Burscough curves turned down

[507020]

I can assure you:

1) the Okehampton line reopening has come from the Restoring Your Railway (RYR) budget.
2) Project SPEED has no budget - it is a process change.
3) If a reopening project is not accepted into the RYR Programme, which for the avoidance of doubt includes the previously announced ‘advanced proposals’ (such as Skipton - Colne, Fleetwood, etc) then it will not receive Government funding or support.
4) Burscough Curves applied for RYR funding - twice. It has not been successful in either attempt.
5) if Burscough curves are to happen, it will need a different source of funding.
6) a proposal being successful at this stage of RYR does not mean it will be built. I’d be surprised if more than a third even make it to the next stage.

So do you mean to say that any reopening imaginable will be integrated into the government’s single Restoring Your Railway scheme to be progressed (or not)? I think the difference with the Project SPEED approach is that they actually gave funding to Okehampton instead of leaving it indefinitely on hold like most of the others. Due to the scale of the Burscough Curves compared even to Okehampton - Crediton, they wouldn’t require much funding at all and the track work could be completed within weeks if started. The signalling might take a bit longer, but this is why I find it so unacceptable for them to remain closed. If only a third of the billed schemes stand a chance of even being considered for being built, then why did they need 3 rounds? Have you got any idea which ones are likely to be built and which aren’t, other than the Burscough Curves?

I grew up in the area and like the Tube people do use Merseyrail (like the Tube) sort of by default if it is applicable to a given journey despite the very high car ownership in places like Ormskirk.

I don't doubt that (the hospital aside as it's nowhere near the centre) people from Ormskirk would go to Southport by train by default if Merseyrail operated a less roundabout service. Some people even do use it via Sandhills in preference to the bus.

Merseyrail is effectively the default to travel between any random pair of stations along any one of its lines largely because it is likely to be the fastest way to get between the given points. Even if it isn’t, it is reliable and convenient enough for the few minutes difference it will make to be worth it, especially when most passengers are likely to travel from the same origin to several possible destinations on different occasions.

Any rail service from Southport to Ormskirk via Burscough whether it is a 777 or a 2 car 150 will have an undisputed time advantage over any road vehicle, but a through service to Liverpool as well as reducing the number of units opens up the whole length of the Ormskirk line to passengers from Southport, allowing journeys to Maghull and Aintree along the corridor of the 300 bus to be made by Merseyrail by default as well as Ormskirk itself. I can’t see any reason not to do this immediately.

At present there is more reason to use Merseyrail via Sandhills at some times of day than others because the bus can beat it if and only if the roads are completely empty, but because the train to Ormskirk can’t leave Sandhills until the train from Southport has arrived because of the conflicting movement, it is a reliable connection for a journey about 1 hour 10 minutes, which I find faster than a typical bus journey, but in the other direction the connection is only possible if the train to Southport is slightly late from Hunts Cross either at peak times or due to low rail adhesion.

I don’t know how Southport and Ormskirk are in a situation where a minimum of 1 hour 10 minutes has to be allowed for a reliable journey to a place 9 miles away which would take only 20 minutes if a less than half a mile single track curve was rebuilt on land wholly owned by Network Rail, but if this curve was open and a service ran on it, I make it that most of the time, to get from Southport Hospital to Ormskirk Hospital, it would be about half an hour faster to get a bus to the town centre at both ends to connect with this train service taking only 20 minutes than to get a direct bus between them. There are a lot of people who only travel between Southport and Ormskirk who are forced to because of hospital appointments.

But without the coverage, or the connections. Merseyrail aren't returning to quarter hourly service just yet either.

This is off topic here however.

Merseyrail have already returned to the 15 minute service on the Chester line however and this is with Ellesmere Port services still running.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I don’t know how Southport and Ormskirk are in a situation where a minimum of 1 hour 10 minutes has to be allowed for a reliable journey to a place 9 miles away which would take only 20 minutes if a less than half a mile single track curve was rebuilt on land wholly owned by Network Rail, but if this curve was open and a service ran on it, I make it that most of the time, to get from Southport Hospital to Ormskirk Hospital, it would be about half an hour faster to get a bus to the town centre at both ends to connect with this train service taking only 20 minutes than to get a direct bus between them. There are a lot of people who only travel between Southport and Ormskirk who are forced to because of hospital appointments

Do the Arriva North West buses 375 or 385 (Southport to Wigan) serve the Southport hospital ?

 

[AntoniC]

Do the Arriva North West buses 375 or 385 (Southport to Wigan) serve the Southport hospital ?

