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

[Bletchleyite]

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.

Unfortunately in the UK there is not, has never been and probably never will be something genuinely fitting that description. OK, well, there are odd islands of it (e.g. Alex Hornby-land), but not a lot.

It'd be a cheapo tender to the lowest bidder* which would be quietly withdrawn after a year or two.

By the way, the S&C couldn't sensibly be bustituted along its full route, the roads don't run that way, you'd need to design a new network, probably one centred on Penrith and Lancaster rather than Carlisle.

Personally I think I would, if high quality bus operations existed in the UK, support the Bentham line becoming one, but not the S&C, which really needs the wires** and to become a more important freight artery to free up the north WCML for an improved, more clockface passenger service.

* I'd venture it'd likely be Kirkby Lonsdale Coach Hire who are actually pretty well regarded locally but are hardly rail-quality. Fortunately North Lancashire lacks disreputable companies like the Aylesbury "triad", but it's not exactly Postauto.

** I'm well aware of the issues the low tunnels may pose, but there are options such as locos with batteries and regen.

 

[paul1609]

A limited stop bus Skipton, Gargreave, Hellield, Settle, Horton, Ribblehead, Hawes, Kirby Stephen, Brough, Appleby, Penrith, Keswick would attract far more users than the existing rail service. You could give passengers complimentary champagne with the costs youd save. North of Penrith give the users free taxis.

 

[A0]

Unfortunately in the UK there is not, has never been and probably never will be something genuinely fitting that description. OK, well, there are odd islands of it (e.g. Alex Hornby-land), but not a lot.

It'd be a cheapo tender to the lowest bidder* which would be quietly withdrawn after a year or two.

By the way, the S&C couldn't sensibly be bustituted along its full route, the roads don't run that way, you'd need to design a new network, probably one centred on Penrith and Lancaster rather than Carlisle.

Personally I think I would, if high quality bus operations existed in the UK, support the Bentham line becoming one, but not the S&C, which really needs the wires** and to become a more important freight artery to free up the north WCML for an improved, more clockface passenger service.

* I'd venture it'd likely be Kirkby Lonsdale Coach Hire who are actually pretty well regarded locally but are hardly rail-quality. Fortunately North Lancashire lacks disreputable companies like the Aylesbury "triad", but it's not exactly Postauto.

** I'm well aware of the issues the low tunnels may pose, but there are options such as locos with batteries and regen.

But what, in your mind, would constitute a "high quality bus link" ?

These are rural areas - Settle popn 2,500, Giggleswick popn 1270, Bentham popn 3,000 Wennington popn 178. Even back in the days of the National Bus Company such places would have seen a sparse service - the bigger ones probably saw a daily service, but probably limited on the number of journeys a day. The likes of Wennington would probably have had a patchy service to key destinations on market day. And that's how it would have been going back to the pre-NBC days. If you somehow think an hourly 'express' type service is going to be viable, you're probably wrong.

To give an example on Timetable World there is the 1968 Ribble timetable - the first bus from Bentham to Lancaster was at 7.48am (arr 8.37am), then nothing until 9.23am and about hourly after that. Going the other way it had a couple of early journeys to Ingleton - the first that went beyond Ingleton was ~10.30 heading to Settle (arr ~11.30) and Skipton (arr ~12.15pm).

 

[InkyScrolls]

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.

The fact that you would support closing the S&C shows how out of touch you are with the reality of the line.

 

[geordieblue]

A limited stop bus Skipton, Gargreave, Hellield, Settle, Horton, Ribblehead, Hawes, Kirby Stephen, Brough, Appleby, Penrith, Keswick would attract far more users than the existing rail service. You could give passengers complimentary champagne with the costs youd save. North of Penrith give the users free taxis.

What about through passengers?

 

[daodao]

A limited stop bus Skipton, Gargreave, Hellield, Settle, Horton, Ribblehead, Hawes, Kirby Stephen, Brough, Appleby, Penrith, Keswick would attract far more users than the existing rail service. You could give passengers complimentary champagne with the costs youd save. North of Penrith give the users free taxis.

A similar argument could be made for other lightly used lines such as Ashford-Hastings.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But what, in your mind, would constitute a "high quality bus link" ?

