When will something be done about the Whitby branch ?

[Starmill]

How about Northern Rail and not paying for ironing boards in 158's.

what?

 

[Starmill]

I'm not sure how much of an outward market there is from Whitby

At 0630? Probably close to zero. An arrival in Middlesbrough at five to eight is so early for people going to work in an office in the town, too. And they must wait for the 1755 return train, as now, unless they can work part time and be away from the office for 1345 daily. In other words it's very unlikely to attract many people working in Middlesbrough for a daily commute. Imagine how you would feel departing by rail at 0630 daily and arriving home at 1925? Add on 10 - 20 minutes walk to the station and you're going to be exhausted.

 

[yorksrob]

At 0630? Probably close to zero. An arrival in Middlesbrough at five to eight is so early for people going to work in an office in the town, too. And they must wait for the 1755 return train, as now, unless they can work part time and be away from the office for 1345 daily. In other words it's very unlikely to attract many people working in Middlesbrough for a daily commute. Imagine how you would feel departing by rail at 0630 daily and arriving home at 1925? Add on 10 - 20 minutes walk to the station and you're going to be exhausted.

I can understand the desire to make the line more accessible for outward passengers but the arrival is probably a bit too early for the daily commute. It might be useful for occasional travellers further afield though.

 

[ainsworth74]

At 0630? Probably close to zero. An arrival in Middlesbrough at five to eight is so early for people going to work in an office in the town, too. And they must wait for the 1755 return train, as now, unless they can work part time and be away from the office for 1345 daily. In other words it's very unlikely to attract many people working in Middlesbrough for a daily commute. Imagine how you would feel departing by rail at 0630 daily and arriving home at 1925? Add on 10 - 20 minutes walk to the station and you're going to be exhausted.

Quite. The 0755 arrival isn't necessarily fatal; I arrive into Middlesbrough at 0743 and my train usually has plenty of other people doing that but that's because we're working our eight hours and going home on the 1607 (i.e. working 8 to 4 rather than 9 to 5)! But if you asked me (and I suspect my fellows) to hang around Middlesbrough until almost 6pm we'd all be driving.

 

[yorksrob]

I think the real potential for the route is for incoming visitors.

The cheapest, quickest potential improvement that could make a difference to the line would be to not get rid of a 153 and boost capacity in the summer with the extra carriage.

 

[deltic08]

I have just been looking at a route learning video from Battersby Junction to Whitby. Trundling along at a top speed of 45mph punctuated by 10mph over some bridges and past open crossings to Grosmont followed by 30mph top speed onto Whitby punctuated by the same 10mph limits over some bridges and open crossings. It was absolutely ball breaking watching mile after mile of relatively good alignment and not travelling faster. Why?
There were many chunks of cwr and a few new underbridges but still only 45mph. To me there was no reason why 60/65mph could not be allowed to Grosmont and 45/50mph after that.
The 10mph restrictions for open crossings on a line of only 30/45mph are completely unnecessary. There are open crossings on lines on the Continent with double track and far higher speeds than 30mph without incident. Are we incapable in this Country of making a decision of whether it is safe to cross a single track railway without crashing into a train? Removing these 10mph crossings would knock 10 minutes off the journey straight away. Another 10 minutes saved between Middlesbrough and Battersby and a new chord avoiding Batterby could reduce the journey to an hour.
I think Whitby should copy Norwich in 90 campaign with Whitby in 60., and they might get it with support from NY County Council who have come up with £11m for improving the line from York to Harrogate that will not reduce journey time but increase resilience. One of the County Councillors in Whitby is very prorail. I will suggest it to him.
I have yet to see what improvements are needed and could be made between Middlesbrough and Batterby and how much time could be saved there.
Does anyone know when this line last saw a tamper?

 

[70014IronDuke]

.. Whether or not there's any actual demand for a service that leaves at 0633 and arrives at 0756 I think is up for debate. Perhaps if it was more like an 0830 arrival (so around 0700 off Whitby) it might have more prospect of success but this was the only time that they could find that would work with the restrictions around Nunthorpe.