Yes they do, but it its timetabled to take 77 minutes one way from Southport to Ormskirk.
I can travel from Southport to Liverpool Central in 43 minutes.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Yes they do, but it its timetabled to take 77 minutes one way from Southport to Ormskirk.
I can travel from Southport to Liverpool Central in 43 minutes.

I was not referring to the bus journey time between Southport and Ormskirk, but the nearness of the Southport hospital to the nearest bus stop on the 375/385 routes for people wishing to visit that hospital from both the Southport and the Ormskirk areas.

What is the nearest station in distance to that hospital?

 

[daodao]

I still don’t see your point I’m afraid, because the first of these lines has opened already, forming the first phase of the new diversionary through route from Exeter to Plymouth.

Off topic, and in any case the likelihood of Okehampton-Tavistock ever re-opening is so remote that it can be discounted. Plymouth (in effect Bere Alston) to Tavistock was successful in round 3 of the "restoring your railway" bid process, so will be evaluated further, and does have a case for re-opening, albeit not especially strong.

I grew up in the area and like the Tube people do use Merseyrail (like the Tube) sort of by default if it is applicable to a given journey despite the very high car ownership in places like Ormskirk.

I don't doubt that (the hospital aside as it's nowhere near the centre) people from Ormskirk would go to Southport by train by default if Merseyrail operated a less roundabout service. Some people even do use it via Sandhills in preference to the bus.

I have relatives in Aughton and they do occasionally use the train for travel from Town Green to Liverpool city centre, and very occasionally from Ormskirk to Preston, although the latter is not especially reliable when there is a cancellation on an already relatively infrequent [hourly] service. They rarely use the bus service, which stops running through Aughton by 7 pm and doesn't operate on Sundays. They wouldn't use the train to go to Southport, outer Liverpool or Greater Manchester.

Re-opening the Burscough curves might facilitate a direct Preston-Southport train (although more likely to be a connection at Burscough Bridge), but this wouldn't be significantly quicker than a direct Southport-Preston bus, and the consequence would be a reduction in what rail travel there is between Ormskirk and Preston. It clearly wasn't regarded by government as worth doing (and rightly so) as it was unsuccessful for seed funding in the "Restoring Your Railway" bidding process. A 3rd rail extension from Ormskirk to Burscough Bridge would be prohibited.

I don’t know how Southport and Ormskirk are in a situation where a minimum of 1 hour 10 minutes has to be allowed for a reliable journey

Buses are scheduled to take 39-46 minutes for this journey. Even if late, 70 minutes seems excessive. Please check the facts before posting.

 

[AntoniC]

I was not referring to the bus journey time between Southport and Ormskirk, but the nearness of the Southport hospital to the nearest bus stop on the 375/385 routes for people wishing to visit that hospital from both the Southport and the Ormskirk areas.

What is the nearest station in distance to that hospital?

Sorry, I misunderstood you.
The 375/385 stops about 10/15 minute walk from Southport Hospital about 10 minute walk to Ormskirk Hospital
As for trains the nearest station to Southport Hospital is Southport (and it`s not even close , it`s about 15 minutes by bus) for Ormskirk Hospital its Ormskirk Hospital and thats a 15 minute walk

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Yes they do, but it its timetabled to take 77 minutes one way from Southport to Ormskirk.
I can travel from Southport to Liverpool Central in 43 minutes.

I now have downloaded a 375/385 timetable and the 375 goes from Southport to Ormskirk via Bescar Church and the 385 goes from Southport to Ormskirk via Hurlston.

The 375 leaves Southport, Lord Street (Morrisons) at xx03 hours and arrives at Ormskirk bus station at xx46 hours ... Journey time 43 minutes
The 385 leaves Southport, Lord Street (Morrisons) at xx39 hours and arrives at Ormskirk bus station at xx16 hours ... Journey time 37 minutes.

What date was the timetable that you were using that says the journey took 77 minutes?

 

[Bald Rick]

So do you mean to say that any reopening imaginable will be integrated into the government’s single Restoring Your Railway scheme to be progressed (or not)?

Restoring Your Railway is a badge for a budget. It is not a project in itself. But, essentially, yes - any reopening proposal will be coming through that budget.

I think the difference with the Project SPEED approach is that they actually gave funding to Okehampton instead of leaving it indefinitely on hold like most of the others.

The difference for Okehampton is that it had a strong case. Project SPEED, as I said earlier, is just a revised project development process - and its principles are being applied to most projects now. TRU uses it. So does MML electrification. Etc.

Due to the scale of the Burscough Curves compared even to Okehampton - Crediton, they wouldn’t require much funding at all and the track work could be completed within weeks if started. The signalling might take a bit longer, but this is why I find it so unacceptable for them to remain closed. If only a third of the billed schemes stand a chance of even being considered for being built, then why did they need 3 rounds?