In this context, it would need to be, in no particular order:

1. Operated using vehicles in a very good condition with a high standard of seating, air conditioned and double glazed
2. Be shown in the rail timetable and timed to co-ordinate with rail connections
3. Serve connecting railway stations directly
4. Be included within railway connection protection and through ticketing, including in the middle of a journey
5. Have GPS tracking for live passenger information
6. Accept card payment
7. Have on-board next stop and connections information
8. Have a professional, courteous driver wearing uniform to give a quality impression
9. Ideally, carry two bicycles, but even if not there must be plenty of luggage rack space and space for one wheelchair plus one unfolded pushchair, with the wheelchair space managed via the railway's assistance booking systems
10. Be funded by the railway budget and guaranteed, not by a local authority so it'll disappear quickly on the quiet when money gets tight

Any more for any more? If you want to know what sort of bus I mean, go to Switzerland and ride some Postautos.

I don't think there's a single UK bus route that meets all of these, though a few (e.g. Alex Hornby's Transdev 36) manage most of them.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Aug 2022 ==

These are rural areas - Settle popn 2,500, Giggleswick popn 1270, Bentham popn 3,000 Wennington popn 178. Even back in the days of the National Bus Company such places would have seen a sparse service - the bigger ones probably saw a daily service, but probably limited on the number of journeys a day. The likes of Wennington would probably have had a patchy service to key destinations on market day. And that's how it would have been going back to the pre-NBC days. If you somehow think an hourly 'express' type service is going to be viable, you're probably wrong.

My suggestion was two-hourly clockface, plus potentially some additional peak workings.

To give an example on Timetable World there is the 1968 Ribble timetable - the first bus from Bentham to Lancaster was at 7.48am (arr 8.37am), then nothing until 9.23am and about hourly after that. Going the other way it had a couple of early journeys to Ingleton - the first that went beyond Ingleton was ~10.30 heading to Settle (arr ~11.30) and Skipton (arr ~12.15pm).

You can't really compare a bus service that was competing with a railway service.

 

[RT4038]

In this context, it would need to be, in no particular order:

1. Operated using vehicles in a very good condition with a high standard of seating, air conditioned and double glazed
2. Be shown in the rail timetable and timed to co-ordinate with rail connections
3. Serve connecting railway stations directly
4. Be included within railway connection protection and through ticketing, including in the middle of a journey
5. Have GPS tracking for live passenger information
6. Accept card payment
7. Have on-board next stop and connections information
8. Have a professional, courteous driver wearing uniform to give a quality impression
9. Ideally, carry two bicycles, but even if not there must be plenty of luggage rack space and space for one wheelchair plus one unfolded pushchair, with the wheelchair space managed via the railway's assistance booking systems
10. Be funded by the railway budget and guaranteed, not by a local authority so it'll disappear quickly on the quiet when money gets tight

Any more for any more? If you want to know what sort of bus I mean, go to Switzerland and ride some Postautos.

I don't think there's a single UK bus route that meets all of these, though a few (e.g. Alex Hornby's Transdev 36) manage most of them.

In respect of point (2) - presumably no more likely or unlikely than if it was an actual train

In respect of point (5) - all (local) buses have these now, but the need (challenge) would be to include their tracking information on the railway website.

In respect of (8) - no more than the equivalent railway staff members.

In comparison with the Transdev 36, I am not sure that this manages 2,3,4,5 (on railway website), 7 (connections information?), 9 (on railway assistance booking system, or bikes?) or 10.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In comparison with the Transdev 36, I am not sure that this manages 2,3,4,5 (on railway website), 7 (connections information?), 9 (on railway assistance booking system, or bikes?) or 10.

You'd be right on most of them but I'm fairly sure I saw Mr Hornby bleating on FB about his on board PIS now showing train connections.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

That would be true for most railway lines in the whole of Britain and Ireland.

Probably one for a separate thread, but would certainly be interesting to know, which railway lines in the GB network, if any, currently actually cover all their costs.

