Great Central Main Line: Could it ever be reopened?

[A0]

A thoroughly sensible, well-thought out, and interesting post. I'm glad you posted that.

Hmm. One advantage of a line between Northampton and Bedford is that it could link up with the Varsity Line. That would allow trains from Birmingham to Cambridge/Stansted Airport to travel via a more direct route - via Coventry, Rugby, Northampton and Bedford - as well as giving parts of the southern East Midlands a direct connection to Birmingham International.

Oh for crying out loud - not this load of old pony AGAIN.

Northampton - Bedford isn't going to happen, period. There simply isn't the demand.

The old Northampton - Bedford route was circuituous, slow and had no demand. I seem to recall the old line was about 25 miles as it went via Olney. Realistic journey time c 40 mins.

You can already do Northampton - Bletchley in 20 mins - assume a Bletchley - Bedford time of 30 mins (which I believe is what EWR are touting) - so there's no way reinstating Northampton - Bedford to save 10-15 mins even starts to make sense.

And as for improving the Birmingham - Cambridge route via using this reopening, you are of course, joking.

So you'd lose the connectivity to Leicester and Peterborough which is probably more important than Northampton and Bedford - and I take it you've seen quite how many free paths there are between Birmingham Intl and Rugby currently? I'll give you a clue it's probably less than 1 per hour.

 

[A0]

http://www.grandnorthern.co.uk/ is worth a giggle.

Quite - somebody's been using the UK's supply of Crayola up on that one....

 

[yoyothehobo]

Quite - somebody's been using the UK's supply of Crayola up on that one....

I must admit, I always find that website quite hilarious

 

[Journeyman]

http://www.grandnorthern.co.uk/ is worth a giggle.

At least they haven't used Class 76s for the illustrations.

 

[70014IronDuke]

I've walked about five miles along the route from the west side of the tunnel towards Hadfield. The backdrop of those huge hills is pretty impressive.

Yes, that western approach to the tunnel was the best part of the route in terms of views. IMO, of course. But as Journeyman wrote - in comparison with other trans Penine routes, I suppose it's kind of average.

 

[70014IronDuke]

http://www.grandnorthern.co.uk/ is worth a giggle.

That's actually a VERY nice website. Nice logo too.

I would agree that the financials, especially the costing side of things, are a bit, well ... skimpy.

Still, they say "Extensive modelling based on recognised figures for HGV/LGV operating costs were employed to arrive at a suitable tarriff for using the Rolling Highway. The forecasted revenue stream, based on a notional journey fare for a 45ft articulated vehicle of £130 pounds each way, indicates that the break even point will be at 40% of capacity. Grand Northern’s aim within the first two years of operation is to achieve a level of utilisation equal to 60% or 1920 vehicles per day. We have also calculated a Benefit Cost Ratio value in excess of 4."

They also write: "These figures are attractive to any would be investor ..." and they say "We believe we have a robust business case ... ".

So it must be alright then.

Ladies and gentlemen, do not miss this once in a lifetime opportunity ...

 

[Journeyman]

Yes, that western approach to the tunnel was the best part of the route in terms of views. IMO, of course. But as Journeyman wrote - in comparison with other trans Penine routes, I suppose it's kind of average.

Yeah - I'm not meaning to diss it, I know it's a beautiful part of the world, but it's not unique scenery, and it's certainly not a factor that would make the line viable.

 

[Dr_Paul]

http://www.grandnorthern.co.uk/ is worth a giggle.

This kind of thing is logical for, say, going through the Alps or under the Channel, but to avoid a few miles of hilly roads between Stockport and Sheffield...?

 

[Journeyman]

This kind of thing is logical for, say, going through the Alps or under the Channel, but to avoid a few miles of hilly roads between Stockport and Sheffield...?

Yup - as was mentioned earlier, it's a classic case of Woodhead being a solution looking for a problem.

