Future of the Settle to Carlisle, Bentham and Ribble Valley lines

[InkyScrolls]

PLEASE don't let this turn into another discussion on the crappiness or otherwise of the 195s/331s

Don't mention the seats! I did once, think I got away with it.

He started it, he invaded Poland!

 

[70014IronDuke]

I haven't time to scroll back through the entire thread and reply to multiple points therein, but I would like to clarify some points regarding the line speed history of the S & C line:

(1) As far as I am aware, the line has never had a 90 mph limit. I have seen a 1960 London Midland Region Sectional Appendix, which shows 65 between Skipton and Hellifield (due no doubt to the contour-hugging curves of the Little North Western); 80 between Hellifield and Newbiggin (just North of the current Kirkby Thore signalbox) and 75 over the slightly more curvaceous section between there and London Road Junction, Carlisle.

As I remember when on the footplate one day in 1971, it was still 80 mph (from Settle Jcn?) to Appleby (with a 70 mph ? psr around Smardale, I think it was). I left the train at Appleby.

But I'm pretty sure @Senex, who is something of an MR expert, wrote some time ago that the line was designed as a 90 mph route.

How about this:-

• An additional late service at 2256 from Carlisle to Appleby, all stops, arriving at 2338. ECS back to Carlisle for 0025

Well, I expect some in the Eden Valley station would appreciate a later service from Carlisle (has there ever been one previously? I dont think so), but I wonder if

a) you are not being too stuck on running clock-face here, and a 22.30 departure would be quite late enough and/or
b) if this service could be justified at all, given the additional costs involved - in terms of crewing on a late shift and, possibly, signal box shifts? (I don't know, are the boxes involved manned 24 hrs a day?).

I also wonder if it would rapidly become one of those trains that conductor guards might prefer to avoid working, especially on a Friday, Saturday night.

• An additional morning peak service for Settle departing ECS from Skipton at 0625, turn at Blea Moor c. 0657, and departing Settle in service at 0723. This would run SET-HLD-SKI-KEI-BIY-SHY-LDS, arriving at 0820, which would allow it to run ahead of the service from Lancaster due into Leeds at 0836

The main disadvantage of this is there being an odd number of unit movements (the extra Settle morning service requiring a unit to move from Skipton to Leeds) but this could be dealt with through attaching the extra two-car 158 to the rear of the 2019 LDS to LAN, to be detached at SKI (for example).

Are you making the 06.57 ex-Blea Moor only a two-car? I think the current train is normally four-car, only sometimes a three-car, but rarely two. I assume it's usually the fullest train of the day by the time it leaves Gargrave.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is quite common for first and last trains to be off pattern, often to make them a bit earlier or later for better utility. This isn't that much of an issue as people will check the timetable when travelling very early or very late anyway.

 

[D6130]

But I'm pretty sure @Senex, who is something of an MR expert, wrote some time ago that the line was designed as a 90 mph route.

It was certainly designed and engineered as a fast route by the standards of the day....but when it opened in 1876 I suspect that there were few locos - especially given the Midland's small engine policy - that would be capable of sustained 90 mph running, even going downgrade. If there were, I don't think any locos were fitted with speedometers in those days and the drivers and firemen probably had more important things to do than count rail joints or telegraph poles while peering at their pocket watches. Having seen facsimiles of pre-WW2 sectional appendices from various companies, ISTR that overall maximum line speeds were not specified for main line routes....only permanent restrictions for sharp curves, junctions and low speed branch lines.

 

[70014IronDuke]

It was certainly designed and engineered as a fast route by the standards of the day....but when it opened in 1876 I suspect that there were few locos - especially given the Midland's small engine policy - that would be capable of sustained 90 mph running, even going downgrade. If there were, I don't think any locos were fitted with speedometers in those days and the drivers and firemen probably had more important things to do than count rail joints or telegraph poles while peering at their pocket watches. Having seen facsimiles of pre-WW2 sectional appendices from various companies, ISTR that overall maximum line speeds were not specified for main line routes....only permanent restrictions for sharp curves, junctions and low speed branch lines.

Yes, all fair points. And I doubt the schedules in 1962-3, ie in the final steam years, demanded much over 75 mph on the expresses, even on the downhill sections.