It’s safe to say that they would need the same scale of funding as Okehampton.

The ‘three rounds’ of RYR were ideas to put into RYR, and were needed to give promoters time to build their case and get the necessary support, as some proposals had done more prep work than others. For obvious reasons DfT didn’t want all the old chestnuts to be proposed (again). Although of course most were.

Have you got any idea which ones are likely to be built and which aren’t, other than the Burscough Curves?

You can see for yourself which are the schemes that have been granted seed corn funding to be taken to the next stage of development, here:

Restoring your railway: successful bids - GOV.UK

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk

Anything else isn’t happening. You can find the full list of submissions, including those that were submitted twice, here:

Restoring Your Railway Fund: bids received

Listing of all the applications made in the various rounds of the Restoring Your Railway Fund.

www.gov.uk

For the sake of brevity, I have not included the lists in the post itself.


Of these 38 successful bids, my estimate is that only a third will proceed to the next stage. Two reasons - some of them , when studied, will be revealed to be poor cases (in my view most of them); and frankly the budget will run out both for building them and for operating the services.

 

[AntoniC]

I now have downloaded a 375/385 timetable and the 375 goes from Southport to Ormskirk via Bescar Church and the 385 goes from Southport to Ormskirk via Hurlston.

The 375 leaves Southport, Lord Street (Morrisons) at xx03 hours and arrives at Ormskirk bus station at xx46 hours ... Journey time 43 minutes
The 385 leaves Southport, Lord Street (Morrisons) at xx39 hours and arrives at Ormskirk bus station at xx16 hours ... Journey time 37 minutes.

What date was the timetable that you were using that says the journey took 77 minutes?

I was reading the timetable from Southport to Wigan - not to Ormskirk , I am silly

 

[bluenoxid]

So do you mean to say that any reopening imaginable will be integrated into the government’s single Restoring Your Railway scheme to be progressed (or not)? I think the difference with the Project SPEED approach is that they actually gave funding to Okehampton instead of leaving it indefinitely on hold like most of the others. Due to the scale of the Burscough Curves compared even to Okehampton - Crediton, they wouldn’t require much funding at all and the track work could be completed within weeks if started. The signalling might take a bit longer, but this is why I find it so unacceptable for them to remain closed. If only a third of the billed schemes stand a chance of even being considered for being built, then why did they need 3 rounds? Have you got any idea which ones are likely to be built and which aren’t, other than the Burscough Curves?

I’ve not yet seen anything that details how Project Speed has achieved the time and cost savings on Okehampton that I think I’ve heard.

RYR is not the only budget. City Deals are another budget that could be used.

Burscough Curves are a good two years away if a government minister sat down this morning and said deliver at all cost, which would effectively cut through bidding and the business case for the project.

It’s biggest problem is what is it? Is it the north curve, is it the south curve, is it both. Are the Merseyrails from Ormskirk terminating at Burscough, Southport or Preston? How much work needs to be done at Burscough? Where are all the extra trains coming from?

I don’t think anyone has really looked into the trackbeds and embankments on both curves since closure, which is several decades. You’ve also got the environmental studies to complete to make sure that everything from the wildlife to the carbon budget of build and operation is accounted for.

The line between Ormskirk and Burscough will need an upgrade and that could include a new power supply if 3rd rail is chosen. Even if battery supply is chosen, effort will need to be put in to effectively harden the area around Ormskirk to reduce the risk of accidental access to the track.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The line between Ormskirk and Burscough will need an upgrade and that could include a new power supply if 3rd rail is chosen. Even if battery supply is chosen, effort will need to be put in to effectively harden the area around Ormskirk to reduce the risk of accidental access to the track.

Why? It already has a train service, why would it having another train service (assuming not third rail) make it need more fences? That said, fences are fairly cheap.

 

[Bald Rick]

RYR is not the only budget. City Deals are another budget that could be used.

true, if it enabled a substantial amount of development, which I don’t see how this would. IIRC the city deals fund is also fully allocated.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A 3rd rail extension from Ormskirk to Burscough Bridge would be prohibited.

Batteries as per Headbolt Lane. Indeed, they are sort-of proposing to use batteries all the way to Preston!

 

[bluenoxid]

Why? It already has a train service, why would it having another train service (assuming not third rail) make it need more fences? That said, fences are fairly cheap.