 

[A0]

In this context, it would need to be, in no particular order:

1. Operated using vehicles in a very good condition with a high standard of seating, air conditioned and double glazed
2. Be shown in the rail timetable and timed to co-ordinate with rail connections
3. Serve connecting railway stations directly
4. Be included within railway connection protection and through ticketing, including in the middle of a journey
5. Have GPS tracking for live passenger information
6. Accept card payment
7. Have on-board next stop and connections information
8. Have a professional, courteous driver wearing uniform to give a quality impression
9. Ideally, carry two bicycles, but even if not there must be plenty of luggage rack space and space for one wheelchair plus one unfolded pushchair, with the wheelchair space managed via the railway's assistance booking systems
10. Be funded by the railway budget and guaranteed, not by a local authority so it'll disappear quickly on the quiet when money gets tight

Any more for any more? If you want to know what sort of bus I mean, go to Switzerland and ride some Postautos.

I don't think there's a single UK bus route that meets all of these, though a few (e.g. Alex Hornby's Transdev 36) manage most of them.

Always love it when people try comparing what a country of 8 million offers and an area of 40,000 sq km with a country of 60 million and over 200,000 sq km of area.

However to take each point in turn:

1 - As ever, seating etc is subjective as we see on pretty much all threads around here. Some vehicles are air-cond, but I fail to see the need for double glazing beyond adding cost and weight to the vehicles.
2 - Simple enough
3 - Right, but we're talking about a rural area and stations are often poorly sited - Bentham's about 1/4 mile outside the main part of the village and is 1.5 miles from Low Bentham, Giggleswick's in the middle of nowhere on the opposite side of a busy A road to the village it purports to serve, Wennington's basically a hamlet which just happens to have a railway station - so why constrict it by saying it *has* to serve the railway station ?
4 - so if the bus is delayed you're going to delay mainline trains to hold connections ? Can see that working well on the WCML, forcing a Glasgow - London express to be held.......
5 - some buses are doing this, the technology exists - though I'm unconvinced of its merit in a rural area.
6 - all the big groups are now doing this
7 - again, subjective. Given the majority of such users are local users, that's a bit unnecessary. Again it's often raised on here about the annoying, repetitive announcements.
8 - Maybe when the National Rail standards are that high......
9 - Surely it should be driven by the demands ? If the train isn't carrying passengers with bikes, why force it on the bus ?
10 - So even if it's running at a huge loss it should continue regardless and be a drain on resources ?

 

[yorksrob]

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.

I make it four posters and counting now.

To quote Phil Collins "It's always the same, it's just a shame, that's all"

 

[Ken H]

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?

Is that the bus service from Ingleton to lancaster that Stagecoach just gave up, ans has just been replaces with a very poor offering at Bentham? There are plenty of buses in the Lune valley, but not at Bentham or the other Wenning valley villages.
And to get from Ingleton to Lancaster now involves a bus journey the long way round via Kirkby Lonsdale.
Oh for the days of Pennine and Ribble.

 

[zwk500]

Probably one for a separate thread, but would certainly be interesting to know, which railway lines in the GB network, if any, currently actually cover all their costs.

The biggest difficulty there is working out which services are causing the base costs such as maintenance and signallers, without which the railway wouldn't be there, and which are the marginal services that take advantage of the track for marginal additional cost.

The Serpell Report probably gives the nearest guess anybody could make as to what an economically-profitable UK network would look like. For the record (because Yorksrob has accused me of this before): I do NOT think that the rail network should break even as a business. I am totally on board with the rail network being subsidised for the public good. However I do think that we need to seriously look at some of the most marginal branch lines and ask ourselves if they are being served in the most efficient way for the public purse.

 

[yoyothehobo]

Lets be honest, the only way a current rail link like this will get shut is if there is a massive infrastructure failure that would cost too much to rectify. Could you imagine an Eden Brows type repair taking place on the Bentham line?

I am slightly surprised that it got done on the S and C.

If you had a substantial failure of the tunnel or a flood took out some of the bridges on the route it would be so far down the list of priorities that it might be defacto closed. Dont get me wrong, i like using the line when i do, especially now without 142s.

Ironically i think you would have more use out of the service if there was a connection to the WCML at carnforth to save the minutes trekking down to Lancaster. Obviously there is no business case for putting in another WCML stop at Carnforth.