 

[randyrippley]

Lancaster-Morecambe-Heysham needs to be split from the Leeds service and instead treated as part of the Windermere / Barrow group using the same electric/hybrid solution they finally get. Ideally some early morning / evening services would run to/from Liverpool providing a commuter service

As for the Bentham line, last time I checked the morning service into Lancaster was useless for work commuting

 

[D6130]

As for the Bentham line, last time I checked the morning service into Lancaster was useless for work commuting

2H03, the 06 41 Bradford Forster Square to Carnforth, arrives at 08 26 and connects with 1U93, 07 47 from Barrow, which departs Carnforth at 08 37 and arrives Lancaster at 08 44.

 

[randyrippley]

2H03, the 06 41 Bradford Forster Square to Carnforth, arrives at 08 26 and connects with 1U93, 07 47 from Barrow, which departs Carnforth at 08 37 and arrives Lancaster at 08 44.

better than I thought but still not really good enough especially if the next step is a bus or a walk across town.
Arrival needs to be ~08:20

 

[Bletchleyite]

better than I thought but still not really good enough especially if the next step is a bus or a walk across town.
Arrival needs to be ~08:20

Lancaster is tiny, but it indeed isn't early enough for the out of town uni or most retail work.

 

[Grumpy]

2H03, the 06 41 Bradford Forster Square to Carnforth, arrives at 08 26 and connects with 1U93, 07 47 from Barrow, which departs Carnforth at 08 37 and arrives Lancaster at 08 44.

I believe the Bradford arrival then eventually runs to Lancaster ecs after delay at Carnforth. Cant understand why it wouldn't run straight through and be advertised to Lancaster- hardly anyone on these trains is going to Carnforth

 

[Starmill]

I believe the Bradford arrival then eventually runs to Lancaster ecs after delay at Carnforth. Cant understand why it wouldn't run straight through and be advertised to Lancaster- hardly anyone on these trains is going to Carnforth

Because the service to Manchester Airport overtakes it and gets to Lancaster first?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Aug 2022 ==

Lancaster is tiny, but it indeed isn't early enough for the out of town uni or most retail work.

Who is going to be living in Bentham and getting a job in retail in Lancaster? Wennington has around 20 houses. Low Bentham doesn't even have a station. I'm really not sure there's a use case here. Wheras for connections to Manchester, Birmingham and London there perhaps is.

 

[Grumpy]

Because the service to Manchester Airport overtakes it and gets to Lancaster first?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Aug 2022 ==

My point being run it straight through so as to get to Lancaster first.

Who is going to be living in Bentham and getting a job in retail in Lancaster? Wennington has around 20 houses. Low Bentham doesn't even have a station. I'm really not sure there's a use case here.

This nicely sums up the whole problem with the line-it doesn't serve anywhere likely to generate the passenger numbers to make it worthwhile. It would make more sense to shut the line and run some trains from Leeds to Morecambe via Bradford, the Calder Valley and Preston

 

[Bletchleyite]

This nicely sums up the whole problem with the line-it doesn't serve anywhere likely to generate the passenger numbers to make it worthwhile. It would make more sense to shut the line and run some trains from Leeds to Morecambe via Bradford, the Calder Valley and Preston

I reckon there's at least one person who lives in Bentham and works in Lancaster, though the uni is more likely and that's poorly served by rail and out of town with a car park. It's actually quite likely that the most economically and societally beneficial way of that person (or two maybe) getting to work is in a small electric car, even better if there is more than one and they share it.

I'd agree the line serves very little purpose (and a properly integrated* bus could do better as it could run via the villages and not away from them), and I'm not sure direct services to Morecambe are needed at all.

Perhaps WCRC might run it as a preserved line?

* If only. The UK's** inability to do this means I don't support closures, but we really should buck our ideas up about it as it would allow considerably more useful services on some routes at a considerably lower cost.
** Even Wales and Scotland seem unable to do it despite having far more tendered than commercial bus routes. It's about more than having a bus stop at the station (though that is handy).

 

[Ken H]

My point being run it straight through so as to get to Lancaster first.

This nicely sums up the whole problem with the line-it doesn't serve anywhere likely to generate the passenger numbers to make it worthwhile. It would make more sense to shut the line and run some trains from Leeds to Morecambe via Bradford, the Calder Valley and Preston

I knew a bloke who commuted from Giggleswick to lancaster - long retired now. But another lady who does the same commute. Nurse at the Infirmary. Gets the crack of dawn train. I believe she walks from the station to the informary.

