Are any "bring back old lines" campaigns likely to succeed?

[CNash]

Curious as to why the area to the north of Norwich has no rail provision outside of heritage lines, I found several articles, campaign sites and other materials all dedicated to the reopening of some of the former railway lines that were closed either by the Beeching axe or soon after. The Lynn - Hunstanton campaign is one such site:

http://www.hunstantonrail.org.uk/

Now, while it's great to see local interest in reopening these lines, and talk of independent feasibility studies etc.... realistically, how likely is it that any of these campaigns will actually get the buy-in from the DfT and TOCs that they'd need? Have there been any examples of a former or heritage line being brought back into regular passenger service? Not just for Norfolk, but anywhere?

 

[Esker-pades]

Quick pedant point: The line to Cromer and Sheringham does still exist (and is north of Norwich).

 

[edwin_m]

This topic will soon turn into a can of worms...

There is some sensible discussion on Scottish threds around @Altnabreac's Five Principles, which so far have been accurate at predicting that the re-opening of the Leven branch would move forward.

 

[Tobbes]

Ah, North Norfolk and railways..... I fear @edwin_m is spot on on this being a can of worms, but anyway.

The basic problem is that there is a lot of not very much in North Norfolk, and @Altnabreac's guide to reopening states:

Altnabreac's 5 golden rules of a successful rail reopening:

• Population of 10,000+
• 60 minutes (75 at a push) journey time of a major employment centre.
• Extant or mainly unobstructed trackbed
• Ability to extend an existing service so more terminal capacity is not required.
  
• Regeneration Potential of a deprived area

So in North and West Norfolk, the population centres without rail service at all are:

King's Lynn - 42,800
Swaffham - 7,500
Fakenham - 7,600
Dereham - 18,600
Hunstanton - 4,300

With aggressive housebuilding to serve greater Norwich this is likely to go up substantially by 2040.

The real question is whether there is a case for Lynn-Middleton Towers-Swaffham-Dereham-Wymondham-Norwich service to relieve the A47? Pity the A47 was built down the old formation at Scarning, so you'd probably have to swing north of Dereham and come into Dereham that way. Oh, and come to an arrangement with the MNR, of course.

However, if you did acheive this, then Lynn-Middleton Towers-Swaffham-Dereham-Wymondham-Norwich service could be very useful - with the possibility of adding and Fakenham-Dereham-Wymondham-Norwich later, with units dividing at Dereham or a Fakenham-Dereham shuttle.

Again, dependent on housebuilding, tram-train in Norwich and then running up the old M&GN to Fakenham could be viable, too. The long-distance path/bike route that I rode a month ago could be a viable option if enough houses were built.

Just my 0.02.

 

[30907]

There is some sensible discussion on Scottish threds around @Altnabreac's Five Principles, which so far have been accurate at predicting that the re-opening of the Leven branch would move forward.

See post #3 here:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/levenmouth-to-reopen.188068/#post-4143457
The thread also references various UK reopenings; these have generally been where the line was still in situ, the major exception being the Borders line in Scotland. In England, the major reopenings have been in urban London, apart from Oxford-Bicester and Blackburn-Clitheroe (pedant mode: there was Dalesrail so technically it wasn't closed for very many years); both lines were still in use for freight. That's the nearest I can get to a rural Norfolk reopening.

That said, I suspect Hunstanton has the most potential in Norfolk. (Sorry, didn't see Hobbes' post on the Dereham line. IIRC those two were the last closures in Norfolk.

 

[AlbertBeale]

Ah, North Norfolk and railways..... I fear @edwin_m is spot on on this being a can of worms, but anyway.

The basic problem is that there is a lot of not very much in North Norfolk, and @Altnabreac's guide to reopening states:


So in North and West Norfolk, the population centres without rail service at all are:

King's Lynn - 42,800
Swaffham - 7,500
Fakenham - 7,600
Dereham - 18,600
Hunstanton - 4,300

With aggressive housebuilding to serve greater Norwich this is likely to go up substantially by 2040.

