backontrack
Established Member
Good point.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
North Lakes Railway
- Thread starter ItsGrimUpNorth
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I doubt a reversal in the Penrith loop platform would have been particularly problematic for modern traction.
Quite. Although modern traction at Penrith in 1972 was a Class 50.
furnessvale
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 4,910
Which presumably would have been banned on the CK & P due to axle load restrictions.
Still could have merrily gone round it's train (seen this happen at New Street and Reading enough!)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Ah well, that's beyond my level of knowledge, so you might have a point. Wasn't the restriction just West of Keswick though?
The last Keswick Convention special from London in 1969 was Class 50 hauled to Penrith by D417. A Class 40 D313 was attached to the London end and hauled the whole train to Keswick. The Class 50 hauled the empty stock + Class 40 back to Penrith and then Carlisle. This was done as the run round facility at Keswick had been removed in late 1967 and remaining signal boxes closed in 1968 so at that time was just a long siding from Penrith operated as 'One engine in steam'. They had to be quick to get the special to Keswick and back between service trains.
D313 hauled the 1967 Convention special from Keswick all the way to Crewe by running round in Keswick and again at Penrith. This train was possibly hauled by an electric from Crewe to London but I can find no record of that.
The weight restriction was only west of Cockermouth but as very few trains if any terminated there from the east, the restriction was effective west of Keswick.
Last edited by a moderator:
Helvellyn
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Aug 2009
- Messages
- 2,577
Quite possibly. Part of the reason the branch was built was because the WCML was not built to run through Kendal then on towards Penrith via Longsleddale, a tunnel beneath Gatescarth Pass and then through the Mardale Valley (Now home to Haweswater Reservoir). Kendal would have been a very large town to cut off the network (not a reason on its own I know) but as others have said it was an easy branch to simplify (single tracking, etc) when the WCML was electrified.
The Keswick branch would have been more expensive to keep up. I also understand the intention was that the A66 would have been dual-carriageway throughout, so the thoughts might have been that the need for the railway was less although the road upgrade has still not come in its entirity. Another factor to consider - with WCML electrifcation (and building of the M6) the Down Loop at Penrith was certainly well used. Maybe it was considered that having a Penrith-Keswick service (likely operated by a Kingmoor based two-car Class 108) would have been an added operational complication given the loop would have then had to be signalled bi-directionally, plus you could have had the loop not available for use at the times the Keswick service would be booked between Keswick Junction (at Redhills, essentially where the WCML crosses the A66) and the platforms at Penrith.
The Down Loop at Penrith is long enough to take a substantial freight train and leave north of the Junction clear for a train on/off the Keswick branch. I don't think signalling for reversible working would have been a problem at the time of commissioning Carlisle power box but did enable two Junctions to be closed including the bay platform at Penrith.
ItsGrimUpNorth
Member
Didn't expect anywhere near this many replies when I posted the starting topic!
Enjoyed reading through!
Enjoyed reading through!
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
You're welcome. We have all enjoyed this opportunity to give our posting responses.
Is there a lack of capacity on the WCML between Penrith and Carlisle ? What about the paths used by TPE to Windermere. These are presumably empty north of Oxenholme. Also, Carlisle is hardly Charing Cross when it comes to terminating trains.
Altnabreac
Established Member
I'm sure there is capacity to Carlisle. Lack of capacity to Preston / Manchester though which are the viable commuting destinations for the North West.
The problem is to generate a business case you need more than just leisure passengers and the inward commuting demand to Carlisle is just not high enough.
If the line had survived it would soldier on with 5tpd and a high level of subsidy but to reopen you need a better case than that.
Have you evidence to support your statement? Penrith doesn't have that good a service to Carlisle anymore. Even some TPEx trains miss out Penrith. Keswick-Carlisle or Manchester through trains would improve use from Penrith.
Preston-Penrith is not congested as far as passenger trains are concerned. It is slower freight trains that clog up the route. One freight train diverted allows two passenger paths. Divert these over Ais Gill or round the coast to allow more passenger paths but the will is not there by those who make the decisions. We know that it would be successful because as interested amateurs we understand how it could be successful by the right type of trains and affordable fares to make it successful.
Keswick has taken over from Hawick as the town furthest from a railhead. I fear for places like Keswick if ever there is an oil shortage. Those with an electrified railway will be the only towns to survive and we are not electrifying fast enough.
Altnabreac
Established Member
Funnily enough Keswick is exactly the same distance from Penrith (17 miles) as Hawick is from Tweedbank.
Fraserburgh (13,000 people, 35 miles from Inverurie) or Peterhead (18,000 people, 31 miles from Dyce) are both likely to win this competition.