Overall opinion, not going to close anytime soon however at the very bottom of the pile for anything resembling investment. Doesnt even really get the classic "Social Benefit" case as its that far from the stations to where you may actually live that you would need a bus or taxi to get there!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ironically i think you would have more use out of the service if there was a connection to the WCML at carnforth to save the minutes trekking down to Lancaster.

Why? Where are the hordes going to Morecambe from Leeds? It's not 1960.

 

[yoyothehobo]

Sorry, i am referring to that if you could change onto northbound WCML services from the Leeds-Lancaster bound train at Carnforth. Just timetable it so the quickest (and cheapest) fair from Leeds/Aire Valley to western scotland would be via that route.

I am not suggesting it would be a massive amount of people, probably very few. But with the lack of northbound connectivity at Carnforth from the Bentham line, it removes most of the reasoning for having a line going in that direction and with the S and C taking so long to get to Carlisle...

EDIT
Just looking at tomorrows journeys:
LDS - GLW via Edinburgh : 4hours
LDS - GLW via Lancaster: 4.45 with 50 mins at lancaster (Cut the connection time by 40 minutes it becomes appealing)
LDS - GLW via Settle Carlisle: 5 hours 17

 

[Starmill]

Probably one for a separate thread, but would certainly be interesting to know, which railway lines in the GB network, if any, currently actually cover all their costs.

Depends whether you would want to do the analysis now or for 2019 and what method you would use to allocate the costs, but it would be something like just the bare minimum needed to run services from London to large cities like Bristol, Cardiff, Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds and Newcastle, plus Edinburgh to Glasgow via Falkirk. It wouldn't inform this discussion at all.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Aug 2022 ==

I make it four posters and counting now.

To quote Phil Collins "It's always the same, it's just a shame, that's all"

It doesn't look like this is what is being said at all to me.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Aug 2022 ==

I do NOT think that the rail network should break even as a business. I am totally on board with the rail network being subsidised for the public good. However I do think that we need to seriously look at some of the most marginal branch lines and ask ourselves if they are being served in the most efficient way for the public purse.

Public transport services, not specifically railway services, should be run for the public good using public funding. Every developed country on earth accepts this to some degree, including the United States and Canada where there's lots of ideological opposition to public transport because the view is that only private transport can support a modern North American economy.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Just looking at tomorrows journeys:
LDS - GLW via Edinburgh : 4hours
LDS - GLW via Lancaster: 4.45 with 50 mins at lancaster (Cut the connection time by 40 minutes it becomes appealing)
LDS - GLW via Settle Carlisle: 5 hours 17

In reality those are all "most of the day" type journeys, so people will mostly choose on price or whether the specific journey meets their required arrival/departure times. Your sweet spot is getting down to 2hrs or so as it makes it daytrippable for most, but turning the Bentham into a 400km/h LGV wouldn't even do that.

(I'd agree I'd like to see that 50 minute connection improved, but the UK has a bad connections policy generally, so we'd have to address that first!)

 

[Starmill]

In reality those are all "most of the day" type journeys, so people will mostly choose on price or whether the specific journey meets their required arrival/departure times. Your sweet spot is getting down to 2hrs or so as it makes it daytrippable for most, but turning the Bentham into a 400km/h LGV wouldn't even do that.

(I'd agree I'd like to see that 50 minute connection improved, but the UK has a bad connections policy generally, so we'd have to address that first!)

Journeys between Leeds and Glasgow were mostly on the direct trains before the pandemic. Perhaps unsurprisingly.

 

[yoyothehobo]

In reality those are all "most of the day" type journeys, so people will mostly choose on price or whether the specific journey meets their required arrival/departure times. Your sweet spot is getting down to 2hrs or so as it makes it daytrippable for most, but turning the Bentham into a 400km/h LGV wouldn't even do that.

(I'd agree I'd like to see that 50 minute connection improved, but the UK has a bad connections policy generally, so we'd have to address that first!)

Settle and Carlisle, Bentham and Cumbrian Coast Shinkansen Circle line. You heard it here first....

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Aug 2022 ==

Journeys between Leeds and Glasgow were mostly on the direct trains before the pandemic. Perhaps unsurprisingly.

Which direct trains?