I’ve not explained it well. It will need better boundary features (stronger fences)

The station would be reconfigured from two termini end to end to a through station, which would require a review and appropriate additional measures to cover the updated layout.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I’ve not explained it well. It will need better boundary features (stronger fences)

Why? But as I said fences are about the cheapest thing the railway can do - unlike all other aspects of railway engineering they are affordable for individuals to stick round their houses. Thus their cost is negligible compared with any other spending required.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

What is all this about 3 miles of track and a rebuilt station? The Burscough Curves are 66 chains of single track, that is less than 1 mile and all present stations can stay as they are. With the exceptions of Ormskirk and Burscough Junction where the 2nd platforms should be reopened, which is as much redoubling as just about amounts to 3 miles of new track. You wouldn’t have any DMUs on an even more truncated Preston - Burscough service because the 777s from Ormskirk and Southport would run through, requiring a few more of those but freeing up a few Sprinters. Quite a bit of signalling needs doing between Southport and Burscough Junction because there is no resiliency at present, or capacity for more services.

Is Wigan Wallgate not East of Kirkby? Of course by reopening the Burscough Curves, 4tph from Liverpool Central to Ormskirk can run through, half to Southport and half to Preston, as well as 2tph from Southport to Preston (some of which should continue to either Blackpool or Windermere) which is truly a new service. Surely this is transformative to rural communities as it gives 4tph from Rufford and Croston (and Midge Hall if reopened) to Preston and 6tph from Southport to Burscough Bridge, with more trains running through New Lane and Bescar Lane and to more destinations, giving more public transport options to the people who would otherwise be the most isolated, but the services remain viable because they directly serve 350000 people in major population centres.

And no 4tph via Hall Road is not good enough when there is a trespasser on the line at Seaforth several days in a row and no service is running at all. Surely a diversionary route via Ormskirk is a good idea and dare I suggest that any of the 90000 people who live in Southport might ever want to go to Aughton, Maghull, Aintree or Walton?

Why exactly are the residents of Southport, the 13th largest town in the North West (and also Formby, Hightown and Crosby who may change at Southport if they wish to go to Manchester) receiving 100% of the blame for “ruining” a timetable when this was caused by too many trains running through Castlefield from other places (e.g. Chester, Sheffield and other places which are accessible from the main shed at Piccadilly) and in any case it would be a vastly better experience to change at Bolton than Salford Crescent.

If the objection is to running Sprinters through Castlefield, then the problem is that the line to Southport has not been upgraded to allow 195s to run, not that people from Southport want to make a perfectly reasonable direct journey to Oxford Road, Piccadilly or Manchester Airport, which was possible for 20 or 30 years.

I particularly care about direct services to Ormskirk, as I’m sure all other residents of Southport with a need to travel to Ormskirk hospital and vice versa do. I went there yesterday on the bus for the first time in a while and after 20 minutes had passed since I left Eastbank Street I noticed that I still wasn’t anywhere near half way there but was stuck behind a tractor.

I don’t know who can seriously suggest buses as a reliable way to get from Southport to either Ormskirk, Preston or Aintree when the road infrastructure simply doesn’t permit a reasonable journey time and all but 66 chains of the required rail infrastructure is sitting there almost unused.

Interworking with Colne services did disastrously compromise the timekeeping of Ormskirk - Preston services, which is why they should interwork with Ormskirk - Liverpool services instead. I note that there is still 1 train a day at peak time which still runs from Colne to Ormskirk.

I believe there are 2 direct buses an hour, but you are right in that it can’ never be done by road in under 55 minutes, while quite often it can only be done in well over 55 minutes, with the buses frequently 25 minutes late from Liverpool which straight away makes it 80 minutes.

Except for the demand which is suppressed in journeys which are not attempted in order to avoid sitting in said traffic congestion. Southport is actually closer to Preston than Blackpool or Ormskirk and yet it takes over twice as long to get there.

Because it’s not news. It’s not even true that they’ve been rejected. The line to Okehampton has just reopened without funding from the Restoring Your Railway fund and note that there is no requirement to change at Crediton and wait for the next train from Barnstaple to Exeter!

Putting on an extra bus an hour only reduces the journey time if you include the wait by 10 minutes and if you don’t include the wait then not at all. What a waste of time thinking about.

The Burscough Curves very much fall into the same category as Colne - Skipton in that there was no case for lifting the track in the first place because they form a vital through route between significantly sized towns and the rural communities in between. In fact they could be reopened in conjunction with each other and you could run a through service from Southport to Skipton. I believe a Stagecoach bus did this once. Then the focus can shift to extending it to Ripon via Otley.