Surely the barrier to getting an 08.30-ish arrival is primarily the lack of a loop at or around Commondale/Castleton Moor, where it would have to cross the Whitby school train?

Personally whilst I think it will have a few users but I doubt it'll be particularly well used but the usergroup got their wish. After a fashion...

It is, isn't it? The 07.56 arrival is really too early for most commuting to Teeside. If they could lop even 15 mins off the journey time from Whitby it would be something, but the 90 minute trip must seem awfully long for a regular commute of just 35 miles.

 

[RT4038]

The 10mph restrictions for open crossings on a line of only 30/45mph are completely unnecessary. There are open crossings on lines on the Continent with double track and far higher speeds than 30mph without incident. Are we incapable in this Country of making a decision of whether it is safe to cross a single track railway without crashing into a train?

Do you have evidence for this? There have been some pretty horrific level crossing accidents 'on the Continent' in recent years, which may not have happened if the train was travelling at 10mph. The collision at an open crossing on the Perpignan-Villefranche-VLB line springs to mind, and this line is still closed to trains 2 years later.
Safety first.

 

[30907]

Do you have evidence for this? There have been some pretty horrific level crossing accidents 'on the Continent' in recent years, which may not have happened if the train was travelling at 10mph. The collision at an open crossing on the Perpignan-Villefranche-VLB line springs to mind, and this line is still closed to trains 2 years later.
Safety first.

Travelling recently in countries such as Czechia which have vast numbers of open crossings, it is noticeable how many additional speed restrictions have been imposed.

 

[deltic08]

Do you have evidence for this? There have been some pretty horrific level crossing accidents 'on the Continent' in recent years, which may not have happened if the train was travelling at 10mph. The collision at an open crossing on the Perpignan-Villefranche-VLB line springs to mind, and this line is still closed to trains 2 years later.
Safety first.

The railway was there first before the car came 50 years later. Why should the railway have to pay to protect the motorist at the expense of a slower railway journey. The Highways Agency should be made to pay for protecting the motorist if they are stupid enough to drive through a crossing when a train is coming. Surely user operated gates on a single line would be better than completely open crossings.

 

[70014IronDuke]

Travelling recently in countries such as Czechia which have vast numbers of open crossings, it is noticeable how many additional speed restrictions have been imposed.

I wonder if these PSRs are EU mandated?

Do you have evidence for this? There have been some pretty horrific level crossing accidents 'on the Continent' in recent years, which may not have happened if the train was travelling at 10mph. The collision at an open crossing on the Perpignan-Villefranche-VLB line springs to mind, and this line is still closed to trains 2 years later.
Safety first.

Well, yes - but if you make the line impossibly slow, effectively forcing passengers onto the less-safe roads, which is kind of what is done on this line, you just hide the problem. Car hits car somewhere on the A171 and it's put down to a 'straightforward' road accident when, possibly, neither car would have been on the road had the rail service been competitive.

Train hits car at Leaholm (or wherever) and there's a Royal Commission set up to make sure it never, ever, happens again in 2,000 years by installing a 10 mph PSR - which adds another 60 seconds to the schedule.

 

[deltic08]

I wonder if these PSRs are EU mandated?



Well, yes - but if you make the line impossibly slow, effectively forcing passengers onto the less-safe roads, which is kind of what is done on this line, you just hide the problem. Car hits car somewhere on the A171 and it's put down to a 'straightforward' road accident when, possibly, neither car would have been on the road had the rail service been competitive.

Train hits car at Leaholm (or wherever) and there's a Royal Commission set up to make sure it never, ever, happens again in 2,000 years by installing a 10 mph PSR - which adds another 60 seconds to the schedule.

Good point.

 

[Harpers Tate]

Let me add to that illustration:
Car hits car because one or both motorists fail to properly follow the rules of the road.........
Train hits car because motorist fails to properly follow the rules of the road........
There is a theme there, I think.

