• 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!

Halkirk & Georgemas

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gathursty

Established Member
Joined
31 May 2011
Messages
2,649
Location
Wigan
What do you think of the following suggestion for the Far North Line:

- Close down both Scotscalder and Georgemas Junction.
- Reopen Halkirk station
- build a third chord from the south to the Thurso branch?
* extra: operate the termini like the Hadfield/Glossop solution in the evening where you would go to one of the termini, reverse to the other one and head back to Inverness without visiting Thurso or Wick twice in a return journey? (Option for bus provision at Halkirk for journeys to/from Wick or Thurso to meet trains.)

Only the resident of the cottage at Scotscalder would be affected if at all. I don't remember anyone living near Georgemas.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Esker-pades

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2015
Messages
3,784
Location
Beds, Bucks, or somewhere else
The extra is wrong.

What should happen (if Halkirk is built), is that services run direct to Thurso, with a shuttle unit based at Wick running between Halkirk & Wick (to connect with the train to/from Inverness) and between Wick & Thurso.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,231
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I don't think I'd even do that. TBH, if you built the Chord, operating Halkirk-Thurso-Wick-Thurso-Halkirk would make the most sense based on the relative importance of the towns, but would remove the extra two reverses that presently requires.
 

Esker-pades

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2015
Messages
3,784
Location
Beds, Bucks, or somewhere else
I don't think I'd even do that. TBH, if you built the Chord, operating Halkirk-Thurso-Wick-Thurso-Halkirk would make the most sense based on the relative importance of the towns, but would remove the extra two reverses that presently requires.
A shuttle from Halkirk to Wick connecting with the Inverness - Thurso service would decrease journey times overall for Inverness - Wick than the current situation, and your solution.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,231
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
A shuttle from Halkirk to Wick connecting with the Inverness - Thurso service would decrease journey times overall for Inverness - Wick than the current situation, and your solution.

It would, but it would be very costly when compared to the benefit. You would need traincrew and two units (one spare).
 

Esker-pades

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2015
Messages
3,784
Location
Beds, Bucks, or somewhere else
It would, but it would be very costly when compared to the benefit. You would need traincrew and two units (one spare).
Heaven forbid anyone would spend money on Caithness...

Have a homogenous fleet on the North Highland Lines (as now), and shuffle units such that they only spend a couple of nights away from Inverness (where maintainence is carried out, as now).
 

Esker-pades

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2015
Messages
3,784
Location
Beds, Bucks, or somewhere else
The line itself is very heavily subsidised and has very low usage. Shout too much and you can have a coach service.
And patronage increases substantially everytime there is a service improvement. 4th train in the day to/from Inverness - increase. Additional services to/from Easter Ross commuter towns/villages - increase.

God forbid anyone should have to subsidise transport for people who have the audacity to live in a rural area. "No, don't ask for improvements because you're lucky you're given anything".
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,231
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
And patronage increases substantially everytime there is a service improvement. 4th train in the day to/from Inverness - increase. Additional services to/from Easter Ross commuter towns/villages - increase.

God forbid anyone should have to subsidise transport for people who have the audacity to live in a rural area. "No, don't ask for improvements because you're lucky you're given anything".

If you did add a couple of units and crews you'd be better doing other improvements than a Wick shuttle which would as easily be done using a bus.
 

Esker-pades

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2015
Messages
3,784
Location
Beds, Bucks, or somewhere else
If you did add a couple of units and crews you'd be better doing other improvements than a Wick shuttle which would as easily be done using a bus.
For a start, we've established that the shuttle itself requires 1 unit.

Previously, services ran Inverness - Georgemas, and then divided with one half going to Wick, and the other to Thurso. A cross-platform or same-platform interchange from the Inverness service to the Wick service is a compromise between the two.

Somehow you've backed this conversation into a weird cul-de-sac where journey times are improved by ~5 minutes (rather than the ~30 that could be achieved), so that the best journey time from Wick to Inverness would be ~4h5m (average of 4h15m) rather than the ~3h40m that could be achieved. Remember, the road takes ~2h30m, and the closer the train gets to the road, the more people will use it. Again, every service improvement on the North Highland Lines have resulted in increased patronage. You've also removed the direct services from Wick to Georgemas (IE: Halkirk).

Given that we're building a new railway station, we might was well invest in getting another 158 up to Inverness, and recruiting a couple more drivers and guards. We're already shedding 158s from the Inverness to Aberdeen line, so one could keep some of those to provide more North Highland Line services (including a Caithness shuttle). That way, you can have both a local service, and a faster service to Inverness. Railways shouldn't be just about profit, they should also be about social benefits.

Or keep the status quo and watch the line slowly decline.
Or do what you propose: close Wick to Georgemas/Halkirk and provide a rail replacement bus there and Wick because people from Wick had the audacity to want both a service to Inverness without having to take a 30 minute detour to Thurso, and a train to Thurso.

Finally, why would a bus be better than a connecting train? It would take double the time to go from Halkirk Station to Wick for a start.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,054
Location
Reston City Centre
A shuttle from Halkirk to Wick connecting with the Inverness - Thurso service would decrease journey times overall for Inverness - Wick than the current situation, and your solution.

