It's funny because I remember you describing the Whitby line as "often full and standing", which based on the passenger counts meant that it was almost totally deserted whenever you weren't using it to make a point.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Future of the Settle to Carlisle, Bentham and Ribble Valley lines
- Thread starter InkyScrolls
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
You appear to have stumbled into the wrong thread, because this is a thread about the S&C and Bentham lines, not the Whitby line.
I don't know what's going on with the counts on the Whitby line, however it has been full and standing on several occasions when I've been on it.
As for the Bentham line, I only recall it being full and standing when I've been on it about three times. Two of these were bank holidays after the Leeds festival (and another was when Bradford City were playing Morecambe). However on many occasions most of the double seats are taken and that's good enough for a perfectly healthy loading in my book.
If your anecdata is suspect for one line it's going to be suspect for all of them
If your anecdata is suspect for one line it's going to be suspect for all of them
For one line I stated that the train is often full and standing, whilst for the other I stated that it was healthily loaded.
At least I use the said lines often enough to make nuanced observations about their patronage
zwk500
Veteran Member
You've also claimed similarly large loadings for the S&C. For railways with slow trains and few services you certianly manage to get out and about a lot if you're able to do representative passenger surveys!For one line I stated that the train is often full and standing, whilst for the other I stated that it was healthily loaded.
At least I use the said lines often enough to make nuanced observations about their patronage
As you've actually travelled on this line (which is more than I have), perhaps you could address a point I've raised a couple of times: on the Little North Western, how much traffic actually joins at the intermediate stations, and how much has already boarded East of Skipton?
I do get out and about on those lines often, although my observations are just that - not passenger services.
From my travels I reckon:
- Vast majority on from East of Skipton
- A good number joining at Skipton, often 20 - 30
- Sometimes a couple on and off at Gargrave
- Often 5 - 10 on at Hellifield
- 5 - 10 Giggleswick
- 3 - 4 at Clapham
- Often 10 - 20 at Bentham
- Occasionally one or two at Wennington
- Often 20 - 30 on and off at Carnforth.
Taking into account the many end to end travellers, this makes for a well enough used service.
tbtc
Veteran Member
Hmm…
Let’s be generous here and use the highest annual passenger numbers for each of these stations over the past five that are on Wiki spread over only the “old” five trains per day in each direction (as per four years ago), rather than me cherry picking lower numbers and apportioning them to the current eight trains a day in each direction since 2018
I’ll divide the number of passengers per station into two (since Half Of The passengers counted are obviously departing And Half Arriving), and then divide over 360 to get the daily number of departing passengers (I.e. not counting Christmas!). I’ll round up too, to avoid nit picking
Giggleswick: 12,270 passengers = 6,135 departing passengers = 62 departing passengers a day = roughly seven passengers for each of the services
Clapham: 8,492 passengers = 4,246 departing passengers = 12 departing passengers a day = roughly two passengers for each of the services
Bentham: 29,932 passengers = 14,966 departing passengers = 42 departing passengers a day = roughly five passengers for each of the services
Wennington: 5,398 passengers = 2,699 departing passengers = 8 departing passengers a day = roughly one passenger for each of the services
Obviously these numbers would look a little worse if passengers were spread over the full eight trains a day (I’m only counting five trains), I’m trying to give the benefit of doubt where I can
But if you are telling me that there are “often” twenty passengers getting on each service at Bentham (when the entire daily station usage is only forty two) then it feels like you’re having the same bad luck that you seem to have on the Whitby Branch (where you are commonly on services that have more passengers on one train than the entire line gets on a typical day)
I’m not counting Hellifield/ Carnforth etc since those passengers are spread between “Bentham” trains and other lines
Averages can "hide" some numbers, while I've not been on the Bentham line, I have had 5 days out on the S&C in the last 12 months. 2 of those I went all the way to Leeds and came back on the last train of the day, one in October last year which was extremely quiet the further it got north of Skipton; that one I was the only person to get off at Langwathby and I think there were only 2 passengers left on the train [factors, mid-week, dark, a bit of Covid-hesistancy around]. The other was March this year when it was very busy, so much so I didn't get a seat until after Shipley [factors : Saturday, good weather that day].
I do have a tendancy to use the Bentham line on Saturdays, so my journey probably coincides with the peak leisure flow between Bentham and Lancaster.
However, even taking that into account, 45 passengers a day seems on the low side for Bentham. I wonder if there is an anomoly.
JohnRegular
Member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2016
- Messages
- 315
Surely it's more likely that any given passenger is more likely to experience a busier train than a quieter one, purely because there are more passengers on the busier train to experience it?
Anyway, no doubt if either route had closed under Beeching there would be plenty of calls from members of this forum to reinstate them.
Anyway, no doubt if either route had closed under Beeching there would be plenty of calls from members of this forum to reinstate them.