Fact check:
- Burscough to Southport does not support 6tph.
- Ormskirk to Preston does not support 4tph.
- It is not possible for 777s to go to Windermere or Blackpool to give a very small number of people a direct leisure journey to make every so often.
- A diversionary route as you call it via the Ormskirk line for Southport is not a sufficient reason to open the curve south towards Aintree, and a change of trains is not unreasonable.
- Southport hardly needs 195s when it doesn’t produce passenger numbers to warrant such a change, to therefore cause others to lose out.
- Trains cost a lot to run compared to buses, and suggestion that buses aren’t good enough is not sufficient reason to start running expensive, very subsidised trains on all these direct routes for a very small number of people to get to go direct. Buses from Southport to Ormskirk and Preston are totally fair ideas, and for the same subsidy and overall running cost of the trains you could get a lot of buses.
- As is already discussed, it’s an area of high car ownership so one could suggest if all aspects are addressed including half-hourly extensions for Kirkby to Wigan and Ormskirk to Preston of 777s, and people still aren’t served, then they should drive.
- A through service from Southport to Skipton sounds honestly ludicrous.

 

[bluenoxid]

Why? But as I said fences are about the cheapest thing the railway can do - unlike all other aspects of railway engineering they are affordable for individuals to stick round their houses. Thus their cost is negligible compared with any other spending required.

Increased train frequency
3rd rail could be extended for the overlap at Ormskirk
The buffer stop that marks the change and effectively provides a break/boundary would be removed

Comparing domestic and industrial installs of products is like comparing apples and pears.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Comparing domestic and industrial installs of products is like comparing apples and pears.

Fencing is still about the cheapest railway job going, and so the cost of it is de minimis compared with the station rebuilds, the Curves etc.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Nov 2021 ==

- Southport hardly needs 195s when it doesn’t produce passenger numbers to warrant such a change, to therefore cause others to lose out.

I suppose it depends what runs to Southport. If anything goes via Atherton, 195s should be used on that for Atherton's benefit. 2-car 195s (doubled up in the peaks) are ideal for Atherton and could enable a Merseyrail style all stations service without a slowdown.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I am beginning to suffer from not a little confusion, as the title of this thread was "Burscough curves turned down", yet there are postings on this thread that give the appearance that this is not the case and discussions ensue on how matters will go forward.

Can someone please clarify this matter for me.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It has turned somewhat speculative. I wonder if the thread should be moved to that forum instead; there wasn't really a lot to discuss about the actual announcement.

 

[Bald Rick]

I am beginning to suffer from not a little confusion, as the title of this thread was "Burscough curves turned down", yet there are postings on this thread that give the appearance that this is not the case and discussions ensue on how matters will go forward.

Can someone please clarify this matter for me.

Of course.

Burscough Curves was proposed through the “Ideas Fund” to the Restoring Your Railway programme. It was proposed in the first round, and turned down. It was subsequently proposed a second time in the third round (I assume with some additional information), and was turned down again.

The proposal therefore is not being taken forward with central Government funding.

There is a possibility that it could be taken forward with funding from another source - either a local authority, or a wealthy private benefactor. This would have to cover both the capital costs and also the operating costs (given that such a service would need subsidising). But if that was a serious proposition, it would presumably have already been indicated as a realistic possibility.

 

[507020]

The 375 leaves Southport, Lord Street (Morrisons) at xx03 hours and arrives at Ormskirk bus station at xx46 hours ... Journey time 43 minutes
The 385 leaves Southport, Lord Street (Morrisons) at xx39 hours and arrives at Ormskirk bus station at xx16 hours ... Journey time 37 minutes.

What date was the timetable that you were using that says the journey took 77 minutes?

What I was trying to say that whatever is timetabled, it is not possible for buses to keep to the timetable on the roads between Southport and Ormskirk due to local traffic congestion and there are massive fluctuations depending on the time of day. 77 minutes is a much more reasonable estimate than 37 minutes for the journey. When I last attempted it I was able to deduce using a simple stopwatch that it took well over 50 minutes and at its worst has taken me several hours.

I’ve not yet seen anything that details how Project Speed has achieved the time and cost savings on Okehampton that I think I’ve heard.

RYR is not the only budget. City Deals are another budget that could be used.

Burscough Curves are a good two years away if a government minister sat down this morning and said deliver at all cost, which would effectively cut through bidding and the business case for the project.

It’s biggest problem is what is it? Is it the north curve, is it the south curve, is it both. Are the Merseyrails from Ormskirk terminating at Burscough, Southport or Preston? How much work needs to be done at Burscough? Where are all the extra trains coming from?

I don’t think anyone has really looked into the trackbeds and embankments on both curves since closure, which is several decades. You’ve also got the environmental studies to complete to make sure that everything from the wildlife to the carbon budget of build and operation is accounted for.

The line between Ormskirk and Burscough will need an upgrade and that could include a new power supply if 3rd rail is chosen. Even if battery supply is chosen, effort will need to be put in to effectively harden the area around Ormskirk to reduce the risk of accidental access to the track.