The real question is whether there is a case for Lynn-Middleton Towers-Swaffham-Dereham-Wymondham-Norwich service to relieve the A47? Pity the A47 was built down the old formation at Scarning, so you'd probably have to swing north of Dereham and come into Dereham that way. Oh, and come to an arrangement with the MNR, of course.

However, if you did acheive this, then Lynn-Middleton Towers-Swaffham-Dereham-Wymondham-Norwich service could be very useful - with the possibility of adding and Fakenham-Dereham-Wymondham-Norwich later, with units dividing at Dereham or a Fakenham-Dereham shuttle.

Again, dependent on housebuilding, tram-train in Norwich and then running up the old M&GN to Fakenham could be viable, too. The long-distance path/bike route that I rode a month ago could be a viable option if enough houses were built.

Just my 0.02.

Surely King's Lynn isn't a population centre "without rail service at all"??

 

[Tobbes]

Surely King's Lynn isn't a population centre "without rail service at all"??

Forgive me- I meant Swaffham, Fakenham and Dereham having no National Rail service, and that a Lynn - Norwich link would be good for all of these towns - and far better than a Norwich - Dereham - Swaffham line alone.

 

[yorksrob]

Portishead and Tavistock both meet @Altnabreac's criteria as an example. Unfortunately, the element lacking is a Government willing to commit anything other than fine words.

 

[tbtc]

Portishead and Tavistock both meet @Altnabreac's criteria as an example. Unfortunately, the element lacking is a Government willing to commit anything other than fine words.

...which is why I've argued for such simple re-openenings in the past, only to be dismissed as "unimaginative" by True Believers, the people who have much grander plans for long rambling routes through the middle of nowhere rather than the "stubs" I've suggested - which is why threads about "new" railway tend to be focussed on rural Devon/ Norfolk/ Derbyshire/ Cumbria etc than short simple projects. If you didn't know the UK, you'd be forgiven for thinking that Keswick, Bakewell and Dunford Bridge were huge conurbations from reading these threads.

What works tends to be things like Larkhall, Alloa, Ebbw Vale, with a clear objective (link unserved town to nearest city, frequent commercial bus service as guide to viability of public transport) - that's an easy story to "sell", that's a straightforward thing to quantify.

Coming up with complicated plans intended to deliver regional "resilience" (or some other puffed up justification) doesn't seem to work. People could save a lot of hot air/crayons if they just looked at the schemes that do work and tried to replicate them (hence Levenmouth getting the green light).

(but, as ever, with the caveat that heavy rail re-openings are just one tool. and that there are plenty of other ways of improving the railway, rather than starting with a 1960s rail atlas and working backward to justify re-opening something as an end in itself)

 

[Tobbes]

...which is why I've argued for such simple re-openenings in the past, only to be dismissed as "unimaginative" by True Believers, the people who have much grander plans for long rambling routes through the middle of nowhere rather than the "stubs" I've suggested - which is why threads about "new" railway tend to be focussed on rural Devon/ Norfolk/ Derbyshire/ Cumbria etc than short simple projects. If you didn't know the UK, you'd be forgiven for thinking that Keswick, Bakewell and Dunford Bridge were huge conurbations from reading these threads.

What works tends to be things like Larkhall, Alloa, Ebbw Vale, with a clear objective (link unserved town to nearest city, frequent commercial bus service as guide to viability of public transport) - that's an easy story to "sell", that's a straightforward thing to quantify.

That's a fair enough critique, @tbtc , but Norwich - Lynn via Dereham and Swaffham is currently supporting a half-hourly bus service (albeit 1h 48m for 48 miles), Lynn / West Norfolk has 25% of its statistical areas in the 2nd lowest decile of Multiple Deprivation and none in the top 50% of the distribution, and the accepting the need to bridge the A47 twice (between Narbourough and East Winch, and leaving Swaffham for Dereham), the route is pretty uncongested, with, crucially, the links into Lynn and Norwich already in use - the only major new alignment required would be to loop around Dereham to the north from Swafffham.