 

[urbophile]

I think (much as the livery is lovely) the omisson of "Snowdon" from the new "Sherpa'r Wyddfa" bus livery is a grave commercial error,

even though the mountain's name is yr Wyddfa and not Snowdon?

 

[A0]

Sorry, i am referring to that if you could change onto northbound WCML services from the Leeds-Lancaster bound train at Carnforth. Just timetable it so the quickest (and cheapest) fair from Leeds/Aire Valley to western scotland would be via that route.

I am not suggesting it would be a massive amount of people, probably very few. But with the lack of northbound connectivity at Carnforth from the Bentham line, it removes most of the reasoning for having a line going in that direction and with the S and C taking so long to get to Carlisle...

EDIT
Just looking at tomorrows journeys:
LDS - GLW via Edinburgh : 4hours
LDS - GLW via Lancaster: 4.45 with 50 mins at lancaster (Cut the connection time by 40 minutes it becomes appealing)
LDS - GLW via Settle Carlisle: 5 hours 17

Or better still 4.32 via Manchester Piccadilly with a 20 minute wait at Manchester.

 

[Starmill]

Which direct trains?

The two-hourly CrossCountry services.

 

[D6130]

If you had a substantial failure of the tunnel or a flood took out some of the bridges on the route it would be so far down the list of priorities that it might be defacto closed. Dont get me wrong, i like using the line when i do, especially now without 142s.

Over the past 15-20 years a lot of money has been spent to avoid potentially catastrophic infrastructure failures on the Bentham line. Melling Tunnel has been repaired at the Wennington end where cracking and deformation of the upper part of the arch portal had occurred. A couple of miles further West, East Lune viaduct underwent major repairs to twisted arch spandrels which were threatening to become detached from the decking and a major embankment slip on the Up side at Tatterthwaite Crossing, between Clapham and Giggleswick, was tackled to remove a long-standing 20 mph permanent speed restriction and restore the 60 mph line speed. Apart from those - and a few minor bank slip repairs - maintenance and renewals have been minimal and there has been no wholesale track, ballast or formation renewal for the past 40 years or so.....only spot re-sleepering and ballasting and recently some rail renewal, including some brand new bull head rails made in Austria! About 70% of the line is still laid with (dipped) jointed bull head track - with both wooden and concrete sleepers - and a smaller proportion with jointed flat bottom rail. The small amount of fairly elderly CWR is mainly second-hand ex-West Coast Main Line. If you really wanted to find out why class 142/144 units were known as 'Bouncy Castles' or 'Nodding Donkeys', this was the line on which to have found out! It certainly did for my back - and many other drivers' backs - leading indirectly to my early retirement on ill-health grounds ten years ago.

Why? Where are the hordes going to Morecambe from Leeds? It's not 1960.

There weren't even hordes going to Morecambe back in 1960, as the majority of Loiners preferred Bridlington, Scarborough or even Whitby. The hordes going to Morecambe came mainly from Bradford, Shipley, Keighley and Skipton....hence Morecambe's nickname 'Bradford-on-Sea'! Of course in the heyday of the West Riding textile industry, many of the Bradford area mill owners - and quite a few of the Leeds ones - resided in Morecambe, Bare, Hest Bank and various rural mansions near Wennington and Bentham. They commuted every weekday on the 'Club train' with breakfast in the restaurant car in the morning and high tea and drinks on the way home. They were hauled into and out of Leeds by a gleaming Lancaster Green Ayre-based 'Patriot' and the Bradford portion worked from and to Skipton by a Manningham-based Fairburn 2-6-4T. How times have changed!

