Should Skipton to Colne reopen with single track ?

[Halifaxlad]

Considering the current financial situation, would you rather (if you support it of course) reopen Skipton to Colne single track (with a passing loop if needed) with provision for double tracking later or double track all the way from Burnley from day 1 ?

 

[bluenoxid]

I don’t believe the scheme has many merits for the money required

It depends on service provision and timetable. An hourly passenger only service terminating at Skipton with an infrequent freight path is different to a half hourly service with hourly freight path.

One of the interesting issues will be running round the Rhylstone trains at Skipton station.

 

[zwk500]

What service would the line reasonably support? That's the first question - then you ask whether you need 1 or 2 tracks to run it.

 

[Bertie the bus]

There isn't going to be a day 1.

 

[cle]

Yep I don't really get how it would be used. It's kind of from nowhere to nowhere. And you can't build substantial 'new' railway for low frequency - it's not reinstating a curve for example.

Manchester to Skipton via Blackburn? A loop around to Bradford/Leeds? There isn't even Manchester to Nelson/Colne, and those are Lancs towns, with likely more demand - but zero service.

 

[Bald Rick]

The poll doesn’t seem to have a ‘no tracks’ option.

(Considering the current financial situation)

 

[Halifaxlad]

The poll doesn’t seem to have a ‘no tracks’ option.

(Considering the current financial situation)

The whole point is around 'if it is to be built' having a no tracks option didn't seem neccessary.

 

[zwk500]

The whole point is around 'if it is to be built' having a no tracks option didn't seem neccessary.

The board is called 'Speculative' not 'Fantasy' though. There's no serious discussion to be had unless you allow mention of the fact that this line is dead and it isn't coming back within our lifetimes.

 

[Bald Rick]

The whole point is around 'if it is to be built' having a no tracks option didn't seem neccessary.

Sorry, I was being unnecessarily facetious.

I would be interested in seeing what people think, in the fantasy world where this new line is built.

What is certain is that if it was proposed as a single track, there would be howls of ‘do the job properly’ etc.

it is often forgotten (conveniently or not) by those who propose this line that the line south of Colne is single line, and therefore a constraint on capacity regardless of how many tracks there are on the new section.

 

[Bertie the bus]

it is often forgotten (conveniently or not) by those who propose this line that the line south of Colne is single line, and therefore a constraint on capacity regardless of how many tracks there are on the new section.

That doesn't appear to be the only thing they have forgotten. I had a quick look at SELRAP's website and they claim:

In just one stride, this project will bridge the 'missing public transport link' - by joining the hearts of six big but isolated East Lancashire towns straight into the centre of into Leeds and beyond.​

They don't name the 6 large East Lancs towns but I'm assuming they include Blackburn, Accrington and Burnley and they already have direct trains to Leeds.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

They don't name the 6 large East Lancs towns but I'm assuming they include Blackburn, Accrington and Burnley and they already have direct trains to Leeds.

Burnley, Brierfield (maybe?), Nelson and Colne and then I'm struggling.

 

[Neptune]

I was hoping that the Colne - Skipton fantasy had gone away as it’s been a few months since the last discussion but just like Christmas it comes around again and let me say that nothing has changed since last time.

If it was suddenly more viable as a single track with passing loops it kills off the pie in the sky suggestion that it can become a core transpennine freight route which was a hilarious suggestion in the first place.

The whole thing isn’t helped by the promoters various wild claims on their website which suggests that East Lancashire has no rail links to Bradford or Leeds (check a map). They also claimed that Colne to Leeds could be done in an hour (from memory) which is absolute bull as well unless they’re planning non stop trains. They do not acknowledge that the Aire Valley route is a busy route and seem to believe that all these transpennine freights will fit seamlessly onto the route.

I said before that they’d be better looking at campaigning for a second service from West Yorkshire to East Lancs perhaps by extending the Hull - Halifax service to Blackburn calling at Rose Grove to connect with Colne line trains as they do with the Man Vic to Blackburn service. That would also give them direct links to East Yorkshire.

That might still be a difficult one to achieve but far more realistic than this effort to draw pretty lines on maps. Just because something used to be there doesn’t mean it should be.

If anyone’s in any doubt I’d vote for no tracks but the choice doesn’t exist.

 

[bluenoxid]

Why is road, guided busway, non guided busway and all weather bridleway also not considered?

