliable locos and close castle cary plus frome loop and station with pax bussed to bruton.

 

[Suraggu]

Leamside line Ferryhill -Pelaw. You could then extend the Metro to Washington which has been petitioned for in Parliament recently and diverts freights away from the Ferryhill -Newcastle section of the ECML.

Plus if the Leamside line is reinstated freight could continue to Stockton on the freight only line and head south through Yarm and rejoining the ECML at Northallerton where the ECML is 4 tracks, releasing paths between Newcastle & Northallerton.