Just to check I'm understanding this right; you want a 158 allocated to Wick to provide a "shuttle" connection into the Thurso - Inverness service?

A fifteen mile trip to Georgemas/ Halkirk four times a day (i.e. the frequency of the Thurso - Inverness train)?

The Wick that gets around twenty five departing passengers per day, on average? (17,890 passengers in total - half of whom are arriving, half of whom are departing - divided by the number of days in the year...)
 

Esker-pades

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2015
Messages
3,784
Location
Beds, Bucks, or somewhere else
Just to check I'm understanding this right; you want a 158 allocated to Wick to provide a "shuttle" connection into the Thurso - Inverness service?

A fifteen mile trip to Georgemas/ Halkirk four times a day (i.e. the frequency of the Thurso - Inverness train)?

The Wick that gets around twenty five departing passengers per day, on average? (17,890 passengers in total - half of whom are arriving, half of whom are departing - divided by the number of days in the year...)
Sort of.

Any additional units would be allocated to Inverness. The shuttle would require one unit, but it would not be the same unit. Maintainence requirements etc. mean it would need to go to Inverness, thus 158s would interwork between the Caithness shuttle and the Thurso to Inverness services. Part of the timetable overhaul may mean that the crew depot is moved to Thurso from Wick. Whatever happens, there will only be one crew depot (and therefore one stabling point) in Caithness. Whether it is Thurso or Wick is immaterial. Thus, the units that are already stabled up north overnight can be shuffled as required for the next day's service.

The additional Caithness unit would provide two roles:
1: Shuttles between Halkirk and Wick to connect with the Thurso to Inverness service.
2: Services from Wick to Halkirk to Thurso, providing additional services between those three towns in the times where the unit would otherwise be sitting idle.

This shuttle is, as I state again, a compromise between the current system (where services to Wick must travel via Thurso, thus adding 30 minutes to the journey time) and the previous system (where trains ran as 4 coach services, dividing at Georgemas).

I have already briefly addressed the statistical point. I'll expand:
The reason patronage on the northern section Far North Line is stagnant (and for the case of Wick, declining) is because the service level has remained stagnant, and has been very unreliable in the past few years. When the service was previously increased, more passengers used the train. Therefore, if new services are increased, more people will use the train.
Secondly, the line takes a lot longer than the road. For Wick, this is compounded by the detour to Thurso. Thus, any significant decrease in journey time (30 minutes is significant) will encourage passengers back to the train who have previously abandoned it, and also new ones.
The ~17k figure you quote for Wick is the lowest recorded (I can only see back as far as '02/'03) bar the period '06/'07 because of these reasons. The highest it has been is 25,666 ('10/'11).
 

gg1

Established Member
Joined
2 Jun 2011
Messages
2,485
Location
Birmingham
Given the passenger numbers, journey time and the fact the total daily mileage will be on the low side, would a PPM (or possibly a pair of them working in multiple if passenger numbers justify it) be a better option for a Halkirk - Wick shuttle?
 

Esker-pades

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2015
Messages
3,784
Location
Beds, Bucks, or somewhere else
Given the passenger numbers, journey time and the fact the total daily mileage will be on the low side, would a PPM (or possibly a pair of them working in multiple if passenger numbers justify it) be a better option for a Halkirk - Wick shuttle?
That would be worse. You'd be creating a micro-fleet. A new depot would have to be built, along with engineers etc. to staff it. Or, you'd have to send it down once a week to Inverness. That's a really, really bad idea.

With a homogenous fleet, one doesn't have to build new depots, and one doesn't have hundreds of miles of dead running; you just allocate the unit to run a service to Inverness when it needs.
 

ABB125

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2016
Messages
4,335
Location
University of Birmingham
Would a small fleet of class 230s (maybe 5?) be suitable to operate the line as a dedicated fleet? I don't know what the linespeeds are, but I can't imagine the 60mph limit of the class 230s being much of an issue.
Similarly, perhaps some dedicated units for the Kyle of Lochalsh line as well?
 

class26

Member
Joined
4 May 2011
Messages
1,199
Would a small fleet of class 230s (maybe 5?) be suitable to operate the line as a dedicated fleet? I don't know what the linespeeds are, but I can't imagine the 60mph limit of the class 230s being much of an issue.
Similarly, perhaps some dedicated units for the Kyle of Lochalsh line as well?

Perfect for a redundant 153 surely ?
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,231
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Perfect for a 153 surely ?

You'd want more than one engine for reliability reasons. Though you could potentially use a pair of them and split at Halkirk/Georgemas, and have one go Halkirk-Thurso-Halkirk and one Halkirk-Wick-Thurso-Wick-Halkirk before they both head back (retaining the local service, on the assumption it's useful).

The 230 idea would have more support from me if the things weren't so unreliable, that said.
 

Esker-pades

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2015
Messages
3,784
Location
Beds, Bucks, or somewhere else
Would a small fleet of class 230s (maybe 5?) be suitable to operate the line as a dedicated fleet? I don't know what the linespeeds are, but I can't imagine the 60mph limit of the class 230s being much of an issue.
Similarly, perhaps some dedicated units for the Kyle of Lochalsh line as well?
Actually, that is an issue. 75mph MU speed limits are fairly common, and there's a 90 as around Altnabreac.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top