InkyScrolls
On Moderation
As someone who works the line regularly those numbers seem absurdly optimistic. From my personal experience and having worked all eight return services frequently, I would estimate:-
East of Skipton: Vast majority, probably ~20 people on average
Skipton: ~10
Gargrave: Usually two or three
Hellifield: Occasionally five or six but usually no more than two
Giggleswick: ~3
Clapham: No passengers on or off on most trains
Bentham: Usually around five to ten
Wennington: Rare to pick up or drop off anyone at all
Carnforth: Again, usually five to ten
Lancaster: Usually ~20
The 'peak' trains tend to be busier but only Skipton, Bentham and Carnforth see any significant change in passenger numbers at those times.
This is all anecdata but given that I've worked every service, every day of the week, in and out of COVID, in all seasons, many times, it should be fairly accurate.
OK, so there's one single post. The post by Bletchleyite says the line serves little purpose, which is true because there's almost no population along it, but doesn't directly call for closure.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Clapham and Wennington are of course in the middle of nowhere. There's really no prospect of them ever having any more passengers either because development in these areas is so heavily restricted by the planning system.
Like I say, I probably travel the route at its busier leisure times.
That said, such numbers as you observe, don't bode particularly well for your idea of a clock face timetable. Frankly we'd be better off defending the existing timetable in that case.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Well, even ignoring the interchange between the larger settlements such as Skipton, Bentham and Carnforth, it still doesn't follow that the route has no purpose.
What are the alternatives for through passengers ?
Copy pit - not much faster and often crowded.
Trans-pennine - often crowded, funny connection times and probably not all that quicker in the long run.
And the suggestion that we run an express train via one of the other routes to get people from Yorkshire to the Lakes ? I'm not convinced these are going to fit into existing timetables easily.
Last edited:
zwk500
Veteran Member
Those numbers suggest the costs of closing the route would be paid back reasonably quickly, given the limited revenue lost.
Given the lack of freight, the only other purpose the line serves is as a test track/short cut for WCRC to Hellifield. Although it's reasonable additional mileage and another path on the WCML, they could easily change locos on the Lostock Hall curve.
Another alternative would be to run Leeds-Carlisle at Hourly with Skip-Stops and extend a Clitheroe terminator to Hellifield for interchange to Preston. (This assumes withdrawal of Settle Jn-Carnforth services).
If you were to close the bentham line what would you gain. A bit of track, much of it ancient. 4 unstaffed stations and 1 or 2 trains.
For the use it gets from people not using its 4 stations its prob worth keeping.
Or do people from the Aire valley use the bus to get to lancaster?
Right, so the through passengers are going to get onto a stopper at Hellifield, travel down to Blackburn for another stopper at Blackburn to go to Preston, hang around a bit, maybe making use of the pricey bar, then squeeze onto whatever hideously crowded Avanti/TPE decides to turn up ?
Can I try some of what you're drinking please !
zwk500
Veteran Member
No, the majority of the c.60 passengers are probably going to drive. Some from East of Skipton might go via Bradford and Man Vic, or Leeds and TPE depending on their ultimate destination. I was simply suggesting an alternative should you wish to preserve the links as a pubic transport option.
However if the withdrawal of this service permits the removal of Carnforth Station Jn, Settle Jn and releases a unit and crew to make the other services more reliable it's better off for the whole railway. Even better if NR can combine it with a handy bit of resignalling to abolish Hellifield and Settle Jn boxes as part of a new Hellifield workstation, and Carnforth, Arnside and Grange Signal boxes as part of a new Workstation there. Freight is next to non-existent, it's only WCRC who'd be seriously losing out and at some point somebody has to question if that is a valid use of public money.
Right, so we're going to push 60 passengers (if this is a day figure it seems wildly pessimistic to me - i'd be interested to know where its from) into road transport, leave the residents of the towns and villages along the stranded from the rail network and make a precipitous and probably irreversible change to the national rail network - all to save a couple of sets of train crew due to current politically engineered industry shortages, and a couple of trains, for which there are generally orders every few years ?
And this is before you get to people like me who don't drive and have to go the long way round. You're forgetting that I've experienced a year of Northern's strike action, so I'm well aware of how iffy the alternative routes are.
If NR were going to re-signal the area, why would the junctions at Settle and Carnforth be a show stopper anyway ?
zwk500
Veteran Member
From the numbers given above by a guard on the route.
The villages are already stranded - the line isn't exactly a regular service. Wennington is not much more than a hamlet and Clapham is miles from the station. The trackbed would presumably get put in all the local planning strategies as protected, so it's there if anybody should want it 100 years from now. And it's not to save a few quid now, it's to save a lot of expense over the years the service is operating.
Regrettably, the railway cannot cater to every edge case. A good bus link would however be perfectly practicable and probably quicker from Bentham to Lancaster.
They're not show stoppers, but they certainly add to the cost. Plain line is much, much easier to signal than a Junction, especially if it means a reduction in Signaller workload that means you don't need as many workstations. It also reduces wear on trains and track, and eliminates a potential point of failure while reducing the maintenance burden, saving useful opex in the long run.
(BTW the line will never close because of politics)
daodao
Established Member
You are referring solely to the passengers using the 4 intermediate stations on the Bentham line, but other than Bentham, the places served have minimal populations. The vast majority of passengers using the Bentham line are making longer through journeys and would be significantly inconvenienced by closure of this line, which is much less costly to maintain that the Settle and Carlisle (S&C) line.