It would have to be both curves, not just one or the other. Trains can terminate at Southport, Preston and Liverpool Central, not Ormskirk. The sum total of work is devegetation, 66 chains of track laying, 4 point faces, 2 crossovers if single track curves and a bit of signalling to run the extra trains. The extra rolling stock itself can be added to an order currently being built by Stadler.

I struggle to see how or why this would be years away if work started immediately after it has been possible to start a service to Okehampton within months of the initial announcement. I believe Network Rail have carried out early stage work on the embankments at Burscough as part of the GRIP process.

Fact check:
- Burscough to Southport does not support 6tph.
- Ormskirk to Preston does not support 4tph.
- It is not possible for 777s to go to Windermere or Blackpool to give a very small number of people a direct leisure journey to make every so often.
- A diversionary route as you call it via the Ormskirk line for Southport is not a sufficient reason to open the curve south towards Aintree, and a change of trains is not unreasonable.
- Southport hardly needs 195s when it doesn’t produce passenger numbers to warrant such a change, to therefore cause others to lose out.
- Trains cost a lot to run compared to buses, and suggestion that buses aren’t good enough is not sufficient reason to start running expensive, very subsidised trains on all these direct routes for a very small number of people to get to go direct. Buses from Southport to Ormskirk and Preston are totally fair ideas, and for the same subsidy and overall running cost of the trains you could get a lot of buses.
- As is already discussed, it’s an area of high car ownership so one could suggest if all aspects are addressed including half-hourly extensions for Kirkby to Wigan and Ormskirk to Preston of 777s, and people still aren’t served, then they should drive.
- A through service from Southport to Skipton sounds honestly ludicrous.

Does Liverpool Central to Kirkdale support 8tph or Manchester Piccadilly to Stockport 15tph? Burscough Bridge will get 6tph simply because it is located before the junctions for the Burscough Curves and all trains must pass through it to reach their destinations, whether Ormskirk, Wigan, Preston or anywhere beyond. Ormskirk to Preston will not be 4tph because this leaves no capacity for Ormskirk to Southport or Southport to Preston, which as a consequence gives 4tph from Rufford and Croston to Preston and 6tph from Meols Cop and Burscough Bridge to Southport, some of which calling at New Lane and Bescar Lane, perhaps on request, which would seem to encourage increased usage.

777s will not reach Windermere or Blackpool so any extended services would need to be run with 195s, battery 350/2s or other stock, but there were historically through trains from Southport to Windermere and even 1 a day or 1 a week would suffice. A change of trains to get from Southport to Maghull or Aintree may not be unreasonable but for operational reasons you wouldn’t have an extra unit and crew laying over at Ormskirk for the sake of not reinstating a few feet of track. Also the train from Southport must run onto the 3rd rail to charge its battery and cannot simply reverse at Ormskirk.

A 2 car 195 actually has less seating capacity than a 150 or 156 so to suggest that they are not justified because of passenger numbers is just nonsense, but why does Southport having something mean it has to be taken away from others? Why can 195s not be cascaded by electrification elsewhere for example?

The only reason buses are not good enough for Southport to Ormskirk or Preston is that the road journey times offered by single carriageways even on a direct route are absolutely ludicrous for such short distances and this suppresses demand on these corridors. If a rail based solution can offer a reliably 20 minute journey to Ormskirk and 30 minute journey to Preston then people will be more likely to attempt these journeys.

Increasing the frequency Ormskirk - Preston and Kirkby - Wigan does not go anywhere near addressing all aspects if you still haven’t built the Burscough Curves or a line to Skelmersdale. To travel to Skipton from anywhere to the west, including Southport, to go via Colne is a much more reasonable proposition than to have to double back via Leeds or Lancaster. The same applies to accessing the Settle - Carlisle line via Clitheroe. Okehampton being accessible by rail only from the east isn’t exactly ideal even when most places do happen to be east of Okehampton.

I suppose it depends what runs to Southport. If anything goes via Atherton, 195s should be used on that for Atherton's benefit. 2-car 195s (doubled up in the peaks) are ideal for Atherton and could enable a Merseyrail style all stations service without a slowdown.

The only reason 195s are not used on Southport services is that the doors foul the platforms at Meols Cop and no one will fund gauging work, leaving us stuck with 150s and 769s. Surely a through service from Southport to Buxton via Piccadilly is the most logical option if infrastructure work is ruled out since this line is also run entirely by Sprinters.

I am beginning to suffer from not a little confusion, as the title of this thread was "Burscough curves turned down", yet there are postings on this thread that give the appearance that this is not the case and discussions ensue on how matters will go forward.