If you want examples closer to Keswick then Kirkcudbright (3,500 people 30 miles from Dumfries) or Castle Douglas (4,000 people 20 miles from Dumfries) are also more isolated than Keswick).
Even if you restricted us to England then Fakenham (19 miles to Sheringham, further to Norwich or Kings Lynn) and Bude (30+ miles to Gunnislake or Barnstaple) both have larger populations than Keswick too.
On subject of Hawick vs Keswick I see the differences being:
- Hawick has a population of 15,000 to Keswick's 5,000
- Melrose St Boswells and Newtown St Boswells add on another 5,000 population, Threlkeld adds on another 500.
- Edinburgh is a major city with a strong job market and large Travel To Work Area attracting in commuters from across the region, Carlisle not so much.
Keswick does have a strong tourism economy (and Hawick doesn't) but it is difficult to see that a large proportion of these visitors would be attracted by a railway station as many will be coming by car and using the car to penetrate deeper into the hills. Those who are happy to get a bus up Borrowdale are equally likely to have been happy to come to Keswick by bus from Penrith or Lancaster anyway.
I'd love the line to Keswick to reopen, but it just doesn't have an even vaguely positive business case unfortunately.
There is always one willing to prove a point.
I was going on rail miles. According to my 1964 timetables Hawick is 18 miles from Galashiels and Keswick is 18.25 from Penrith.
Where is your evidence that reinstating to Keswick doesn't have a business case? Have you done a benefit/cost analysis? I doubt it. Mr Martindale has done one and that is why he continues to campaign for it and I wish him well. If more people got behind him instead of telling everybody that it won't happen then it would happen.
Maybe Keswick doesn't want it. If it does then it is being rather weak in supporting reinstatement.
Again according to my 1964 timetable there was a train from Manchester Victoria to Workington via Penrith/Keswick and Barrow/Whiehaven daily and from Workington to London via Keswick/Penrith and Whitehaven/Barrow. Also on Summer Saturdays from Newcastle to Keswick in 160 minutes.
The Windermere-London portion was titled THE LAKES EXPRESS in the timetable but inexplicably the Workington-Keswick-Penrith-London portion that loaded to six coaches on leaving Keswick, and the biggest portion, was untitled. This was the start of the rundown of the line in 1964 after the Beeching Report.
Windermere could still have through trains if the greedy Property Board had not sold off the carriage sidings, beautiful little three platform station, with overall roof for a supermarket of all things and hacked out all double track and obliterated the signalling and signal boxes. This was an ideal opportunity to rationalise but leave enough infrastructure for more than one train on the branch and a round the clock service if necessary by incorporating it into a power box. The same could have been done for the Keswick-Penrith line.
People always say that no one goes on holiday by train anymore, or that all tourists go by car etc. Yet wherever a railway link exists in such a setting, it always seems to attract lots of leisure travellers, such as day trippers.
Altnabreac
Established Member
I think it would attract some leisure visitors.
Some leisure visitors will not be enough for a positive business case.
Commuters are needed for a positive business case.
Keswick is too small and too far from a big city to generate the numbers required.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Rail miles are somewhat irrelevant to how far a town is from a rail connection post closure. And as I said there are plenty of places further from the network.
As I said earlier in the thread, you can pay a consultant £30K to do a study but they'll basically come to the same conclusion as my golden rules score. Too small a town and not enough commuting demand = no reopening.
Sad but true. Sorry.
Last edited:
Altnabreac's rules are very helpful, and largely correct. Depending on how things play out with the redistricting if the Commons goes down to 600 seats, Keswick may move MP again. If you want to reopen the railway, you could do worse than making a big, sustained noise for the reselections if this happens.
For me, this is one of the special case reopenings where conventional BCR may be overridden in order to protect the National Park - a "congestion charge" regime for the Lakes with the funding used for public transport has always appealed to me.
There's a fifth rule.
The new / reopened line has to enable significant regeneration (ie of an economically deprived area, and/or be accompanied by plans for significant new housing development along the line of the route. Both mean lots of bricks and mortar.
The new / reopened line has to enable significant regeneration (ie of an economically deprived area, and/or be accompanied by plans for significant new housing development along the line of the route. Both mean lots of bricks and mortar.
Altnabreac
Established Member
Very true! I'm stealing that one for my fag packet business case assesor.
Now I can give a feasibility score out of 5 that probably counts as GRIP2 and I can charge £40K for my consultancy instead...
ItsGrimUpNorth
Member
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/new-10bn-sellafield-nuclear-power-6073419
The lad who's been campaigning should get in touch with the Powers involved with this. A new railway station is planned already, could easily form a terminal?
The lad who's been campaigning should get in touch with the Powers involved with this. A new railway station is planned already, could easily form a terminal?