25ish miles of new single railway with loops at the stations, with the remainder upgraded for 75 mph running - @Altnabreac / @Bald Rick - £500m?

 

[Journeyman]

People do come up with some absolutely crazy ideas, many motivated by nostalgic trainspotting memories more than anything else - look how many times people campaign to reopen the GC or Woodhead, even though both closed for very good reasons and neither have a decent business case now. That said, the Borders Railway looked pretty marginal and unlikely, but 45 years of dogged campaigning by locals got it back, well against the odds.

This is, however, largely down to Transport Scotland being a rather different beast to the DfT and perhaps rather more enthusiastically supporting reopening of rail routes. That said, I think the campaign to reopen all the way to Carlisle is not likely to succeed. The case to Hawick seems pretty good, but beyond there the area is about as sparsely populated as the surface of the moon, and the need for a duplicate main line is questionable, especially one with such gruesome curves and gradients (although, if electrified, I'm sure Pendolinos would make light work of them).

 

[PartyOperator]

Wisbech looks to have the best case for reopening in the East of England. 30k+ population, about the right distance for commuting to Cambridge, alignment intact, clear economic benefits (including allowing more housing construction) etc.

 

[Tobbes]

Wisbech looks to have the best case for reopening in the East of England. 30k+ population, about the right distance for commuting to Cambridge, alignment intact, clear economic benefits (including allowing more housing construction) etc.

Agreed, but add a route to Mildenhall to it (presumably from Newmarket rather than the old branch) to support the housing growth when the base closes.

 

[yorksrob]

...which is why I've argued for such simple re-openenings in the past, only to be dismissed as "unimaginative" by True Believers, the people who have much grander plans for long rambling routes through the middle of nowhere rather than the "stubs" I've suggested - which is why threads about "new" railway tend to be focussed on rural Devon/ Norfolk/ Derbyshire/ Cumbria etc than short simple projects. If you didn't know the UK, you'd be forgiven for thinking that Keswick, Bakewell and Dunford Bridge were huge conurbations from reading these threads.

What works tends to be things like Larkhall, Alloa, Ebbw Vale, with a clear objective (link unserved town to nearest city, frequent commercial bus service as guide to viability of public transport) - that's an easy story to "sell", that's a straightforward thing to quantify.

Coming up with complicated plans intended to deliver regional "resilience" (or some other puffed up justification) doesn't seem to work. People could save a lot of hot air/crayons if they just looked at the schemes that do work and tried to replicate them (hence Levenmouth getting the green light).

(but, as ever, with the caveat that heavy rail re-openings are just one tool. and that there are plenty of other ways of improving the railway, rather than starting with a 1960s rail atlas and working backward to justify re-opening something as an end in itself)

As a "true believer" myself, I don't find the idea of reopening the whole mid Devon route through Okehampton and Tavistock incompatible with reopening to Tavistock. Infact, you have to open the section from Bere Alston to Tavistock to continue any further.

My concern is that even these relatively uncontroversial schemes aren't being done because Central Government won't come part way on them.

 

[Bald Rick]

My concern is that even these relatively uncontroversial schemes aren't being done because Central Government won't come part way on them.

It’s principally because the numbers don’t add up. If they did, it would happen.

 

[yorksrob]

It’s principally because the numbers don’t add up. If they did, it would happen.

I'm afraid I just don't believe that it would happen, whether the numbers add up or not.

 

[Bald Rick]

That's a fair enough critique, @tbtc , but Norwich - Lynn via Dereham and Swaffham is currently supporting a half-hourly bus service (albeit 1h 48m for 48 miles), Lynn / West Norfolk has 25% of its statistical areas in the 2nd lowest decile of Multiple Deprivation and none in the top 50% of the distribution, and the accepting the need to bridge the A47 twice (between Narbourough and East Winch, and leaving Swaffham for Dereham), the route is pretty uncongested, with, crucially, the links into Lynn and Norwich already in use - the only major new alignment required would be to loop around Dereham to the north from Swafffham.