Can someone please clarify this matter for me.

The Liverpool Echo published an article claiming that the Burscough Curves have been turned down when in reality this is not the case and they have only been refused funding under round 3 of the Restoring Your Railway ideas fund, but the reopening will still go ahead under alternative funding once this materialises because there is still an urgent need for them.

There is a possibility that it could be taken forward with funding from another source - either a local authority, or a wealthy private benefactor. This would have to cover both the capital costs and also the operating costs (given that such a service would need subsidising). But if that was a serious proposition, it would presumably have already been indicated as a realistic possibility.

What exactly would the operating costs be, including the savings from not having any layover at Ormskirk and how many passengers would both new services need a day to cover the? This number could then be increased by a percentage to cover the initial capital cost.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The only reason 195s are not used on Southport services is that the doors foul the platforms at Meols Cop and no one will fund gauging work, leaving us stuck with 150s and 769s. Surely a through service from Southport to Buxton via Piccadilly is the most logical option if infrastructure work is ruled out since this line is also run entirely by Sprinters.

And that has run before. But there's no point suggesting changes to the Castlefield services as the future of those has now been decided.

 

[507020]

And that has run before. But there's no point suggesting changes to the Castlefield services as the future of those has now been decided.

At least there has been a decision on Castlefield because the urgency in coming to one was recognised, but what Southport has got from it is half baked and gives no access to Piccadilly, Manchester Airport, Stockport or anywhere else (although Alderley Edge was beyond useless as a through service) eliminating connectivity which has existed for over 33 years (which I admit isn’t the same as the 166 years that services have run into Victoria but it’s still a loss) when what is needed is for more connectivity to be gained.

If only one of the Burscough Curves was done or services didn’t run through to Southport it would be just as bad and money would have been spent delivering something which is almost useless.

 

[Bald Rick]

I struggle to see how or why this would be years away if work started immediately after it has been possible to start a service to Okehampton within months of the initial announcement.

because work had been going on re Okehampton for a long time before the announcement.

I believe Network Rail have carried out early stage work on the embankments at Burscough as part of the GRIP process.

I’d be surprised if this was the case, as to my knowledge Burscough is not in any project development process - who would have paid for it? NR is not funded for this sort of thing.

The sum total of work is devegetation, 66 chains of track laying, 4 point faces, 2 crossovers if single track curves and a bit of signalling to run the extra trains. The extra rolling stock itself can be added to an order currently being built by Stadler.

which ever way you look at it, it will be the thick end of £50m. And for the avoidance of doubt, you don’t just rock up and lay track. There’s a lot of things that need doing first.

The Liverpool Echo published an article claiming that the Burscough Curves have been turned down when in reality this is not the case and they have only been refused funding under round 3 of the Restoring Your Railway ideas fund

I struggle to see how being refused funding is not the same as being turned down. What am I missing?

but the reopening will still go ahead under alternative funding once this materialises because there is still an urgent need for them.

so urgent that for my entire railway career, no organisation has come up with any reason to fund it. Where is this alternative funding coming from?

What exactly would the operating costs be, including the savings from not having any layover at Ormskirk and how many passengers would both new services need a day to cover the? This number could then be increased by a percentage to cover the initial capital cost.

if you can tell me exactly the difference in train service you proposed compared to today, I’ll give you a rough operating cost. Expect it to be several million pa.

 

[507020]

I’d be surprised if this was the case, as to my knowledge Burscough is not in any project development process - who would have paid for it? NR is not funded for this sort of thing.

I have been told that Network Rail have been seen at the site of the Burscough Curves and it is evident from visiting the north curve that large numbers of people have recently climbed up it. Is this not a sign of preliminary/exploratory work taking place to assess feasibility?

which ever way you look at it, it will be the thick end of £50m. And for the avoidance of doubt, you don’t just rock up and lay track. There’s a lot of things that need doing first.

If 13 miles of track can be laid from Crediton to Okehampton for £40m as well as doing all the other things that needed doing first, I’m sure that less than 1 mile can be done for well under that, let alone £50m, even if the cost per chain/yard is a lot higher because things need doing to the embankments.

I struggle to see how being refused funding is not the same as being turned down. What am I missing?

I can’t see how many reopening schemes if any at all can ever be turned down because the need for them will simply continue to exist until they are reopened in full.

if you can tell me exactly the difference in train service you proposed compared to today, I’ll give you a rough operating cost. Expect it to be several million pa.

