Speculation: Services which don't exist yet but likely to in future

[Clansman]

As the title says. I have been thinking a lot about this when I have read various proposals for line reopenings. And the Scarborough LNER thread got me pondering this further.

St Andrews comes to mind with cross border services should it ever reopen - which may or may not also give an opportunity for Dunfermline perhaps if the case was strong enough.

An existing one which I forsee being extended is the morning Stirling-KX service to Perth iver the next decade, or, as the other thread alludes, Scarborough too.

Any other examples whether it'd be existing or proposed routes?

 

[najaB]

London Crossrail.

St Andrews comes to mind with cross border services should it ever reopen - which may or may not also give an opportunity for Dunfermline perhaps if the case was strong enough.

Problem with St Andrews is that the old junction faced the wrong direction, and I don't know how feasible a new alignment would be.

 

[hexagon789]

Problem with St Andrews is that the old junction faced the wrong direction, and I don't know how feasible a new alignment would be.

The solution to that would be to re-open the entire Fife Coast line from St Andrews to Thornton Junction via Anstruther and Creil! No problem with the Junction facing the wrong way then...

An existing one which I forsee being extended is the morning Stirling-KX service to Perth iver the next decade,

I could see that happening, I often wonder why they didn't start it at Perth but perhaps in a path that passes Stirling approximately one hour later.

 

[TXMISTA]

Portishead - Bristol, hopefully in the next few years but the pessimist in me says it won’t happen before 2030.

 

[najaB]

I could see that happening, I often wonder why they didn't start it at Perth but perhaps in a path that passes Stirling approximately one hour later.

Is it as simple as that it can run as electric all the way, rather than having to run on diesel, meaning they can use either an 800 or 801?

 

[hexagon789]

Is it as simple as that it can run as electric all the way, rather than having to run on diesel, meaning they can use either an 800 or 801?

Would make sense, given it did run as a IC225 set albeit briefly after the OLE was extended to Dunblane.

In fact it appears to be booked an 801, so that answers that it would seem.

 

[fgwrich]

Salisbury > Southampton > Fawley if the Salisbury 6 is split up with the proposed opening of the Fawley branch to passenger services (which at this rate might overtake Portishead).

 

[zwk500]

Salisbury > Southampton > Fawley if the Salisbury 6 is split up with the proposed opening of the Fawley branch to passenger services (which at this rate might overtake Portishead).

Who was proposing to run the Salisbury train to Fawley? You'd either need to reverse at Southampton Central or go the longer way round over the Chandlers Ford Single line and Eastleigh jns.

 

[Whistler40145]

Who was proposing to run the Salisbury train to Fawley? You'd either need to reverse at Southampton Central or go the longer way round over the Chandlers Ford Single line and Eastleigh jns.

The direct route from Salisbury to Fawley via Southampton Central wouldn't require any reversals

 

[507020]

Southport - Preston (or beyond - Blackpool/Windermere) and Southport - Ormskirk - Liverpool Central via the Burscough curves

 

[Peter0124]

I hope Newton-Uddingston/Bellshill is made possible again, build two new platforms at Newton on the mainlines please!

 

[Whistler40145]

I hope Newton-Uddingston/Bellshill is made possible again, build two new platforms at Newton on the mainlines please!

Wouldn't that cause a bottleneck for Avanti West Coast and Transpennine Express services?

 

[zwk500]

The direct route from Salisbury to Fawley via Southampton Central wouldn't require any reversals

If you route the Salisbury trains via Eastleigh then you increase the journey time for passengers to Southampton Central. SWR are very keen to decrease journey times between Salisbury and Southampton. You'd also be left trying to tie the Fawley branch pattern into the gaps determined by the Romsey Rockets.

 

[Halish Railway]

Given how the remodelling of Huddersfield as part of TRU only leaves one east facing bay platform, I’d say that it’s likely that there will be an all stations Leeds to Manchester Victoria via Huddersfield all stations service.

 

[Peter0124]

Wouldn't that cause a bottleneck for Avanti West Coast and Transpennine Express services?

Not really as they don't pass by at similar times, it would be like a similar stop to Cambuslang/Uddingston as they would use the (I wish) newly built platforms. They could then be retimed to avoid being ran in-front of faster services of course.

 

[A S Leib]

Gospel Oak - Barking Riverside

Abbey Wood / Shenfield - Heathrow / Reading

 

[PTR 444]

If you route the Salisbury trains via Eastleigh then you increase the journey time for passengers to Southampton Central. SWR are very keen to decrease journey times between Salisbury and Southampton. You'd also be left trying to tie the Fawley branch pattern into the gaps determined by the Romsey Rockets.

Could you not split the Romsey Rounder in a way that keeps the direct Salisbury - Southampton section via Redbridge, while the Southampton - Romsey via Eastleigh section gets bolted onto an extension of the Fawley service?