 

[Starmill]

My point being run it straight through so as to get to Lancaster first.

It cannot do so. It would conflict with the 0630 Glasgow Central to London Euston which passes by at 0833 and arrives at Lancaster at 0838. There is no chance of retiming this train later to accommodate. If the train waited in the platform at Carnforth for 5 minutes for this to pass, it would then hold up the service behind it coming from Barrow-in-Furness.

 

[zwk500]

Perhaps WCRC might run it as a preserved line?

WCRC wouldn't even think of taking on the maintenance liability.

Aside from WCRC, is there any freight traffic over the line? Although the charters would be miffed as hell, if closing the line is actually a viable option then it should be seriously considered. Extend the Clitheroe terminators to Hellifield for connections to Preston and Lancs, then you can run a regular hourly Leeds-Carlisle (probably with most stations 1tph2h). The maintenance savings at Carnforth and Settle Junction would also presumably be fairly noticeable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

WCRC wouldn't even think of taking on the maintenance liability.

Is there much? Only one tunnel that I can see.

 

[zwk500]

Is there much? Only one tunnel that I can see.

Still all the track etc but regardless. If its £0.01 you can bet your bottom dollar WCRC will not be taking it on. Its not like they'd make money with access charges.

 

[Ken H]

WCRC wouldn't even think of taking on the maintenance liability.

Aside from WCRC, is there any freight traffic over the line? Although the charters would be miffed as hell, if closing the line is actually a viable option then it should be seriously considered. Extend the Clitheroe terminators to Hellifield for connections to Preston and Lancs, then you can run a regular hourly Leeds-Carlisle (probably with most stations 1tph2h). The maintenance savings at Carnforth and Settle Junction would also presumably be fairly noticeable.

Settle Jct could be rationalised. Its basically a facing crossover and a turnout from the down line towards Gig. Operate it from a screen in Hellifield box. manning it for 2-3 shifts must be expensive.

 

[zwk500]

Settle Jct could be rationalised. Its basically a facing crossover and a turnout from the down line towards Gig. Operate it from a screen in Hellifield box. manning it for 2-3 shifts must be expensive.

If you're getting rid of the junction entirely, I'd just make them Intermediate Block signals of the ones either side. If you're moving it as far as Hellifield you'd probably just do it properly and resignal Hellifield-Settle into Manchester ROC.

 

[Grumpy]

It cannot do so. It would conflict with the 0630 Glasgow Central to London Euston which passes by at 0833 and arrives at Lancaster at 0838. There is no chance of retiming this train later to accommodate. If the train waited in the platform at Carnforth for 5 minutes for this to pass, it would then hold up the service behind it coming from Barrow-in-Furness.

Well couldn't you run the train from Bradford, and the subsequent run to Lancaster, a few minutes earlier?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Aug 2022 ==

I'm not sure direct services to Morecambe are needed at all.

The proposed development of the Eden Project North at Morecambe, not far from the railway station, should create a new market for rail passengers from West Yorkshire (and indeed other conurbations in the North).

 

[Starmill]

Well couldn't you run the train from Bradford, and the subsequent run to Lancaster, a few minutes earlier?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Aug 2022 ==


The proposed development of the Eden Project North at Morecambe, not far from the railway station, should create a new market for rail passengers from West Yorkshire (and indeed other conurbations in the North).

From Bradford Forster Square to Skipton, no. It needs to leave Bradford Forster Square behind the 0630 to London Kings Cross and depart from Shipley ahead of the 0626 Leeds to Skipton.

However if your implied question is can it be split up at Skipton again, the answer is... maybe. You will have to find another electric unit to cover the Bradford Forster Square to Skipton service. I have no idea if there would be one. It might be possible to depart from Skipton at 0705 and depart from Lancaster at 0810. But platform 3 at Skipton does not become available until after the departure at 0701. Furthermore you would need to add 20 minutes to the driver and conductor's day. Possibly more for the driver if they also need to bring the train from Leeds empty. I do not know if this would be possible. You would think that they considered precisely this when this service was introduced less than two years ago.

 

[yorksrob]

My point being run it straight through so as to get to Lancaster first.

