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

[Neptune]

The Northern unit diagrams show that the Morecambe shuttle interworks with Lancaster - Barrow/Carlisle services and that five different 156s are booked to work the shuttle at different times of day, M-F. The relevant unit diagrams are:
HT663 - 6 evening round trips Lancaster - Morecambe
HT671 - 1 evening
HT673 - 1 mid morning
HT674 - 4 afternoon
HT680 - 7 morning + the Heysham round trip

The five Leeds - Morecambe services, booked as 158s, are interspersed amongst these, and one of them shuttles Lancaster - Morecambe twice before returning to Leeds.

It is by no means obvious that unit and crew resources could be used as efficiently if these diagrams were disentangled in order that a single unit could work the shuttle all day. Units and crews would likely have longer layovers at Lancaster before returning to Barrow/Carlisle/Leeds.

I agree 100% but neither can you categorically say that unit/crew efficiency can’t be retained or improved either if there is a recast however minor this may be. Lancaster is a PNB point also which means crews don’t have to work away to take these making it more efficient.

 

[The Planner]

£400k for a SEU? (Signalling equivalent unit)
Not anymore.....

 

[HSTEd]

ECP makes a hell of a lot of sense on the S&C for performance and safety reasons aside from the potential train integrity checking. However while ECP braking might solve the freight issues, AIUI there would still be the issues of DMUs which could work in multiple and heritage/Charter stock which will only fit ECP braking if they are forced to. Also is ECP part of the L3 spec?

ECP isn't explicitly part of the L3 spec, but it is pretty much the only extant method of getting freight integrity checking at reasonable costs.
I believe most operational DMUs have electrical integrity checking, although I'm not sure about this. I seem to recall the Sprinter coupling spec having a train integrity loop wire.

Charter stock would have to be fitted in the same way as freight stock, but the fleet is quite small compared to the freight stock - although despite FOIs to the ORR and Network Rail, noone can give me an estimate of how big the operational freight stock fleet even is!

I seem to recall seeing higher estimates of ECP fitments, although still a far sight lower than the SEU costs.

Even if its double or treble that cost I don't think it really matters given the ruinous price of signalling in the modern era.
Indeed it would probably be worth it even if all the wagons in service had to be replaced to do the conversion!

Signalling has become incredibly expensive.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Dec 2022 ==

£400k for a SEU?
Not anymore.....

I almost dread to ask what it is now!

 

[30907]

I agree 100% but neither can you categorically say that unit/crew efficiency can’t be retained or improved either if there is a recast however minor this may be. Lancaster is a PNB point also which means crews don’t have to work away to take these making it more efficient.

But only if you have layovers in the schedule to match.
A Morecambe shuttle all day would need multiple crews,and/or gaps in the timetable for PNBs. These could neatly be covered by extending services from Leeds.... (I agree the present Morecambe shuttle could be improved.)

Leeds trains are crewed from Yorkshire so time for a PNB at Lancaster is inefficient (nowt to do with the Wars of the Roses).

 

[Neptune]

But only if you have layovers in the schedule to match.

Correct.

A Morecambe shuttle all day would need multiple crews,and/or gaps in the timetable for PNBs. These could neatly be covered by extending services from Leeds.... (I agree the present Morecambe shuttle could be improved.)

Which they already do. Terminating the Leeds service at Lancaster won’t necessarily cost any extra Traincrew if diagrammed properly.

Leeds trains are crewed from Yorkshire so time for a PNB at Lancaster is inefficient (nowt to do with the Wars of the Roses).

Never mentioned Skipton crews having a PNB at Lancaster however it does happen now if, for instance the crew does some work beforehand and then works to Lancaster before their break.

I still believe the Bentham line could be made more efficient if also crewed from the west side.

 

[Greybeard33]

Correct.

Which they already do. Terminating the Leeds service at Lancaster won’t necessarily cost any extra Traincrew if diagrammed properly.

Never mentioned Skipton crews having a PNB at Lancaster however it does happen now if, for instance the crew does some work beforehand and then works to Lancaster before their break.

I still believe the Bentham line could be made more efficient if also crewed from the west side.

Forgive my scepticism about your ideas, but I believe Northern's planners generally do an excellent job in using traincrew and unit resources efficiently. I don't think they have created such complex diagrams for the fun of it!