 

[zwk500]

Could you not split the Romsey Rounder in a way that keeps the direct Salisbury - Southampton section via Redbridge, while the Southampton - Romsey via Eastleigh section gets bolted onto an extension of the Fawley service?

The problem with doing so is that you then end up with 2 trains aiming for the same path between Southampton and Redbridge. The Salisbury service would also need a platform slot at Southampton to bridge the gap between inwards and outwards workings, but can't be timed solely around that end because of everything else running between Romsey and Salisbury.

EDIT: I think discussion of specifically how Fawley might be served has had at last one thread, and somewhat distracts from the OP's question. I would say it is very likely that a service between Southampton Central and the Waterside/Fawley Branch will operate in the next 2-5 years, but where it originates and how far down the branch it gets are still open questions.

 

[Wynd]

Montrose services extended to Peterhead via Dyce.

 

[bluenoxid]

Ashington - Newcastle Upon Tyne

 

[bramling]

Ashington - Newcastle Upon Tyne

The interesting question with Ashington is whether it will ever go further - either looping back to Morpeth, or continuing to Newbiggin.

Newbiggin isn’t a big place, but equally the amount of work required to reach there appears fairly minimal.

 

[PTR 444]

• Barnstaple - Exeter services extended to Axminster
• All Exmouth - Paignton trains calling at Polsloe Bridge and St James’s Park (as opposed to 1 out of 2tph now)

 

[najaB]

Newbiggin isn’t a big place, but equally the amount of work required to reach there appears fairly minimal.

I don't know the area at all, but from a quick "Google Maps Survey" it looks like the big problem is the height difference between the existing line and Newbiggin. You'd likely have to branch off before the A189 and that introduces a level crossing.

 

[bramling]

I don't know the area at all, but from a quick "Google Maps Survey" it looks like the big problem is the height difference between the existing line and Newbiggin. You'd likely have to branch off before the A189 and that introduces a level crossing.

You’re right there is a height difference at the point the current power station route passes over the A189. I’m not convinced it’s a massive issue though- branch off before the A189, bridge over the A189 and then graded embankment down, or junction after the A189 and same. From what I can tell from old maps, the original Newbiggin route bridged the A189, though it isn’t clear whether todays road is at the same level as it was then.

I suspect the biggest cost would be signalling, especially if the power station still needs to be served. Likewise whether the relatively small size of Newbiggin, and fairly limited parkway potential, justifies it. But it seems so tantalisingly close…

In the case of Newbiggin I suspect it will happen eventually.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Is this thread a rehash of the perennial "What lines would you like to re-open?" forum favourite?

Or maybe is it what services could/should be linked together or extended or created so as to offer worthwhile new / alternative travel opportunities, with a fairly minimum requirement for any new infrastructure?

 

[xotGD]

Colne to Manchester
Bradford to Sheffield
Liverpool to the south west and south coast
Bradford to Manchester Airport
Leicester to anywhere north of Sheffield
Castleford to York
Nottingham to Glasgow via S&C

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Colne to Manchester
Bradford to Sheffield
Liverpool to the south west and south coast
Bradford to Manchester Airport
Leicester to anywhere north of Sheffield
Castleford to York
Nottingham to Glasgow via S&C

None of those are likely

 

[Fokx]

Given how the remodelling of Huddersfield as part of TRU only leaves one east facing bay platform, I’d say that it’s likely that there will be an all stations Leeds to Manchester Victoria via Huddersfield all stations service.

I wouldn’t read too much into that as platforms are likely to be longer and Bi-directional (the same way that 4a/b is currently used).

You’re more likely to see the pre-covid plan of a Manchester to Wakefield and a Leeds to Huddersfield for reliability and capacity (at Leeds) reasons

 

[A S Leib]

None of those are likely

One train a day from Leeds to Scarborough already passes through Castleford; is there no demand at all from Castleford to York, or is it just that, at least theoretically, changing at Leeds should be good enough?

 

[YorksLad12]

Given how the remodelling of Huddersfield as part of TRU only leaves one east facing bay platform, I’d say that it’s likely that there will be an all stations Leeds to Manchester Victoria via Huddersfield all stations service.

I wouldn’t read too much into that as platforms are likely to be longer and Bi-directional (the same way that 4a/b is currently used).

You’re more likely to see the pre-covid plan of a Manchester to Wakefield and a Leeds to Huddersfield for reliability and capacity (at Leeds) reasons

Indeed. When you think about it, there's only really one east-facing bay at the moment as P5 is too short for anything except a Pacer (RIP) or 150. The new P5 will be used the same way as the current P4, which will become the new P3.

One train a day from Leeds to Scarborough already passes through Castleford; is there no demand at all from Castleford to York, or is it just that, at least theoretically, changing at Leeds should be good enough?

There's no demand, but there are demands. "We've got a new platform 2, we must invent services to use it." If the curve from Pontefract Monkhill to Baghill hadn't been partially built on you could have diverted the Sheffield-York services (such as they are) via Pontefract and Castleford, which would have been a way to determine demand.