This nicely sums up the whole problem with the line-it doesn't serve anywhere likely to generate the passenger numbers to make it worthwhile. It would make more sense to shut the line and run some trains from Leeds to Morecambe via Bradford, the Calder Valley and Preston

They would have difficulty picking up the many passengers at places like Skipton and Bingly who seem to use the line to go West.

The line has perfectly healthy loadings most of the time, and anyone using it regularly would know that.

 

[zwk500]

The line has perfectly healthy loadings most of the time, and anyone using it regularly would know that.

What does 'perfectly healthy' mean in terms of numbers and fares? just wondering. A well-loaded 2-car unit is still a small actual number.

 

[XAM2175]

What does 'perfectly healthy' mean in terms of numbers and fares? just wondering. A well-loaded 2-car unit is still a small actual number.

"Perfectly healthy loadings" from that poster means "precisely the number of passengers needed to validate my opinion"

 

[61653 HTAFC]

What does 'perfectly healthy' mean in terms of numbers and fares? just wondering. A well-loaded 2-car unit is still a small actual number.

One could suppose that if a 2-car DMU every 2-3 hours is loading to around 75%, an increase in frequency to hourly could potentially induce further demand. However this does depend on the catchment population of the intermediate stops. None of the places along what I always called "the Little Northwestern" are particularly large, so I'm not sure how much growth potential there is in that case.

 

[Ken H]

One could suppose that if a 2-car DMU every 2-3 hours is loading to around 75%, an increase in frequency to hourly could potentially induce further demand. However this does depend on the catchment population of the intermediate stops. None of the places along what I always called "the Little Northwestern" are particularly large, so I'm not sure how much growth potential there is in that case.

Giggleswick does get some traffic from Settle and upper Ribblesdale towards Lancaster. But I am not sure how integrated the 581 buses are with the trains. Its a longish walk to settle. (We use Hellifield for trips east so we have a choice of Carlisle or Lancaster/Morecambe trains)
Bentham is a small market town so should generate some traffic. It is also railhead for Ingleton. Its bus service to Lancaster has been decimated recently with the withdrawal of Stagecoach from the Lune valley,
Clapham and Wennington cant do much business.

 

[yorksrob]

What does 'perfectly healthy' mean in terms of numbers and fares? just wondering. A well-loaded 2-car unit is still a small actual number.

"Perfectly healthy loadings" from that poster means "precisely the number of passengers needed to validate my opinion"

Or in the real world, almost every double seat taken.

Quite why every discussion of the Bentham line seems to turn into a sort of Beeching fantasy fest.

 

[Starmill]

Or in the real world, almost every double seat taken.

Quite why every discussion of the Bentham line seems to turn into a sort of Beeching fantasy fest.

To be fair, I haven't actually seen anyone arguing for total closure of the route. Also few people have suggested cutting the service back from current levels. But people are pointing out that service improvements would be expensive, and that the money would be better spent on other routes which are busier.

 

[yorksrob]

To be fair, I haven't actually seen anyone arguing for total closure of the route. Also few people have suggested cutting the service back from current levels. But people are pointing out that service improvements would be expensive, and that the money would be better spent on other routes which are busier.

Au contraire, as usual, people are explicitly suggesting closure:

My point being run it straight through so as to get to Lancaster first.

This nicely sums up the whole problem with the line-it doesn't serve anywhere likely to generate the passenger numbers to make it worthwhile. It would make more sense to shut the line and run some trains from Leeds to Morecambe via Bradford, the Calder Valley and Preston

I reckon there's at least one person who lives in Bentham and works in Lancaster, though the uni is more likely and that's poorly served by rail and out of town with a car park. It's actually quite likely that the most economically and societally beneficial way of that person (or two maybe) getting to work is in a small electric car, even better if there is more than one and they share it.

I'd agree the line serves very little purpose (and a properly integrated* bus could do better as it could run via the villages and not away from them), and I'm not sure direct services to Morecambe are needed at all.

Perhaps WCRC might run it as a preserved line?

* If only. The UK's** inability to do this means I don't support closures, but we really should buck our ideas up about it as it would allow considerably more useful services on some routes at a considerably lower cost.
** Even Wales and Scotland seem unable to do it despite having far more tendered than commercial bus routes. It's about more than having a bus stop at the station (though that is handy).