I was hoping that the Colne - Skipton fantasy had gone away as it’s been a few months since the last discussion but just like Christmas it comes around again and let me say that nothing has changed since last time.

The group is ploughing on and I am advised (by people who appear to support the project) that they are meeting the DfT at regular intervals and the business cases are being progressed.

 

[zwk500]

The group is ploughing on and I am advised (by people who appear to support the project) that they are meeting the DfT at regular intervals and the business cases are being progressed.

It doesn't cost the dft much to have a monthly meeting, and a business case being progressed does not mean it will come out with a positive number.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

It doesn't cost the dft much to have a monthly meeting, and a business case being progressed does not mean it will come out with a positive number.

Hit the nail on the head there ! (in any cases , this field has been well ploughed in the past in any case) - see posts "passim"

 

[quantinghome]

Considering the current financial situation, would you rather (if you support it of course) reopen Skipton to Colne single track (with a passing loop if needed) with provision for double tracking later or double track all the way from Burnley from day 1 ?

Depends what 'provision for double tracking' means. Once you've built all your bridges, earthworks etc to take double track, there's not much saving to be made. Loops may be more expensive operationally as Colne-Skipton is short enough to run as a single signal section.

 

[Halifaxlad]

The board is called 'Speculative' not 'Fantasy' though. There's no serious discussion to be had unless you allow mention of the fact that this line is dead and it isn't coming back within our lifetimes.

Excuse, but considering the past couple of years that presumably you have also being living through it is reasonable to question the magnitude any such reopening project should go to all in one go!

 

[zwk500]

Excuse, but considering the past couple of years that presumably you have also being living through it is reasonable to question the magnitude any such reopening project should go to all in one go!

I'm not entirely clear what you're suggesting here, tbh. It's reasonable to question how a project should be built only once you've established it would be reasonable to run anything in the first place. Skipton-Colne does not pass this first test.

I've been directly involved in 2 Railway reopening projects in the last 3 years. One of them is open for public consultation right now. I have also been involved in numerous other early-stage proposals for new/reopened lines (and in one case, reopening a line that never actually opened!). On each occasion we have started by establishing if there is demand for the service, then what the service provision will look like. Then and only then does the question get asked about what infrastructure is required to support the service.
Only if the answer to part 3 is 'more than is sensible to pay for' do you start looking at what compromises can be made to achieve a cost-effective proposal.

So, to propose an answer to your question, can you tell me what service you are proposing for this reopening, and what the potential service could look like in 30 years (the lifetime of the infrastructure assets). We'll ignore the cost/benefit and economic analysis for now, to give you half a chance.

 

[WAO]

The establishment of demand for a restored service (by any mode) is not always simple when it is only potential. The North Lancashire towns now have a rail link to Yorkshire via the Copy Pit line which is direct and has had investment. However the geography of the area is like South Wales; the settlements are mostly strung along valley bottoms (hence the floods). These are quite densely populated and have suffered loss of industry, so may have low economic activity at present, although this might be stimulated by a new transport link. The proposal therefore comes down to linking by rail the eastern Pendle Valley with the Aire Valley towns. The Yorkshire towns are more prosperous and have quite high rail usage showing how prescient was the WYPTE Chair who drove the North Leeds Electrification in the 1990's. Whether there is synergy attaching the Lancashire towns to this is the point in question - I don't have the answer. From my experience of the Ukfield - Lewes scheme 15 or so years ago, I don't think a NR project could ever be viable as it would be over-engineered, possibly unavoidably.

I don't think that we should decry local efforts (often with effective political lobbying) towards reviving their area even if they can't come to pass.

To answer the original question, I think that the offer should be based on an hourly service, probably 60mph single track with passing loops at c10 mile intervals, as TT dictates. That's not to say it's viable, though like North Leeds it may surprise us.

WAO

 

[Bertie the bus]

I was hoping that the Colne - Skipton fantasy had gone away as it’s been a few months since the last discussion but just like Christmas it comes around again and let me say that nothing has changed since last time.

It will never go away. The day the last train is being taken to the scrap yard because we are all using personal jet packs to get places someone will still be calling for Colne – Skipton and the Burscough curves to be reopened.