In addition to 2tph Southport - Manchester, there will additionally be 2tph Southport - Preston and 2tph Southport - Ormskirk. There will be no layover at Ormskirk, with 4tph from Liverpool Central, 2tph can continue to Preston and 2tph can continue to Southport, giving 6tph through Burscough Bridge. The new services should be run by new battery 777s. What other details do you need from my proposal?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The Liverpool Echo published an article claiming that the Burscough Curves have been turned down when in reality this is not the case and they have only been refused funding under round 3 of the Restoring Your Railway ideas fund, but the reopening will still go ahead under alternative funding once this materialises because there is still an urgent need for them.

Who is providing this seemingly confirmed alternative funding that you refer to and when will it be in place?

 

[Bletchleyite]

In addition to 2tph Southport - Manchester, there will additionally be 2tph Southport - Preston and 2tph Southport - Ormskirk. There will be no layover at Ormskirk, with 4tph from Liverpool Central, 2tph can continue to Preston and 2tph can continue to Southport, giving 6tph through Burscough Bridge. The new services should be run by new battery 777s. What other details do you need from my proposal?

Yours is the premium suggestion. This is my budget one, which can always be expanded later:

• South Curve reinstated and Merseyrail extended using batteries via Burscough Jn to Burscough Bridge, 2tph. Single track retained. Additional reversing siding at Ormskirk plus signalling. Two additional 777 diagrams and the Ormskirk fleet needing to be battery fitted.
• Optionally, build Burscough Mill Dam Lane station as has been proposed for a while.
• North Curve reinstated, and a single unit Preston-Burscough Bridge service operated hourly. One 15x diagram removed.
• Direct line mothballed.
• Rebuild Burscough Bridge station to accommodate the reversals, ideally with new bay platforms on the present car parking though there are a few options. Pay Tesco for their car park to be used for rail users.

Though I do find the "new station at the crossover site and forget the Curves" an interesting option which would in many ways provide more for considerably less cost. If you did that and closed Junction, you would certainly want to build Mill Dam Lane. It's presently somewhat in the middle of a field, but housing development could be added around it at some point, and it's only about 0.5km from the village centre, and could accommodate a large car park. It might even be possible to slew the Ormskirk-Preston line over a bit using part of the trackbed of the Curves and make it slightly closer, as to do it you'd be building a new bridge anyway.

 

[urbophile]

What is the level of car ownership in the area under discussion? Not everyone is enamoured of public transport to the same extent as the Mayors of Liverpool and of Greater Manchester,

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Nov 2021 ==

I would be surprised if car ownership in those parts was far below 100% (one vehicle per household at any rate). I would be equally surprised if north Sefton (Crosby to Southport) was much less. But in the latter case people have access to a frequent and generally efficient rail service, which is well used. The cars might be sitting in garages and on driveways but if people have a choice of good alternatives they will use their cars less. Hence a bigger contribution towards saving the planet. In the West Lancs semi-rural, semi-suburban plain, there is little real alternative at present. For the sake of comparative coppers a lot could be done.

 

[Bald Rick]

I have been told that Network Rail have been seen at the site of the Burscough Curves and it is evident from visiting the north curve that large numbers of people have recently climbed up it. Is this not a sign of preliminary/exploratory work taking place to assess feasibility?

not at all. Of course, it could be, but that would be having a look round. And absolutely not all the ground investigations That would be needed.

If 13 miles of track can be laid from Crediton to Okehampton for £40m as well as doing all the other things that needed doing first, I’m sure that less than 1 mile can be done for well under that, let alone £50m, even if the cost per chain/yard is a lot higher because things need doing to the embankments.

see this thread for possible costs of reinstating a curve on railway land. And you’d need more power supply to get extra juice into all those battery units.

Hall Farm Curve

The Hall Farm Curve on the Lea Valley lines, linking the Chingford branch with the line from Stratford has come up again in local discussions. Here is an informal report back from a Waltham Forest Public Transport Consultation Group meeting held this week. An interesting...

www.railforums.co.uk

I can’t see how many reopening schemes if any at all can ever be turned down because the need for them will simply continue to exist until they are reopened in full.

you need to look harder. it’s been turned down. Of course that doesn’t stop someone trying again. And being turned down again.

In addition to 2tph Southport - Manchester, there will additionally be 2tph Southport - Preston and 2tph Southport - Ormskirk. There will be no layover at Ormskirk, with 4tph from Liverpool Central, 2tph can continue to Preston and 2tph can continue to Southport, giving 6tph through Burscough Bridge. The new services should be run by new battery 777s. What other details do you need from my proposal?

you’re looking at £2m a year for extra crew, about the same for lease and maintenance of another 8 new units. Then track access, plus all the ancillary costs that Go with running extra services and extra passengers. Call it around £5m a year. for comparison, the entire income for the whole Merseryrsil operation is a little over £50m Pre Covid.