 

[Ken H]

Over the past 15-20 years a lot of money has been spent to avoid potentially catastrophic infrastructure failures on the Bentham line. Melling Tunnel has been repaired at the Wennington end where cracking and deformation of the upper part of the arch portal had occurred. A couple of miles further West, East Lune viaduct underwent major repairs to twisted arch spandrels which were threatening to become detached from the decking and a major embankment slip on the Up side at Tatterthwaite Crossing, between Clapham and Giggleswick, was tackled to remove a long-standing 20 mph permanent speed restriction and restore the 60 mph line speed. Apart from those - and a few minor bank slip repairs - maintenance and renewals have been minimal and there has been no wholesale track, ballast or formation renewal for the past 40 years or so.....only spot re-sleepering and ballasting and recently some rail renewal, including some brand new bull head rails made in Austria! About 70% of the line is still laid with (dipped) jointed bull head track - with both wooden and concrete sleepers - and a smaller proportion with jointed flat bottom rail. The small amount of fairly elderly CWR is mainly second-hand ex-West Coast Main Line. If you really wanted to find out why class 142/144 units were known as 'Bouncy Castles' or 'Nodding Donkeys', this was the line on which to have found out! It certainly did for my back - and many other drivers' backs - leading indirectly to my early retirement on ill-health grounds ten years ago.

There weren't even hordes going to Morecambe back in 1960, as the majority of Loiners preferred Bridlington, Scarborough or even Whitby. The hordes going to Morecambe came mainly from Bradford, Shipley, Keighley and Skipton....hence Morecambe's nickname 'Bradford-on-Sea'! Of course in the heyday of the West Riding textile industry, many of the Bradford area mill owners - and quite a few of the Leeds ones - resided in Morecambe, Bare, Hest Bank and various rural mansions near Wennington and Bentham. They commuted every weekday on the 'Club train' with breakfast in the restaurant car in the morning and high tea and drinks on the way home. They were hauled into and out of Leeds by a gleaming Lancaster Green Ayre-based 'Patriot' and the Bradford portion worked from and to Skipton by a Manningham-based Fairburn 2-6-4T. How times have changed!

in the late 70's early 80's there were some massive Saturday trains. They started at Leeds but went via Bradford FS. Often 8 cars of classic DMU's How they managed at the short platformed bentam line stations I dont know
Remember, Settle only got 2 trains a day back then.

 

[XAM2175]

3 - Right, but we're talking about a rural area and stations are often poorly sited - Bentham's about 1/4 mile outside the main part of the village and is 1.5 miles from Low Bentham, Giggleswick's in the middle of nowhere on the opposite side of a busy A road to the village it purports to serve, Wennington's basically a hamlet which just happens to have a railway station - so why constrict it by saying it *has* to serve the railway station ?

It should serve directly the stations with connecting trains, not the stations for which it's replacing train service.

4 - so if the bus is delayed you're going to delay mainline trains to hold connections ? Can see that working well on the WCML, forcing a Glasgow - London express to be held.......

They don't do that for the train today! Obviously "be included within railway connection protection and through ticketing, including in the middle of a journey" means that passengers should receive the same protections and entitlements as they would with a train-to-train connection.

Is it really so hard to grasp the concept of having a bus service not only replace the train but also to provide a level of service better than the train could?

 

[Ken H]

It should serve directly the stations with connecting trains, not the stations for which it's replacing train service.


They don't do that for the train today! Obviously "be included within railway connection protection and through ticketing, including in the middle of a journey" means that passengers should receive the same protections and entitlements as they would with a train-to-train connection.

Is it really so hard to grasp the concept of having a bus service not only replace the train but also to provide a level of service better than the train could?

so how long do you think a bus would take from Skipton to Lancaster? The current bus takes 2h35m Train is 1h10. And how would a real replacement bus work with the current bus service. it would effectively be the same as the current Skipton - Settle service as far as Long Preston. And would a replacement bus want to avoid Settle?
The road from Clapham village through Bentham to Hornby is quite narrow and slow. So a bus would struggle to do more than 20-25mph.
What is needed is a minibus from Settle Stn to Giggleswick meeting the trains. Gig could become settles other Station.
And dont make the mistake of thinking Gig and Settle are separate places. They are one large settlement. Separated by a river.

 

[yorksrob]

Is it really so hard to grasp the concept of having a bus service not only replace the train but also to provide a level of service better than the train could?

Yes, because it's a figment of your imagination.

 

[Grumpy]

Is it really so hard to grasp the concept of having a bus service not only replace the train but also to provide a level of service better than the train could?

Look at some of the Scottish Citylink services. For example Fort William to Glasgow-4 trains/day compared to 9 coaches. Train journey time 3hour 48 plus, coach 3 hour 4 plus. Coach also cheaper