 

[RT4038]

The railway was there first before the car came 50 years later. Why should the railway have to pay to protect the motorist at the expense of a slower railway journey. The Highways Agency should be made to pay for protecting the motorist if they are stupid enough to drive through a crossing when a train is coming. Surely user operated gates on a single line would be better than completely open crossings.

I presume this is just a rant, because you know that this not going to happen. Slowing the trains down on a backwater branch is just so much easier and cheaper.

 

[30907]

The railway was there first before the car came 50 years later.

But the roads were there first, which is why LCs are the responsibility of the railway.

 

[deltic08]

But the roads were there first, which is why LCs are the responsibility of the railway.

Where we have level crossings now were not roads as we know them to-day. They were trails and tracks with nothing more than cow-drawn carts. Roads that could be called roads in 1850 had a bridge built for them.

 

[yorksrob]

But the roads were there first, which is why LCs are the responsibility of the railway.

I've always found that a very poor argument for encumbering rail passengers with the costs of (what is for the most part) saving motorists from themselves. Modern motoring is a very different form of transport from the odd horse drawn wagon that turned up at rural level crossings when the railways were built.

It is still the case that the vast majority of risk at level crossings are caused by (road) driver misuse, therefore IMO, the cost for rectifying this should come from the road budget.

 

[70014IronDuke]

I think the real potential for the route is for incoming visitors.

The cheapest, quickest potential improvement that could make a difference to the line would be to not get rid of a 153 and boost capacity in the summer with the extra carriage.

Dangerous to base hopes on one such form of traffic, which is mainly seasonal, and therefore means stock hanging around for 7-8 months of the year doing little or nothing - even if that stock is 'just' a 153.

Tapping into a daily commuter market is an entirely different kettle of economic fish - one that is far more stable potentially and one that could help justify both the line's existence and its development. The issue here is a) does the market exist? & b) if it does, can the limited, relatively expensive*, slow service provided (even with the improvements) prove attractive to lure folks out of their cars, and out of buses?

* expensive because the early morning train will be, effectively, ECS, along with the late return train, except in the summer, I suspect.

 

[Ploughman]

I will get shot down in flames for this but here goes:-

Would it be practicable for the LC's on the route to be converted to Toll gates?
Meaning that some form of barrier will be across the roadway.
Reducing the Road/ Rail collision risk and enabling a higher line speed.

There is also a contribution towards costs. Small in size though and probably uneconomic.

 

[deltic08]

I will get shot down in flames for this but here goes:-

Would it be practicable for the LC's on the route to be converted to Toll gates?
Meaning that some form of barrier will be across the roadway.
Reducing the Road/ Rail collision risk and enabling a higher line speed.

There is also a contribution towards costs. Small in size though and probably uneconomic.

Maybe not a toll as that will upset local motorists, but closed to motorists until a button is pressed. Only activates barriers if clear to cross otherwise remains closed until the train has passed.
That is a positive idea at much less cost than automatic barriers.

 

[yorksrob]

Dangerous to base hopes on one such form of traffic, which is mainly seasonal, and therefore means stock hanging around for 7-8 months of the year doing little or nothing - even if that stock is 'just' a 153.

Tapping into a daily commuter market is an entirely different kettle of economic fish - one that is far more stable potentially and one that could help justify both the line's existence and its development. The issue here is a) does the market exist? & b) if it does, can the limited, relatively expensive*, slow service provided (even with the improvements) prove attractive to lure folks out of their cars, and out of buses?

* expensive because the early morning train will be, effectively, ECS, along with the late return train, except in the summer, I suspect.

We're not just talking about the old seasonal bucket and spade brigate. Whitby is culturally significant enough to attract visitors most, if not all year round. Though I agree, commuters in the opposite direction would be a good thing.