 

[yoyothehobo]

Another point about that is they want to unload as close to one of the busiest bits of both the M60 and M1...

 

[yoyothehobo]

They also mention they want to lower the floor of the tunnel by 700mm. At what point does it become cheaper and easier to just bore a new tunnel.

 

[Journeyman]

They also mention they want to lower the floor of the tunnel by 700mm. At what point does it become cheaper and easier to just bore a new tunnel.

Err...they'll have to. The original bores have been sealed and the new tunnel now carries power cables.

 

[yoyothehobo]

Err...they'll have to. The original bores have been sealed and the new tunnel now carries power cables.

I know they have, but theoretically i was asking the question. Surely by the time you consider all the geological factors and engineering factors of dropping the entire floor by nearly a metre it would be easier just to build a new tunnel. (Ignoring the fact it is woodhead and the strategic steam reserve would have to be temporarily relocated to somewhere actually with rail access)

 

[Journeyman]

I know they have, but theoretically i was asking the question. Surely by the time you consider all the geological factors and engineering factors of dropping the entire floor by nearly a metre it would be easier just to build a new tunnel. (Ignoring the fact it is woodhead and the strategic steam reserve would have to be temporarily relocated to somewhere actually with rail access)

Absolutely, it wouldn't be a simple job, it's over three miles of hacking away at solid rock, and like you say, it wouldn't actually cost much more to drill a completely new tunnel.

Haha, is that where they're keeping the Strategic Reserve these days? Watch out, you know too much.

*dons tinfoil hat*

 

[a_c_skinner]

Indeed. The Woodhead Pass is usually fairly free to motor traffic, what lorry owner is going to muck about with a train for a short trip their vehicles will usually make with little trouble? I suppose you could ban lorries but they'd simply take other routes in preference to the cost and messing about with a train. If Woodhead hadn't closed it would be fairly busy with transpennine rail traffic, but it shut and it is going to stay shut because Manchester to Leeds needs the capacity much more than Manchester to Sheffield.

 

[Journeyman]

Indeed. The Woodhead Pass is usually fairly free to motor traffic, what lorry owner is going to muck about with a train for a short trip their vehicles will usually make with little trouble? I suppose you could ban lorries but they'd simply take other routes in preference to the cost and messing about with a train. If Woodhead hadn't closed it would be fairly busy with transpennine rail traffic, but it shut and it is going to stay shut because Manchester to Leeds needs the capacity much more than Manchester to Sheffield.

They're especially not going to muck about with a train for £130 a trip which is what is being proposed!

Agreed, there doesn't really appear to be a major capacity problem from Manchester to Sheffield. We've coped fine without Woodhead since 1981, and there's nothing in the pipeline which will make the enormous cost of reopening it worthwhile.

 

[a_c_skinner]

It would be different if Woodhead lead on to anywhere else. A fast line to Leeds from the Sheffield end, HS2 reaching Manchester via the East Midlands, but as it is it would basically end up in Sheffield and there isn't enough need at present for that.

£130 a trip. They are having a larf! I cannot for the life of me see why anyone with the brain of a gnat would have gone to the trouble of typing their WWW page in their back room, let alone paying people to do it, let alone spending good money on the idea at all. It must be a way of recycling public money, that is the only way anyone could think of getting something out of it.

 

[Chester1]

Indeed. The Woodhead Pass is usually fairly free to motor traffic, what lorry owner is going to muck about with a train for a short trip their vehicles will usually make with little trouble? I suppose you could ban lorries but they'd simply take other routes in preference to the cost and messing about with a train. If Woodhead hadn't closed it would be fairly busy with transpennine rail traffic, but it shut and it is going to stay shut because Manchester to Leeds needs the capacity much more than Manchester to Sheffield.

