Most dubious railway closure cases

[yorksrob]

What makes you think that it was ‘mileage’ rather than ‘losses’?

A lot of closures were of individual stations on lines that retained passenger services. Many other cases were withdrawal of loss-making passenger services on lines that remained open for freight, especially in industrial areas.

I am genuinely interested in where your ‘fundamentalism’ comes from.

As an example, the Swanage line, where the manager at the time reportedly said to Barry Doe that he'd wished he could have closed the Lymington branch instead as the Swanage line generated more revenue. This clearly suggests that there was pressure to get rid of route milage.

 

[43096]

As an example, the Swanage line, where the manager at the time reportedly said to Barry Doe that he'd wished he could have closed the Lymington branch instead as the Swanage line generated more revenue. This clearly suggests that there was pressure to get rid of route milage.

“Reportedly” being the key word. No facts, just rumour and hearsay.

 

[thedbdiboy]

Remember that it wasn't just revenue, it involved costs too. And some of the pressure to close lines was to make way for new roads - for example, both the (then) Dart Valley Railway through Buckfastleigh and the Lakeside & Haverthwaite railway were prevented from using part of the formation to allow roads to be built; the Swaange reopening via Corfe Castle was hard fought as a road bypass was promised to the formation; and East Sussex County Council were standing by for Uckfield-Lewes to shut so that they could build the Phoenix Causeway.
It is very hard now to imagine or remember that back in the 1960s the orthodoxy was very much that railways were on the way out. IF you had said then 'this will be needed in 50 years', the answer would have been 'who's going to pay for it this year?'

 

[yorksrob]

“Reportedly” being the key word. No facts, just rumour and hearsay.

It's a first hand account of a conversation. Short of Mr Doe carrying a wire, I don't see what else he was supposed to do.

 

[WesternLancer]

It's a first hand account of a conversation. Short of Mr Doe carrying a wire, I don't see what else he was supposed to do.

Excellent - I'm getting a vision of the esteemed Barry Doe, railway journalist, in an 'All the Presidents Men' scenario....

 

[yorksrob]

Excellent - I'm getting a vision of the esteemed Barry Doe, railway journalist, in an 'All the Presidents Men' scenario....

Fitting for the scandal of "closuregate" !

 

[The exile]

What makes you think that it was ‘mileage’ rather than ‘losses’?

A lot of closures were of individual stations on lines that retained passenger services. Many other cases were withdrawal of loss-making passenger services on lines that remained open for freight, especially in industrial areas.

I am genuinely interested in where your ‘fundamentalism’ comes from.

I am sure that the vast majority of closures made economic sense at the time when judged by the criteria permitted. However, many were using "as is" costs, rather than "as could be" - ie all trains with two (or three) staff working them, staffed stations (at least at both ends of a branch), an indeterminate number of staffed signalboxes / crossings etc. That said, at a time when driving meant "enjoying the freedom of the open road" rather than "being stuck in a traffic jam of indeterminate length while all the time contributing to local pollution / global warming and wondering where you're going to park when you eventually get there" they were probably doomed anyway.

 

[WesternLancer]

I am sure that the vast majority of closures made economic sense at the time when judged by the criteria permitted. However, many were using "as is" costs, rather than "as could be" - ie all trains with two (or three) staff working them, staffed stations (at least at both ends of a branch), an indeterminate number of staffed signalboxes / crossings etc. That said, at a time when driving meant "enjoying the freedom of the open road" rather than "being stuck in a traffic jam of indeterminate length while all the time contributing to local pollution / global warming and wondering where you're going to park when you eventually get there" they were probably doomed anyway.

That is a good point.

But it also seemed that they did not have (weren't permitted by the SoS ?) to have any wider contextual brief - or what we would call now strategic planning relationship. Couple of cases from where I used to hail from always seemed to illustrate this to me:

Falmer - closed when a brand new large university was just about to be opened and must have been planned for some years - sense prevailed and it was re-opened rapidly I believe.

Hailsham branch (by late 60s then a branch) - closed despite the local planning authority being on the cusp of green lighting large scale housing estates surrounding the town built from the early 1970s onwards, many of whose residents would have inevitably (and do) sought work in nearby Eastbourne.

These are very local traffic issues, but there must have been plenty more of this sort of thing.

 

[simonw]

Why do threads like this continue to exist, with all the conspiracies racked up again and agwin.

The railways were losing shed loads of money

Traffics levels were falling and continued to fall

Significant numbers of railway stations generated a tiny fraction of the traffic

Significant lengths of line should never have been built

Significant mileage had already closed

Freight traffic was falling off a cliff (remember in 1960 half of all BE revenue was from freight)

Car ownership was rising and for Most people this was a 'good thing'


Most people didn't use the railway and the day their local station or line cheeseburger passed with no impact on them, or was the first day they had visited the railway in years.

Most people really didn't (and dont) care that the railways close.

What happened in GB differed in only one material respect from what happened in virtually all countries world wide - in that the closures were the subject of a nationwide report. In other countries, closures hax happened decades before, look at France.