As I have previously stated, if one of these 2 lines has to close, it should be the S&C line. whose continued existence can only be justified by its use (and potential use) for freight traffic. West Yorkshire-Carlisle/Scotland through passenger traffic could be re-routed via Carnforth/Lancaster, with some through trains reversing on a loop south of Carnforth.
I am not convinced that the S&C line's long-term role for freight traffic is guaranteed (even post HS2), as I expect that Anglo-Scottish passenger and freight traffic on the WCML would diminish considerably if Scotland becomes independent with a hard border (almost inevitable if it re-joined the EU) along the Cheviots. This would free up capacity on the WCML for slower freight trains. The decision as to whether the S&C line should be kept long-term thus depends on whether the SNP's dream comes to fruition, but it is reasonable to retain it until there is clarity on Scotland's future status.
So if we take the guard's post at face value - that's nearly sixty people per train pushed onto road transport. I forget the exact timetable, but six trains each way, that's around 720 extra road journeys.
Whatever way you look at it, you are proposing a huge environmental and societal dis-benefit which will likely be irreversable, for trifling short term gains.
zwk500
Veteran Member
The post above clearly includes passengers from the Aire Valley. The guard states its about 20 people from Skipton making through journeys on average.
Not trifling if the money saved could run a cheaper, faster, more frequent bus service. Or be used for other rail improvement projects like Access for all interventions. I'd trade 720 road journeys created in exchange for 1,000 road journeys being made available by rail through installing a lift.
It's difficult to know where to start with this post.
You'd need a new lift every ten metres up the line to achieve that.
And what makes you think that the saved money would go to Access for all Interventions that weren't planned already anyway ? Why aren't the cuts to staff and services that are already happening, being reallocated to such interventions ?
It would also be worth asking some of the disabled passengers who probably use the line now, whether they'd be happy to sacrifice their train service for such improvements elsewhere.
As for bus replacements.
Last edited:
But as I've pointed out many times before - retail workers tend not to travel very far. Retail is not well paid so the majority of people working in retail will only do so in the town they live in or perhaps the next town along. Travelling 10 miles + is very rare outside store management. And store managers *have* to be able to drive because they are also the keyholders of the site and will get called out if there is any alarm activation overnight. And since there aren't trains at 2am - they need to be able to get to the store to address any issue.
I'd hold your horses a bit on that - the Eden Project in Cornwall just about gets 1 m visitors a year bolstered no doubt by the number of people holidaying in Devon and Cornwall.
If the Morecambe one matched this, there would be demand coming from Manchester, Merseyside and even the West Mids as well as West Yorks - let's be generous and say 50% of the demand would come from West Yorks and it matches the Devon and Cornwall visitor numbers - then you're looking at half a million a year. School parties will probably be 5-10% of that and they will use coaches (for convenience and safeguarding reasons), so you're down to ~400,000. Assume 80% of that arrives by road, you're on 20% for rail (and I'll bet that's generous) and you're looking at 80,000 - even if ALL of those went via the Bentham line that's 1500 extra users a week. And a good number of those won't go via the Bentham line, because instead they'll go for the quickest train which will almost certainly be via Burnley to Preston and change onto the WCML at Preston.
InkyScrolls
On Moderation
At this point I'd like to make it clear that despite the often poor loadings, the railway is a lifeline for passengers living along the route of the FoBL. To suggest closing an entire line for minimal gain is even more absurd than the wildly optimistic passenger figures another poster gave above.
As well as the local traffic, there is a significant number of students from Lancaster uni, who for the most part can't drive, who use the line to travel to Leeds. Obviously this is only during term time but it does give a small boost to the numbers I gave.
IMHO railways shouldn't be required to turn a profit; they're a public service first and foremost and a moneymaking operation second!
As well as the local traffic, there is a significant number of students from Lancaster uni, who for the most part can't drive, who use the line to travel to Leeds. Obviously this is only during term time but it does give a small boost to the numbers I gave.
IMHO railways shouldn't be required to turn a profit; they're a public service first and foremost and a moneymaking operation second!
However the students would still travel by rail even if the line were closed. When the end to end journey time from Lancaster to Leeds is ~1h 50m via Bentham compared to 2h 10m via Preston or Manchester the time impact isn't significant.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Would a bus service not be?
Yes, I know, the UK can't do bus services properly, which is why I don't support the closure. But if we could do a bus service well, one to Swiss Postauto standards, and one that ran through Austwick, Clapham, Ingleton, High and Low Bentham, Wennington, Gressingham and Over Kellet, wouldn't it be more of a useful lifeline to those places as well as being cheaper? High Bentham is literally the only place it serves well. None of the places are huge, granted, but surely it'd be less hopelessly uneconomic and potentially easier to do as a more frequent service, potentially two-hourly clockface with some peak additionals and potentially even running to Lancaster Uni as a major local employer and for access to education?
I'd close both the Lancaster and Carlisle routes to passengers north of Skipton. Replace them with a high quality bus link which would better serve the population. Saves billions in infrastructure costs. Reduces the unsustainable Northern Subsidy.
That would be true for most railway lines in the whole of Britain and Ireland.
- Status