Certainly right while there are cheap solutions to boost capacity on Hope Valley route. A jump from the recent 1tp2h pacer Northern stopping service, 1tph 4 coach EMT and 1tph 3 coach TPE to 1tph Sprinter Northern, 1tph 4 coach EMT and 6 coach TPE in the near future should reduce the overcrowding for a while. In the medium term the passing loops TWAO has been granted allowing a third express and maybe a fourth? The line is a long way away from being at its maximum reasonable capacity even considering bottlenecks heading into Manchester.

 

[Journeyman]

It would be different if Woodhead lead on to anywhere else. A fast line to Leeds from the Sheffield end, HS2 reaching Manchester via the East Midlands, but as it is it would basically end up in Sheffield and there isn't enough need at present for that.

£130 a trip. They are having a larf! I cannot for the life of me see why anyone with the brain of a gnat would have gone to the trouble of typing their WWW page in their back room, let alone paying people to do it, let alone spending good money on the idea at all. It must be a way of recycling public money, that is the only way anyone could think of getting something out of it.

That's the thing - Woodhead closed because it ceased to be useful, and nothing has changed sufficiently to make it useful again.

The passenger service closed because there was no need for two routes between Manchester and Sheffield, and Woodhead served few intermediate settlements of any significance and was left terminating at Sheffield Victoria, which after the closure of the GC main line was isolated and inconvenient for forward connections. Electrifying and connecting those services to Midland was too expensive to justify.

The freight service closed because of the decline in power station coal traffic, and there's been no need to create further capacity in the years since the line closed.

I can't help but think that this is a pet project run by someone with rather too much time on their hands, and a rather sentimental attitude to the line. I won't deny it was a very interesting route with unique traction, hence the appeal to enthusiasts, and I really wish I could have seen it in operation (it closed when I was seven years old and I grew up in London). But...it's been and gone. It did its job, it was useful once, but wanting to spend millions bringing it back just because there's a fairly modern tunnel sitting there is crazy.

 

[Chester1]

That's the thing - Woodhead closed because it ceased to be useful, and nothing has changed sufficiently to make it useful again.

The passenger service closed because there was no need for two routes between Manchester and Sheffield, and Woodhead served few intermediate settlements of any significance and was left terminating at Sheffield Victoria, which after the closure of the GC main line was isolated and inconvenient for forward connections. Electrifying and connecting those services to Midland was too expensive to justify.

The freight service closed because of the decline in power station coal traffic, and there's been no need to create further capacity in the years since the line closed.

I can't help but think that this is a pet project run by someone with rather too much time on their hands, and a rather sentimental attitude to the line. I won't deny it was a very interesting route with unique traction, hence the appeal to enthusiasts, and I really wish I could have seen it in operation (it closed when I was seven years old and I grew up in London). But...it's been and gone. It did its job, it was useful once, but wanting to spend millions bringing it back just because there's a fairly modern tunnel sitting there is crazy.

Reintroducing passenger services on the Stocksbridge freight line is perhaps viable though. Realistically the track would need to be relaid to be able to adequately timetable an hourly service with intermediate services. Signalling wouldn't be an issue if freight trains only opperated off peak with the line continuing to be one train at a time. It would also have to be Rotherham - Stocksbridge with Sheffield served by an interchange with the trams, maybe a few hundred metres to the east of the site of Victoria?

 

[Journeyman]

Reintroducing passenger services on the Stocksbridge freight line is perhaps viable though. Realistically the track would need to be relaid to be able to adequately timetable an hourly service with intermediate services. Signalling wouldn't be an issue if freight trains only opperated off peak with the line continuing to be one train at a time. It would also have to be Rotherham - Stocksbridge with Sheffield served by an interchange with the trams, maybe a few hundred metres to the east of the site of Victoria?

Maybe, but that's a Sheffield local service and somewhat different to reopening the line in its entirety. It's a bit like the Borders Railway - formerly part of a longer main line now closed. The business case to Tweedbank was good, an extension to Melrose and Hawick is almost certainly a good idea and likely to happen, but a lot of people are proposing extending back to Carlisle. Err...really? The area between Hawick and Carlisle is about as densely populated as the surface of the Moon. The line now works as a commuter railway for Edinburgh, and isn't needed for its original purpose of forming a competing, third route from Edinburgh to London.