25ish miles of new single railway with loops at the stations, with the remainder upgraded for 75 mph running - @Altnabreac / @Bald Rick - £500m?

I’d say nearer twice that. Lots of civils required. Lots of (presumably) former level crossings would need bridges. Along with lots of actual bridges. Lots of property required in awkward places - no chance of going through Swaffham for example.

All to connect fewer people than Levenmouth, to Norwich. For about 10x the cost.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm afraid I just don't believe that it would happen, whether the numbers add up or not.

But where the numbers do add up, it usually does happen.

 

[yorksrob]

But where the numbers do add up, it usually does happen.

Portishead and Tavistock already have suitable business cases. The numbers are there. No one wants to cough up the cash.

 

[Tobbes]

I’d say nearer twice that. Lots of civils required. Lots of (presumably) former level crossings would need bridges. Along with lots of actual bridges. Lots of property required in awkward places - no chance of going through Swaffham for example.

All to connect fewer people than Levenmouth, to Norwich. For about 10x the cost.

I'd not thought abut the level crossings - very fair point. It does seem a bit odd that there is no flexibility on the "No new LCs ever" rule, as if this route had survived, the LCs on minor roads and farm tracks would probably still be in use (and indeed there are several on the surviving stub to Middletown Towers, though I appreciate this is only for a couple of trains a week rather than a half-hourly service). Is it the rule really as definitive as "No new or reinstated LCs ever"?

You probably could get back to (very central) Swaffham station site if you wanted to - there are some light industrial units that can be moved and there doesn't appear to be any housing. The real wins are opening the arc of NW Norfolk to commuting to Norwich and take the pressure off the (largely inadequate) A47. As mentioned upthread, there's a lot of rather hidden poverty in Norfolk, with Lynn a major contributor - and Norwich is in many ways a more diverse economic magnet than Cambridge. Seen in this light, the population that benefits is above 75,000 before any new housebuilding is included - more than twice the greater Levenmouth area. More expensive than Levenmouth? On a per head basis, yes, but it would also significantly reduce commuting to Norwich on the A47, delaying the need to dual it.

Is it the best incremental spend of £1bn on transport in East Anglia? Presumably not - or at least not yet. It would be interesting to see how much it would actually cost for 2tph Norwich to Lynn (the current bus off-peak frequency), especially in light of the substantial house building that is expected in this section of Norfolk idc.

 

[Bald Rick]

Portishead and Tavistock already have suitable business cases. The numbers are there.

Portishead does, hence why Government has committed cash.

Tavistock - I’d like to see a business case, based on the most recent estimate. I can’t find one on line.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'd not thought abut the level crossings - very fair point. It does seem a bit odd that there is no flexibility on the "No new LCs ever" rule, as if this route had survived, the LCs on minor roads and farm tracks would probably still be in use (and indeed there are several on the surviving stub to Middletown Towers, though I appreciate this is only for a couple of trains a week rather than a half-hourly service). Is it the rule really as definitive as "No new or reinstated LCs ever"?

You probably could get back to (very central) Swaffham station site if you wanted to - there are some light industrial units that can be moved and there doesn't appear to be any housing. The real wins are opening the arc of NW Norfolk to commuting to Norwich and take the pressure off the (largely inadequate) A47. As mentioned upthread, there's a lot of rather hidden poverty in Norfolk, with Lynn a major contributor - and Norwich is in many ways a more diverse economic magnet than Cambridge. Seen in this light, the population that benefits is above 75,000 before any new housebuilding is included - more than twice the greater Levenmouth area. More expensive than Levenmouth? On a per head basis, yes, but it would also significantly reduce commuting to Norwich on the A47, delaying the need to dual it.