 

[Killingworth]

Maybe not a toll as that will upset local motorists, but closed to motorists until a button is pressed. Only activates barriers if clear to cross otherwise remains closed until the train has passed.
That is a positive idea at much less cost than automatic barriers.

They couldn't possibly justify the cost of such a system on the Whitby line. The one at New Barnetby and Melton Ross requires drivers to phone for the gates to be opened - gates, not a barrier. However it's a public right of way so a footbridge is provided. The cost is enormous, but there are frequent heavy freights as well as passenger services. Any accident would go very much against the motor vehicle.

 

[ainsworth74]

We're not just talking about the old seasonal bucket and spade brigate. Whitby is culturally significant enough to attract visitors most, if not all year round.

Yes, even I as someone who is constantly pouring water on ideas on financial grounds, agrees that Whitby as a destination attracts visitors all year around. Obviously a Saturday in July/August is going to be far busier than one in November but the place still won't be totally dead.

 

[deltic08]

They couldn't possibly justify the cost of such a system on the Whitby line. The one at New Barnetby and Melton Ross requires drivers to phone for the gates to be opened - gates, not a barrier. However it's a public right of way so a footbridge is provided. The cost is enormous, but there are frequent heavy freights as well as passenger services. Any accident would go very much against the motor vehicle.

But there is at least one crossing with automatic half barriers with a 20mph speed restriction and many open crossings of 10 mph. This just shouldn't be on any railway. Do all lines with half barriers have a 20mph speed limit? I think not so why here.
There must be a way to reduce Whitby to Middlesbrough journey time to around 60 minutes for everyone's benefit especially commuters.

 

[AndyHudds]

We're not just talking about the old seasonal bucket and spade brigate. Whitby is culturally significant enough to attract visitors most, if not all year round. Though I agree, commuters in the opposite direction would be a good thing.

But that is Whitby's bread and butter, the biggest money spinner in the town so why doesn't it have the infrastructure to enable to maintain and grow that? You would think that the summer timetable would be modelled to accommodate extra services to capitalise on the tourist trade.

 

[yorksrob]

But that is Whitby's bread and butter, the biggest money spinner in the town so why doesn't it have the infrastructure to enable to maintain and grow that? You would think that the summer timetable would be modelled to accommodate extra services to capitalise on the tourist trade.

I would.

But we seem to have a situation where the operators are loath even to strengthen those services that already run severely overcrowded.

One can only hope that the grants from the mining company engender some change eventually.

 

[Kingspanner]

I would.

But we seem to have a situation where the operators are loath even to strengthen those services that already run severely overcrowded.

One can only hope that the grants from the mining company engender some change eventually.

No danger of that happening. Sirius minerals have run out of money https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/c8l6d3n7elxt/sirius-minerals, although there is talk of a Qatari distribution deal.

 

[yorksrob]

No danger of that happening. Sirius minerals have run out of money https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/c8l6d3n7elxt/sirius-minerals, although there is talk of a Qatari distribution deal.

One would hope that the agreements are carried through to any new deal.

 

[Bald Rick]

Do all lines with half barriers have a 20mph speed limit? I think not so why here.

I’m not overly familiar with the line, but elsewhere where there are 20mph (or lower) restrictions across open / half barrier crossings it is usually due to sighting time for the train driver. Drivers are, effectively, driving on sight on the approach, with the assistance of a special signal to confirm the crossing is operating.

 

[Meerkat]

Yes, even I as someone who is constantly pouring water on ideas on financial grounds, agrees that Whitby as a destination attracts visitors all year around. Obviously a Saturday in July/August is going to be far busier than one in November but the place still won't be totally dead.

How many visitors does Whitby get on a November weekday! Apologies for my cynicism, but I struggle with the “let’s get the train to Whitby” idea...though I can imagine some old folk drive over (being able to drive right to your destination and sit in the car being a bit more inviting than cold stations and longer walks on a November day.
Just going to pop to Speculation for a ‘should we keep Pacers’ debate....