 

[tbtc]

There are about a dozen reopening schemes that are never far away from being discussed; any time there’s a brief signal failure at Totnes then someone will suggest re-opening the Tavistock line, any complaint about random freight paths disrupting the Hope Valley stopping clock face passenger services you’ll have someone pointing out that we could resolve this by “simply” spending a billion on reopening the Millers Dale line

It’s a knee jerk reaction for some people, instinctively always suggesting the same thing, but I guess it keeps them happy

Sometimes it’s harmless, but occasionally it feels like the obsession with such big reopenings has harmed modest cases for local improvements (e.g. Tavistock/Ripon might have been a viable scheme, a simple single track low speed line beyond Bere Alston/ Harrogate but insisting that only a fast double track route capable of handling diverted long distance services at a competitive speed will be good enough means it’s much easier to dismiss it all and deliver nothing)

I can see some logic in projects like Woodhead or Strathmore, they’d be low down my shopping list but at least they provide some benefits.

Skipton-Colne though… it’s the second weakest of all of the reopening wish list (Dumfries to Stranraer is in a league of its own!).

If anyone is convinced of its merits Though, I never did get anyone attempting to answer these questions: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/re-opening-colne-to-skipton.220420/page-7#post-5427232

1. Is this just a simple twelve miles of single track for the hourly Preston - Colne service to run through to Skipton, or something much more ambitious?
2. If you want through trains to Leeds then are these extensions of the existing Skipton - Leeds services (which are so busy that we had to order EMUs capable of increasing the length from four to six coaches)? In which case, are you talking about electrifying the line through Colne? And, would the wires end at Burnley, Blackburn, Preston, where? So a half hourly Leeds - Skipton - Colne - Burnley - Blackburn - Manchester/Preston service, with all of the infrastructure that that would mean (lots of electrification, doubling of lines etc)? If you run it through to Preston then would that mean the current Leeds - Bradford - Halifax - Burnley - Preston (Blackpool) trains being terminated somewhere short?
3. Or is the plan for the Leeds - Skipton - Colne (and beyond) trains to be additional to the current Leeds - Skipton trains (in which case you might be planning on running them as DMUs to save on the cost of electrification in Lancashire, but might need additional paths on the congested line through Shipley and a new platform at Leeds?
4. Plus Bradford trains? The SELRAP website talks about services running directly into Bradford City Centre, so is it two Leeds services per hour, plus one to Bradford too? (obviously Blackburn/ Accrington/ Burnley already have an hourly train into the city centres of both Leeds and Bradford, but I know that SELRAP like to pretend that the Copy Pit doesn't exist)
5. There was talk on the SELRAP site about regular trains to Manchester Airport, so would these be coming all the way from Leeds via Skipton and then the single track bits of line from Blackburn to Bolton (given how congested and unreliable Castlefield is)?
6. But if you can run regular trains from Colne to Manchester (without needing infrastructure improvements) then why aren't you focussing on that kind of deliverable goal, instead of all the complicated/ expensive/ flashy stuff? The website looks appealing when it promises that "commuting could become possible from East Lancashire to south Manchester", but we all know that there's nothing stopping trains from East Lancashire to south Manchester already - you don't need the train to have run via Skipton to achieve that
7. Burnley gained an hourly Manchester train six and a half years ago (via Rochdale) - long enough for trends to be noticed - has this had a significant impact upon house prices in Burnley/ unemployment in Burnley? Because if I was bringing up the amazing opportunities that people in East Lancashire could have, if only we spent a lot of money providing them with a regular train to a big city (e.g. Leeds) then presumably there's a lot of data to show how transformational it was when we previously introduced such a line (e.g. the one to Manchester)? If Burnley and Accrington are still two of the places with cheapest house prices in England (as the campaigner suggested), and hourly trains to both Manchester and Leeds haven't changed this then why do you think that a direct train to Skipton is going to be transformational? Did Blackburn's house prices/ unemployment rates etc change when the service to Manchester via Bolton was doubled a few years ago?
8. Would you be including the cost of grade separation at the Leeds throat to allow freight to be diverted via Colne and Skipton towards places like Drax? Or will we just accept the throat to this busy station closing for the sake of these diverted freight trains?
9. Would Clitheroe lose it's current Manchester trains, if you want to run all of these Leeds - Skipton - Colne services through to Manchester?

