Trivia: UK rail line with best case for closure

[cf111]

Not true, I'm afraid. All the Scottish lines you've mentioned benefit from tourism, and there's quite a bit of usage down the southern half of the Far North Line. (The first train down from Wick is usually quite crowded because of the early ferry from Stromness). The HoWL gets some tourists too, but not nearly as many.

The early train from Wick is the 0618 which departs Thurso at 0650 - the ferry doesn't arrive in Scrabster until 0800. The second train of the day leaves Thurso at 0843 but there isn't that much traffic from the ferry, most people from Orkney will take their cars across on either the Northlink boats mentioned above or on the much shorter, cheaper and more sheltered St. Margaret's Hope to Gills Bay crossing.

The south end of the line is indeed quite busy with commuters up until about Tain.

 

[backontrack]

I have long thought that 2tph all day with peak extras to 4tph would make more sense on that route (and Brum). But I doubt that is costing a fortune - VT's yield management model seems to be sound in terms of maximising profit (rather than bums on seats).

That, or just concentrate the 9-cars on those services allowing the 11s to be used on the less frequent and more overcrowded Scottish runs.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Tain-Golspie, according to the Wiki article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far_North_Line

The loop doesn't appear to serve much of consequence, so it staying open would be surprising. The train might still win, though, as trains are more comfortable than regular Citylink coaches.

DORLAG (Dornoch Rail Link Action Group) is supporting a new stretch of line from Tain to Golspie, with a station at Dornoch, that would cut journey times by 40 minutes. The route would stay open from Tain to Lairg for use on Invernet services and such like, so only the stop at Rogart would close. This would obviously be great for the line, but bigger priorities are more passing loops/double track and Evanton station.

The Police told us we had to let him out of the cupboard, some nonsense about 'Human Rights' or similar such guff :roll:

Obviously not fans of the Osborne work ethic, then. :P

 

[cf111]

DORLAG (Dornoch Rail Link Action Group) is supporting a new stretch of line from Tain to Golspie, with a station at Dornoch, that would cut journey times by 40 minutes. The route would stay open from Tain to Lairg for use on Invernet services and such like, so only the stop at Rogart would close. This would obviously be great for the line, but bigger priorities are more passing loops/double track and Evanton station.

It'd cost an awful lot of money because you'd need to cross both the Dornoch Firth and Loch Fleet with new bridges. This is before thinking about how many level crossings you'd need. I think, from memory, the time saving would be closer to 30 minutes but this could have been based on when the line was run by 156s.

Don't get me wrong, I'd be delighted to see it, but I think any realistic improvements will come from upgrading the existing infrastructure and I don't see any real appetite from the government to do even that.

 

[DT611]

There are other service reductions instead of line closures which I think would work better if implemented to save money.

To start is it really worth having 3 trains per hour between London Euston and Manchester Piccadilly throughout the day, I would say no as most trains between Crewe/Stoke-on-Trent and London Euston are carting fresh air about.

The problem with that is the return services. While the particular services toards manchester for example might have little patronage the return services could be packed. You might be able to eliminate little used services and returns with a time table reshuffle but i know nothing about that aspect i'm afraid. You also have the problem that if you reduce services you may make it less convenient.

 

[satisnek]

Grove Park to Bromley North?

Just 'done' this line, possibly for the first time, the other day and wondered what was the point? Apparently it sees a fair amount of use but I can't for the life of me see why. Possibly faster to London even with the change at Grove Park??

As for the Scottish routes, they used to be 'lifelines' for isolated communites, but with road improvements plus the use of DMUs (which can't punch through snowdrifts like locos can) does this still hold true?

And then there's Stourbridge Town. When the branch was cut back for the second time in the 1990s I heard it suggested that the most cost-effective option would be to park a load of redundant loco-hauled coaches on the line and people made the journey by simply walking through the train...

 

[RichmondCommu]

The short route between Ironville Junction and Kirkby Lane End Junction in the East Midlands cannot see much use nowadays since the last coal mines closed so that must be a candidate for moth balling at the very least. I was amazed that the line survived the fairly recent re-signalling.

Another route that springs to mind is the test track out to High Marnham. All of the remaining local coal mines have closed for ever and there is of course the test track Asfordby which could take on the additional test work.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

An interesting idea for a thread, The Leeds to Morecambe line between Long Preston and Carnforth could be seen as one as its only used by 5 trains per day in each direction and the most amount of passengers any intermediate station along the line sees per year is 25,000.

However maintenance costs on the line must be very low given that there are no signals apart from the junctions at either end. And there would be no savings at Settle Junction given that it's an important block post on the S & C, not to mention it's crossover.