Ok detailed costing, might have saved a few lines but the thrust of the report was about creating a railway fit for prpose in which it could compete. i.e intercity traffic and bulk freight not some lightly used branch lines

 

[steamybrian]

That is a good point.

But it also seemed that they did not have (weren't permitted by the SoS ?) to have any wider contextual brief - or what we would call now strategic planning relationship. Couple of cases from where I used to hail from always seemed to illustrate this to me:

Falmer - closed when a brand new large university was just about to be opened and must have been planned for some years - sense prevailed and it was re-opened rapidly I believe.

Hailsham branch (by late 60s then a branch) - closed despite the local planning authority being on the cusp of green lighting large scale housing estates surrounding the town built from the early 1970s onwards, many of whose residents would have inevitably (and do) sought work in nearby Eastbourne.

These are very local traffic issues, but there must have been plenty more of this sort of thing.

I have no record of Falmer being closed for any period.

I agree that Hailsham- Polegate was a very dubious closure. A former BR colleague of mine said at the time that line was losing only a small amount of money (a few thousand pounds in the 1960s) but despite the prospect of housing development increasing the size of the town, it was in the Beeching Report so had to close.

 

[30907]

The main service on the route certainly at the time of closure was the Tonbridge - Brighton train.

Pedant mode - since dieselisation it had been Oxted-Brighton. I think paul1609 is right in that it was cut back to Lewes at the very end, but I haven't a timetable handy. I did the line (from Clock House via Sanderstead) in early 1971 (1970?) and some of the trains, at least, still went through.

 

[yorksrob]

Pedant mode - since dieselisation it had been Oxted-Brighton. I think paul1609 is right in that it was cut back to Lewes at the very end, but I haven't a timetable handy. I did the line (from Clock House via Sanderstead) in early 1971 (1970?) and some of the trains, at least, still went through.

My mistake in that case. But as you say, Brighton was the main destination and services were concentrated towards there for most of the lines history.

 

[A0]

I have no record of Falmer being closed for any period.

I agree that Hailsham- Polegate was a very dubious closure. A former BR colleague of mine said at the time that line was losing only a small amount of money (a few thousand pounds in the 1960s) but despite the prospect of housing development increasing the size of the town, it was in the Beeching Report so had to close.

But you couldn't reasonably have kept a short stub branch between Hailsham & Polegate open - Polegate's only 4 miles away from Hailsham, and keeping the line open through to Eridge wouldn't have been viable.

 

[yorksrob]

But you couldn't reasonably have kept a short stub branch between Hailsham & Polegate open - Polegate's only 4 miles away from Hailsham,

Why not ? We've kept them for Bognor and Eastbourne, amongst others.

 

[A0]

Why not ? We've kept them for Bognor and Eastbourne, amongst others.

Eastbourne's 5 times bigger than Hailsham and is a tourist destination in its own right.

Bognor is probably still a tourist destination. The nearest rail alternatives would have been Barnham which was 6 miles away and not particularly direct or Chichester which is 7 miles away.

 

[The exile]

Eastbourne's 5 times bigger than Hailsham and is a tourist destination in its own right.

Bognor is probably still a tourist destination. The nearest rail alternatives would have been Barnham which was 6 miles away and not particularly direct or Chichester which is 7 miles away.

Not to mention the fact that both have carriage sidings which would probably have been needed anyway.

 

[yorksrob]

Eastbourne's 5 times bigger than Hailsham and is a tourist destination in its own right.

Bognor is probably still a tourist destination. The nearest rail alternatives would have been Barnham which was 6 miles away and not particularly direct or Chichester which is 7 miles away.

Surely the relevance here is that the line was almost covering its costs, so there was no justification in closing it. In this curcumstance, being on a stub is neither here nor there.

 

[thedbdiboy]

I have no record of Falmer being closed for any period.

I agree that Hailsham- Polegate was a very dubious closure. A former BR colleague of mine said at the time that line was losing only a small amount of money (a few thousand pounds in the 1960s) but despite the prospect of housing development increasing the size of the town, it was in the Beeching Report so had to close.

The problem was that pre-1968, there was no concept of subsidy for the rail system in general; it was supposed to pay its way and the losses accrued each year were racked up in an ever-growing deficit. From 1968, a process existed for urban lines to be grant-aided but anything that fell outside this was still on the hit list. It wasn't until 1974 that the PSO grant was introduced on the basis of maintaining the passenger network at broadly the same level.
This isn't an argument for the Hailsham branch's closure but a statement of the circumstances at the time. Had it lingered until 1974, then it would likely still be with us.

 

[simonw]

Surely the relevance here is that the line was almost covering its costs, so there was no justification in closing it. In this curcumstance, being on a stub is neither here nor there.

Almost but not doing so, so it closed.

 

[yorksrob]

Almost but not doing so, so it closed.

Indeed. A dreadful and unjustifiable policy.