Dr Hoo
Established Member
Altnabreac's four golden rules are an excellent filter for any proposed re-opening scheme but, as always, it is possible to make it more sophisticated (or complicated, depending on your point of view). The regeneration potential as a fifth criterion is a good example.
It is useful to think about resource utilisation efficiency and network effects up front as well.
The old Penrith-Keswick service latterly took just over half an hour each way, all stations, which would scupper a fairly efficient single unit shuttle on a standard pattern. A non-stop service with modern unit would probably be able to do a round trip every hour but would still not be very robust in performance terms, e.g. if connections were held at Penrith.
The fairly ragged pattern of calls by Virgin and TPE services at Penrith, both northbound and southbound would tend to mean that meaningful through journey opportunities were a bit hit-and-miss anyway.
Pity, because it was a lovely ride when it was open.
It is useful to think about resource utilisation efficiency and network effects up front as well.
The old Penrith-Keswick service latterly took just over half an hour each way, all stations, which would scupper a fairly efficient single unit shuttle on a standard pattern. A non-stop service with modern unit would probably be able to do a round trip every hour but would still not be very robust in performance terms, e.g. if connections were held at Penrith.
The fairly ragged pattern of calls by Virgin and TPE services at Penrith, both northbound and southbound would tend to mean that meaningful through journey opportunities were a bit hit-and-miss anyway.
Pity, because it was a lovely ride when it was open.
You'd need to find a new alignment for much of the route from Keswick to the coast line, as the A66 is now in the way.
RichmondCommu
Established Member
Rob the thing is day trippers don't tend to have too much baggage to cart around. On the other hand if you are planning a weekend fell walking in the Lakes you need a fair bit of baggage. You are also then reliant on local bus services whilst hoping that they run to a half decent timetable. If you're up there in June and the weather is kind you could easily be out walking until gone 18.00, in which case you've got to hope that there is a bus to take you back to your accommodation.
Last edited:
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
I am sure that published bus information is readily available online these days to those people who you describe above.
I think a good start would be to run the service to Carlisle and ensure that you have decent connections with the southbound Manchester services. Then, at least the service will be properly plugged into the North for the sort of journeys where motor transport is a more viable competitor. This is less the case for longer distance journeys, so a wait in the buffet at Penrith is perhaps less of an issue.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
We're both regular train travellers in the Dales so we've both seen the wide range of leisure travellers, many with lots of luggage and walking gear on Leeds - Carlisle and Morecambe services. I don't see why this should be different for the North Lakes.
Perhaps if tourism there is more dependant on bus connections, it might be sensible to have a later evening service than would otherwise be the norm.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
We're both regular train travellers in the Dales so we've both seen the wide range of leisure travellers, many with lots of luggage and walking gear on Leeds - Carlisle and Morecambe services. I don't see why this should be different for the North Lakes.
Perhaps if tourism there is more dependant on bus connections, it might be sensible to have a later evening service than would otherwise be the norm.
Looking at my similar vintage timetable, the train was shown as Lakes Express RC and TC London-Windermere and TC - Keswick etc. On the branch line timetables only the Up Windermere portion has the Lakes Express title. I suspect, knowing the inertia of railway timetables, that that had been the case for years rather than being post Beeching.
More generally, the reason why Windermere retains its passenger service is surely that it's much easier to reach from most main centres of population (Tyneside and Central Scotland apart), and the local population (with Ambleside) is 3 times that of Keswick.
ItsGrimUpNorth
Member
Agreed, but when sums of £10-20bn are being banded about, it's a perfect chance to recreate transport links surely? At present there's only the West Cumbrian Line, so why not look into a new line from the new plant (Which is to have a new station) through Whitehaven/Workington, onto Cockermouth, Keswick then Penrith, maybe even to Appleby to connect the Settle to Carlisle?
As well as reconnecting tourist areas, you'd be connecting industry and opening potential freight to the area.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Since some sort of time comparison is needed, how would a Manchester to Keswick direct service compare time-wise with the existing Manchester to Windermere service?
Dr Hoo
Established Member
Presuming that a re-opened Penrith-Keswick line wouldn't be electrified (at least initially) would we seriously want to run a diesel service under the wires from Manchester to Penrith and then reverse? Bi-modes wouldn't come cheap and you would need quite a few for a regular service over such a distance. For such a radically new option journey times are hard to estimate.
If one accepted connections at Penrith (even out of the suggested Carlisle through service above) then the journey time could be whatever the TPE Manchester-Scotland service takes once it is running via Bolton after electrification plus about half an hour for the Keswick branch, plus up to an hour's wait in the buffet given the random spread of stopping patterns at Penrith overall.
- Status