On the basis of what people are suggesting on this thread and given the presence of the M65, perhaps the route from Burnley to Colne should be up for the chop? :roll:

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Quite a few of the routes being suggested have a fairly limited service, so perhaps the question should be "How can we get more people to use them?". It's true that such routes (Leeds to Morecambe, HOWL etc.) will always need some degree of subsidy but subsidies are there for a reason- these services are vital to the economies of the settlements they serve both in bringing tourists in and taking workers to where the jobs are. There may be case for closing certain stations along these routes but closure of entire routes and bustitution has been proven through history to be a false economy. Trains are viewed (for all their flaws) as more reliable and more permanent than buses by the public at large: Even for journeys where the bus is no slower and more frequent (Huddersfield to Bradford for example) the train gets a significant share of the total ridership, at least based on my amateur observations.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

UK rail line with best case for closure

Newhaven Harbour - Newhaven Marine

 

[krus_aragon]

Not that I've ever been up there, but how does the case for the Stranraer branch stack up since the relocation of the ferry terminal?

 

[backontrack]

Not very well, I'm afraid. After December there'll be no direct services via Kilwinning, so only the Kilmarnock trains will remain. They've been talking about making all services from Ayr to Stranraer shuttles, so passengers from Stranraer and Barrhead would have to change at Ayr or Girvan.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Don't get me wrong, I'd be delighted to see it, but I think any realistic improvements will come from upgrading the existing infrastructure and I don't see any real appetite from the government to do even that.

Yeah. I think the money would be spent better on:

-A new loop between Clachnaharry and Clunes
-A new loop between Helmsdale and Forsinard
-A new loop between Forsinard and Thurso/Wick
-A new station at Evanton

 

[PHILIPE]

It'd cost an awful lot of money because you'd need to cross both the Dornoch Firth and Loch Fleet with new bridges. This is before thinking about how many level crossings you'd need. I think, from memory, the time saving would be closer to 30 minutes but this could have been based on when the line was run by 156s.

Don't get me wrong, I'd be delighted to see it, but I think any realistic improvements will come from upgrading the existing infrastructure and I don't see any real appetite from the government to do even that.

When a new road bridge was built across the Dornoch, probably 20/30 years ago now as I've lost track of time, there was a proposal to make it a combined road/rail bridge but the Government of the day stated it was unaffordable.

 

[hulabaloo]

I'd like to propose London to Dartford via Woolwich Arsenal as no one who uses this line has a bloody ticket.

 

[najaB]

Yeah. I think the money would be spent better on:

-A new loop between Clachnaharry and Clunes
-A new loop between Helmsdale and Forsinard
-A new loop between Forsinard and Thurso/Wick
-A new station at Evanton

For the money that a Dornoch crossing would cost you'd be able fullly double Clachnaharry to Clunes plus the other improvements you listed.

 

[yorksrob]

Nothing *will* close though - any enthusiasts will continue to come up with excuses to keep anything open. Prepare for excuses like "ah, but if you ran more services then more people would use it"..

Well it's true. There is usually a reason or other why individual lines and stations shouldn't close. The biggest one of all though, is that if you make it easy to close a lightly used route, it makes it easier to close less lightly used routes. Nobody really trusts Government not to go too far. It seems to me to be a good strategy to ensure that closures remain as politically toxic as possible.

Newhaven Marine is a case in point. It is basically closed. You can't buy a ticket there, so Southern doesn't have to even run it's replacement taxi service. With the status quo, Southern keeps it's handy reversing siding, the official closure process remains difficult and nothing untoward changes. The only people who lose out in this scenario are those with an agenda to make closure easier elsewhere.

 

[PHILIPE]

For the money that a Dornoch crossing would cost you'd be able fullly double Clachnaharry to Clunes plus the other improvements you listed.

Are you associating with Post #101 ?

 

[yorksrob]

I don't think we should have a purely financial railway by any means but the network we have today was to some degree more by luck than management and travel patterns are somewhat different to 50 years ago, so there may be good cases for reopening some lines but equally there may be good cases for closing others.

Unfortunately when comes to both reopening and closure there are too many deluded fantasists (well I had to get it in somewhere) out there

Ah yes, those lines which we are told 'might have a good case for reopening' when we are being buttered up to accept closures, but dissappear like a mirage as soon as anyone actually wants to reopen anything. I don't trust a word of it.

It's those who fantasise about closures and cuts who are deluded, 'lost in a lost world' (to quote the Moody Blues) of Gannex raincoats, shiny empty motorways and "You've never had it so good" that bears no resemblance to the present day.

 

[najaB]

Are you associating with Post #101 ?

It was a reply to backontrack 's post, but yes the Dornoch Bridge was a missed opportunity.

 

[yorksrob]

Wondered how long it would take for this one to come up. Of course usage figures for this line are far underestimated, being based on tickets sold in board which frequently does not happen. Demand is hampered by the limited service (not the other way around). Despite this passenger numbers, both on through journeys and at intermediate stations have been consistently growing. It provides an important qualitative benefit to the local communities (who aren't well served by other public transport links), some the inaccurately reported quantitative figures mask. Indeed this has been recognized, and the current five services a day is to increase under the new Northern franchise.
.

Spot on. It's a shame there isn't an equivalent derogatory term to 'crayonista' to denote those who look at a line on the map and then decree that it should close, without any knowledge of the usage of the line or experience of using it.

 

[furnessvale]

Oh

*goes and clobbers sarcasm detector*

No problems! I can have difficulty with internet posts.

I can write something and think "how great was that posting". Someone else can read those exact same words and come to a totally different meaning.