 

[Old Yard Dog]

I doubt it. You'd have to do extensive rebuilding of a long stretch of line to serve a town with 13,000 inhabitants. It has good bus services and the nearest station is only six miles away.

That's as maybe. But when Bradford played at Brackley in the National League North play-off semi-finals on a Sunday in May, I was forced to drive as the last bus out of Brackley left at 1740. I had quite rightly anticipated extra time and possibly penalties. I ended up having to ferry fellow supporters to Banbury station otherwise they would have been stranded.

 

[Journeyman]

That's as maybe. But when Bradford played at Brackley in the National League North play-off semi-finals on a Sunday in May, I was forced to drive as the last bus out of Brackley left at 1740. I had quite rightly anticipated extra time and possibly penalties. I ended up having to ferry fellow supporters to Banbury station otherwise they would have been stranded.

How often does that happen, though? You can't spend millions on the strength of a very occasional special event!

 

[edwin_m]

I was forced to drive as the last bus out of Brackley left at 1740. I had quite rightly anticipated extra time and possibly penalties.

That one cuts both ways. If a town can't even sustain a decent evening bus service it would be difficult to justify building (effectively) a new railway to serve it.

 

[HSTEd]

The passenger service closed because there was no need for two routes between Manchester and Sheffield, and Woodhead served few intermediate settlements of any significance and was left terminating at Sheffield Victoria, which after the closure of the GC main line was isolated and inconvenient for forward connections. Electrifying and connecting those services to Midland was too expensive to justify.

The Woodhead route closed to passengers because the Hope Valley line was to be kept open by decree of the Transport Secretary.

Not that many people live on the Hope Valley route after all.

 

[RPM]

The danger of relying upon maps!

Do you know when the road was built? And is it a public road or a private one, as (from satellite maps) it doesn't seem to connect with other roads in the area?

The on-line OS standard map still shows there to be a disused railway between Grendon Underwood and an industrial estate/works (the fertilizer plant?); however, if you go to the latest version of the satellite images they do indeed show the trackbed to have been converted to a road north of that point. Not sure when these images were changed as the last time I looked the road wasn't there. Moreover, if you go to the streetview images - which are shown as having been recorded in August 2011 - there's still an empty trackbed!

Thanks for the info. Now we need to build a new railway line alongside the route of the old one; more pennies!

It was completed in 2015 and I *think* it is a private road. It serves the new Greatmoor Energy from Waste plant.

 

[HowardGWR]

That one cuts both ways. If a town can't even sustain a decent evening bus service it would be difficult to justify building (effectively) a new railway to serve it.

Indeed. I have wondered whether a town like Brackley just totally adjusted to an American way of life - just totally car-oriented. I suppose the very old and incapacitated just have to rely on lifts or simply don't go anywhere. Bucks is a bit like that throughout.

 

[Old Yard Dog]

How often does that happen, though? You can't spend millions on the strength of a very occasional special event!

That's true. But think of the poor people of Brackley who want to go away for the weekend - or have visitors come to them. Cutting a town off completely from public transport on a Sunday night is cruel. Sunday transport provision in the shire counties in particular is dire.

 

[Tobbes]

If the locals want 200,000 houses in the Brackley - Woodord Halse - Rugby area, then the capital costs of rebuilding the line would be easily covered.....

 

[edwin_m]

That's true. But think of the poor people of Brackley who want to go away for the weekend - or have visitors come to them. Cutting a town off completely from public transport on a Sunday night is cruel. Sunday transport provision in the shire counties in particular is dire.

If bus and rail services were treated as a unified network as they are in most countries with decent public transport, then the rational decision would be to pay for a decent bus service rather than spending a huge amount on building a railway.