Is it the best incremental spend of £1bn on transport in East Anglia? Presumably not - or at least not yet. It would be interesting to see how much it would actually cost for 2tph Norwich to Lynn (the current bus off-peak frequency), especially in light of the substantial house building that is expected in this section of Norfolk idc.

But Lynn already has a railway, with direct (and comparatively swift) services to Cambridge and London. I really can’t see how a link to Norwich is going to lift parts of Lynn out of deprivation where the existing line doesn’t.

At an educated guess you could get half the benefit for about 5% of the cost simply by upgrading the Mid Norfolk to Dereham.

The LX rule. I can’t see how we could ever have new LXs. The whole life cost of a new highway LX on a new railway (even a reopened one) is substantially higher than a bridge in all but the most difficult locations. This means the business case will always be better for bridges.

 

[Tobbes]

But Lynn already has a railway, with direct (and comparatively swift) services to Cambridge and London. I really can’t see how a link to Norwich is going to lift parts of Lynn out of deprivation where the existing line doesn’t.

At an educated guess you could get half the benefit for about 5% of the cost simply by upgrading the Mid Norfolk to Dereham.

The LX rule. I can’t see how we could ever have new LXs. The whole life cost of a new highway LX on a new railway (even a reopened one) is substantially higher than a bridge in all but the most difficult locations. This means the business case will always be better for bridges.

Thanks on the LX point. I'd support the Dereham idea as a starting point - be interesting to see what would happen.

 

[Bald Rick]

Thanks on the LX point. I'd support the Dereham idea as a starting point - be interesting to see what would happen.

Well the MNR would have something to say!

 

[Tobbes]

Well the MNR would have something to say!

Of course - you just need to make it attractive enough to them to make it happen.

 

[yorksrob]

Tavistock - I’d like to see a business case, based on the most recent estimate. I can’t find one on line.

The local authority already own the route, so they have clearly put their money where their mouth is.

 

[Dr Day]

The business case for any re-opening also has to consider the operating costs as well as the capital. This needs to include infrastructure maintenance/operating costs and vehicles as well as staff, fuel etc. Unless the projected passenger revenue covers all these, the funder is not just committing to a one-off cost to build something, but also an on-going subsidy. In these instances the railway may be competing with other transport subsidies (you can operate a lot of buses for the cost of a rail service) and the local authority or DfT/TfW/TS/TfN/TfWM etc may simply not be convinced this is justified for the incremental benefits that the railway brings over a bus.

 

[yorksrob]

The business case for any re-opening also has to consider the operating costs as well as the capital. This needs to include infrastructure maintenance/operating costs and vehicles as well as staff, fuel etc. Unless the projected passenger revenue covers all these, the funder is not just committing to a one-off cost to build something, but also an on-going subsidy. In these instances the railway may be competing with other transport subsidies (you can operate a lot of buses for the cost of a rail service) and the local authority or DfT/TfW/TS/TfN/TfWM etc may simply not be convinced this is justified for the incremental benefits that the railway brings over a bus.

Yet we have a number of cases where it is the capital construction cost that is proving the sticking point.

The 2008 study on the Uckfield - Lewes reopening concluded that a single track railway would cover its operating costs, yet no one was there to pay to build it.

 

[JKF]

Portishead does, hence why Government has committed cash.

Tavistock - I’d like to see a business case, based on the most recent estimate. I can’t find one on line.

The Portishead cost is astronomical for a line that is mostly still there, and they haven’t even been bold enough to insist on taking it right into the town (I think the agreed station site is 700m from the high street, about 15-20 mins walk). Not going to bring many visitors into the town with that level of inconvenience, although I understand the idea is to take people out of the town.

I do wonder given the cost whether there could have been an alternative solution of tunnelling under the Avon from Avonmouth, given many of the trains on the SB line terminate there already, so it would be an extension of that service and not cause conflict with the (currently non-existent) portbury freight traffic. Just widen out the old coal conveyor tunnel...

 

[jfowkes]

I'm naively confident that Leicester-Burton will happen somehow, one day.