 

[London Trains]

If it actually was reopened, I would have this service pattern (stops not shown):

Manchester - Bolton - Blackburn - Colne - Skipton
(Manchester - Bolton - Blackburn - Clitheroe)

Preston - Blackburn - Colne - Skipton - Leeds
(Opposite half hour to Leeds - Carlisle/Lancaster services between Leeds and Skipton)

 

[Philip]

I would reopen it as double track but rebuild the junction at Skipton so that trains head west rather than towards Leeds. This would provide easier access for freight via the S&C to the North and Scotland compared with via Clitheroe; some freight currently using the WCML could run this way instead. Also could open up opportunities for direct passenger services from Manchester to Skipton and up the S&C. Barnoldswick is a sizeable place too and would benefit from a restored rail link to Skipton, Burnley, Blackburn, Preston and Manchester.

 

[zwk500]

I would reopen it as double track but rebuild the junction at Skipton so that trains head west rather than towards Leeds. This would provide easier access for freight via the S&C to the North and Scotland compared with via Clitheroe;

How?

Also could open up opportunities for direct passenger services from Manchester to Skipton and up the S&C.

They would need to be routed via Bolton and Blackburn to do so. Is there any evidence that Skipton-Manchester is a significant flow? Or is this another of your 'trains from my house to places I visit once a year' suggestions.

Barnoldswick is a sizeable place too and would benefit from a restored rail link to Skipton, Burnley, Blackburn, Preston and Manchester

10K might be big for the area, but it isn't much to sustain train links without other factors being present (like an overwhelmingly dominant travel pattern, or being on the route of other services that can accept the stop). Oh, and the old trackbed didn't get that close to Barnoldswick, being 2 miles away in Earby! The walk is also not direct, so it's a 5km if you follow the roads.

 

[Starmill]

Why would we build a railway when we could choose to just subsidise a better bus service instead? Burnley to Keighley and Burnley to Skipton already have bus services which could be improved and integrated into the the rail schedule without any of the costs of new railway infrastructure.

 

[Philip]

How?

They would need to be routed via Bolton and Blackburn to do so. Is there any evidence that Skipton-Manchester is a significant flow? Or is this another of your 'trains from my house to places I visit once a year' suggestions.

10K might be big for the area, but it isn't much to sustain train links without other factors being present (like an overwhelmingly dominant travel pattern, or being on the route of other services that can accept the stop). Oh, and the old trackbed didn't get that close to Barnoldswick, being 2 miles away in Earby! The walk is also not direct, so it's a 5km if you follow the roads.

The line between Clitheroe and Hellifield is slow and not in top quality condition for handling a busy freight service with the heavy wagons. The S&C has plenty of spare capacity to be able to carry the freight which currently uses the WCML, along with the existing freight paths, so by doubling Burnley-Colne and reopening the Colne-Skipton line as a mainline-grade freight route (including an hourly passenger service), you could take all freight between Preston and Carlisle off the WCML and send it via the route I've suggested.

A park and ride scheme or dedicated station-town bus connection at Barnoldswick could solve the problem you've highlighted.

 

[Bertie the bus]

What possible benefit to anybody would diverting all WCML freight via the S&C be? Most of the freight are intermodals which will be just in time delivery and going via the S&C would:
a) mean electric traction had to be replaced by diesel traction
b) add 2 to 3 hours to the journey

 

[geordieblue]

In all fairness to the OP the thread title isn't on the viability of a reopening but on the ideal infrastructure. Here's my 2p:
If Skipton-Colne was to be reopened, there is literally zero benefit from providing it as single track. Costs for double track, especially considering S&C for loops on a single lins, are not much higher (a two track line doesn't cost twice as much to build as a single track line). There's also minimal demand from Colne to Skipton anyway (anecdotally, I worked in Skipton for six months last year and met one person from Colne). These are not towns that share much, economically or culturally, so a local service would very probably carry low double digits of passengers per train.
On the other hand if you're building it you may as well attempt to divert some freight along it and possibly even a longer distance passenger service. There's no point opening a new line for 1tph. As such double track would probably be a better bet.

Pathing down the Aire Valley would be tricky and probably kills reopening off altogether anyway (it's a non-starter anyway mind), but if you're building it in a fantasy world with unlimited money I'd argue you might as well do it double.

 

[Kite159]

..

Burnley, Brierfield (maybe?), Nelson and Colne and then I'm struggling.

Burnley already has direct Leeds trains from Manchester Road.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Burnley already has direct Leeds trains from Manchester Road.

Indeed it does, but the claim was that the Colne-Skipton re-opening would link the hearts of six East Lancashire towns.

Moot point as to whether Burnley Manchester Road station is the best placed station for the town centre of Burnley.