 

[Starmill]

Personally, I think some re-openings have a dubious side.

Corby branch on MML? Station only re-opened a few years ago and ELECTRIFIED now. Wires north to Leicester, Nottingham, Derby & Sheffield CANCELLED. OK, HS2 might well have a compensation factor for the latter. But surely the former is nothing to do with Corby being a marginal parliamentary seat? A bit like a cluster of constituencies north west of Leeds with 333’s while for most of Northern Rail Pacers are only just history.

Electrification from Corby was only done to provide capacity for office commuters who used Luton, Bedford and to a lesser extent Wellingborough, in large numbers before the pandemic. It is being extended to Market Harborough as a response to the grid feeder location.

 

[simonw]

Indeed. A dreadful and unjustifiable policy.

Not really, no.

 

[leytongabriel]

It's a first hand account of a conversation. Short of Mr Doe carrying a wire, I don't see what else he was supposed to do.

I've certainly seen it elsewhere that had Soutern Region 'had to be seen to closing something' and so it became a toss-up between Lymington and Swanage.
But what about Alton - Winchester where they started electrification work and closure was on and off for ages? Possibly more to do with having a relief route than traffic levels at the time but still.

 

[yorksrob]

I've certainly seen it elsewhere that had Soutern Region 'had to be seen to closing something' and so it became a toss-up between Lymington and Swanage.
But what about Alton - Winchester where they started electrification work and closure was on and off for ages? Possibly more to do with having a relief route than traffic levels at the time but still.

In terms of Alton - Winchester, the Southern Region obviously felt it worth rationalising the line at one stage. Perhaps they had pressure brought to bear on them by higher powers.

 

[WesternLancer]

But you couldn't reasonably have kept a short stub branch between Hailsham & Polegate open - Polegate's only 4 miles away from Hailsham, and keeping the line open through to Eridge wouldn't have been viable.

Isn't Marks Tey - Sudbury a short stub branch on an otherwise closed longer route that ran beyond Sudbury? (apols not double checked a map) - surely there are plenty of such examples.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Nov 2021 ==

The problem was that pre-1968, there was no concept of subsidy for the rail system in general; it was supposed to pay its way and the losses accrued each year were racked up in an ever-growing deficit. From 1968, a process existed for urban lines to be grant-aided but anything that fell outside this was still on the hit list. It wasn't until 1974 that the PSO grant was introduced on the basis of maintaining the passenger network at broadly the same level.
This isn't an argument for the Hailsham branch's closure but a statement of the circumstances at the time. Had it lingered until 1974, then it would likely still be with us.

Yes, this is key.

 

[A0]

Isn't Marks Tey - Sudbury a short stub branch on an otherwise closed longer route that ran beyond Sudbury? (apols not double checked a map) - surely there are plenty of such examples.

Not really - Marks Tey - Sudbury is nearly 12 miles long. The St Albans Abbey line is 7 miles with intermediate stations on it.

Barnham - Bognor was a better example at ~3 miles, but the end destination was more of a tourist attraction (probably still is) than Hailsham.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Nov 2021 ==

I've certainly seen it elsewhere that had Soutern Region 'had to be seen to closing something' and so it became a toss-up between Lymington and Swanage.

Lymington had the link to the Isle of Wight ferry (and still does) which was probably a point which helped keep that one viable.

That said, neither Swanage nor Lymington were named in the Beeching report (available on railways archive).

 

[WesternLancer]

I have no record of Falmer being closed for any period.

I checked - and not in Beeching report list indeed so I may be mistaken, but i recalled the story from somewhere - maybe I read it in copy of guide to the line - or maybe it was part of an earlier proposal (I knew someone who worked at the University of Sussex when it was being constructed - which would have been pre Beeching as it happens, and it may be that they told of plans to close it which were reversed due to the university being built - but BR seemingly unaware of the plans for a new university being developed elsewhere in govt. If from such a conversation of course it has the status of anecdote, unless anyone else can verify it.

This is thread about closures not about Beeching's proposed closures of course.

But my point remains that decision on some closures were seemingly made in isolation of wider trends in population and economic development - for reasons very well set out in post #138 by @thedbdiboy

 

[Dr_Paul]

Isn't Marks Tey - Sudbury a short stub branch on an otherwise closed longer route that ran beyond Sudbury?

That's one of the sad ironies of many closures. At a time when there were complaints, not without good reason, that BR had too many dead-end branches, quite a few closures led to through lines becoming dead-end branches. Sudbury is just one of many examples of this.

 

[yorksrob]

The whole closure programme was just an ill conceived, poorly thought out and badly executed cost slashing exercise, given a gig leaf of science washing by Beeching, to satisfy the treasury and the road lobby.

 

[D6130]

That's one of the sad ironies of many closures. At a time when there were complaints, not without good reason, that BR had too many dead-end branches, quite a few closures led to through lines becoming dead-end branches. Sudbury is just one of many examples of this.

Likewise the Braintree branch....which used to run through to Bishop's Stortford via Dunmow.