 

[47802]

Ah yes, those lines which we are told 'might have a good case for reopening' when we are being buttered up to accept closures, but dissappear like a mirage as soon as anyone actually wants to reopen anything. I don't trust a word of it.

It's those who fantasise about closures and cuts who are deluded, 'lost in a lost world' (to quote the Moody Blues) of Gannex raincoats, shiny empty motorways and "You've never had it so good" that bears no resemblance to the present day.

What are you on about there are loads of Stations and Services as well as such as routes reinstated at great expense such as the Borders and East West Rail Link, since I was a kid in the 70's.

Just in the area where I live there was reinstatement of Copy Pit services in the 80's then recently the Manchester services over that route.

Then there has been Bradford-Huddersfield, Wakefield-Pontefract, loads of new or reopened stations around West York's, London trains to Brighouse and Halifax who would have believed that years ago

But just because we doing that it shouldn't mean lightly used routes and stations should be immune to closure.

 

[dcsprior]

Out of interest, what are the costs of keeping a line open? For instance what would a lightly used 25 mile single-track non-electrifed line cost (very roughly) per year; for comparison what would it cost to reinstate if closed?

I'd assumed that most of the maintenance cost was related to wear and tear, so if it saw little usage, it'd require little spend on maintenance - but this may be wide of the mark.

 

[backontrack]

What are you on about there are loads of Stations and Services as well as such as routes reinstated at great expense such as the Borders and East West Rail Link, since I was a kid in the 70's.

There's none of the in the North of England, though. London + Home Counties, Scotland and South Wales are the only places that see this now.

How about Skipton-Colne, York-Beverley, Ashington, Keswick-Penrith, Woodhead, Skelmersdale and even HS3?

 

[yorksrob]

What are you on about there are loads of Stations and Services as well as such as routes reinstated at great expense such as the Borders and East West Rail Link, since I was a kid in the 70's.

Just in the area where I live there was reinstatement of Copy Pit services in the 80's then recently the Manchester services over that route.

Then there has been Bradford-Huddersfield, Wakefield-Pontefract, loads of new or reopened stations around West York's, London trains to Brighouse and Halifax who would have believed that years ago

But just because we doing that it shouldn't mean lightly used routes and stations should be immune to closure.

With the exception of East - West, these were getting on for twenty years ago. Progress has become far too slow in my opinion.

I'm very happy for 'lightly used' routes to be immune from closure (especially as many of them aren't as lightly used as some people try to make out). In the bigger picture this makes another programme of wholesale closures less likely.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

There's none of the in the North of England, though. London + Home Counties, Scotland and South Wales are the only places that see this now.

How about Skipton-Colne, York-Beverley, Ashington, Keswick-Penrith, Woodhead, Skelmersdale and even HS3?

That's 47802 you're quoting there

 

[furnessvale]

Out of interest, what are the costs of keeping a line open? For instance what would a lightly used 25 mile single-track non-electrifed line cost (very roughly) per year; for comparison what would it cost to reinstate if closed?

I'd assumed that most of the maintenance cost was related to wear and tear, so if it saw little usage, it'd require little spend on maintenance - but this may be wide of the mark.

It all depends how much in the way of central costings is loaded onto the figures to justify closure.

Of course, once that line is closed the central costs do not disappear but remain available to load onto the next closure candidate.

 

[47802]

There's none of the in the North of England, though. London + Home Counties, Scotland and South Wales are the only places that see this now.

How about Skipton-Colne, York-Beverley, Ashington, Keswick-Penrith, Woodhead, Skelmersdale and even HS3?

As I said above while there might not have been much in the way of reopened lines there's been plenty in the form of reopened stations and reinstated services. Obviously to rebuild a closed line is an expensive proposition do any of the above have a really good business case.

I would say that a Rail Line to Leeds Bradford Airport along with a Park and Ride for that area ought to be the high on the agenda for the North but a new road seems to be the preferred option at present.

 

[backontrack]

Ashington has a good business case, the only problem being required units. HS3 has an extremely strong business case, has got to happen. Skelmersdale also has a good business case.

47802, I'd be interested to know which reopenings you support, and which closures you support, too.

 

[Domh245]

Spot on. It's a shame there isn't an equivalent derogatory term to 'crayonista' to denote those who look at a line on the map and then decree that it should close, without any knowledge of the usage of the line or experience of using it.

'rubberista'

 

[yorksrob]

'rubberista'

I like it

 

[47802]

Ashington has a good business case, the only problem being required units. HS3 has an extremely strong business case, has got to happen. Skelmersdale also has a good business case.

47802, I'd be interested to know which reopenings you support, and which closures you support, too.

Overall I don't really support reopening lines that add to the subsidy burden i.e they should cover their operating costs. However I would waive that rule for schemes which relive both rail and road congestion in major cites and major trunk routes so HS3 might qualify for that, and also to serve significant areas of the country that don't have a rail service, so I would probably support the Borders rail link but I doubt I would support Skipton - Colne.

The only closures I support are those services or stations which currently have a token or no service, but there are others such as Barton which need to be evaluated.

 

[backontrack]

Would you support any of the routes I listed?