 

[lyndhurst25]

I am surprised that nobody has suggested this yet: Some of the reasons given for not being able to extend S&C services on to Glasgow are lack of available stock / nobody wants to spend all that time on a Sprinter / trains not fast enough to travel along the WCML north of Carlisle without causing hold ups. Well, what trains are about to become available in the near future? GWR Castle Class HSTs! The HST Staycation Express attracted a lot of extra tourist traffic when it was running.

Seriously though, if Northern want to increase passenger numbers then they have shot themselves in the foot with the recently introduced Dales Railcard 0815 morning restrictions (why not just bar travel towards Leeds on the first trains of the day, like they are doing for the current Dales Railcard Winter Offer?) and removing the long established Horton/Clapham and Ribblehead/Bentham ticket inter-availability that was used by walkers.

 

[Neptune]

Forgive my scepticism about your ideas, but I believe Northern's planners generally do an excellent job in using traincrew and unit resources efficiently. I don't think they have created such complex diagrams for the fun of it!

I agree entirely and have never said they don’t. In fact I have confidence that they could carry out what I suggest should the service pattern be altered.

Anyway it’s fine. I won’t risk anyone taking anything out of context again and I shan’t post anything else on here.

 

[InkyScrolls]

I am surprised that nobody has suggested this yet: Some of the reasons given for not being able to extend S&C services on to Glasgow are lack of available stock / nobody wants to spend all that time on a Sprinter / trains not fast enough to travel along the WCML north of Carlisle without causing hold ups. Well, what trains are about to become available in the near future? GWR Castle Class HSTs!

Would the crew training be worth it? I wonder, though I agree that would solve quite a few problems.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Dec 2022 ==

How would the service going to Preston and Blackpool rather than morecambe compare to route via Bradford interchange?

Via Bradford to Preston and Blackpool: 1 hr 45 mins, 2 hrs 10 mins.

Via Bentham (assuming one min recovery at Lancaster and three to change end at Preston): 1 hr 57 mins, 2 hrs 25 mins.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Dec 2022 ==

I still believe the Bentham line could be made more efficient if also crewed from the west side.

A micro depot based at Lancaster, signing to Leeds, Windermere, Barrow, Morecambe, Heysham and Manchester Airport would remove many of the early morning ECS movements from Wigan/Barrow, and provide a second, locally based depot for the Bentham Line.

 

[InkyScrolls]

Looking at passenger loadings alone, the case for retaining the Bentham Line service isn't great - the four stations of Giggleswick, Clapham, Bentham and Wennington contribute a total of just 45k (approx.) per year, or on average just under one per station per train.

Were local services to be withdrawn, Giggleswick passengers would likely largely transfer to Settle (especially if the frequency was improved). The primary losers out would be Bentham residents, who make up over half the yearly total for the line. Wennington and Clapham serve very small populations which are for local journeys better served by bus (especially in the case of Clapham!).

I am not advocating closure but I appreciate where that point of view comes from. Certainly if, of the four, only Bentham remained open, with services primarily tailored to through traffic (which in my experience makes up over half the total), savings could be made for (comparatively) little public inconvenience.

 

[yorksrob]

Looking at passenger loadings alone, the case for retaining the Bentham Line service isn't great - the four stations of Giggleswick, Clapham, Bentham and Wennington contribute a total of just 45k (approx.) per year, or on average just under one per station per train.

Were local services to be withdrawn, Giggleswick passengers would likely largely transfer to Settle (especially if the frequency was improved). The primary losers out would be Bentham residents, who make up over half the yearly total for the line. Wennington and Clapham serve very small populations which are for local journeys better served by bus (especially in the case of Clapham!).

I am not advocating closure but I appreciate where that point of view comes from. Certainly if, of the four, only Bentham remained open, with services primarily tailored to through traffic (which in my experience makes up over half the total), savings could be made for (comparatively) little public inconvenience.

Why, most people on the line are using it from Skipton and beyond to Carnforth and beyond.

 

[Ken H]

Looking at passenger loadings alone, the case for retaining the Bentham Line service isn't great - the four stations of Giggleswick, Clapham, Bentham and Wennington contribute a total of just 45k (approx.) per year, or on average just under one per station per train.

Were local services to be withdrawn, Giggleswick passengers would likely largely transfer to Settle (especially if the frequency was improved). The primary losers out would be Bentham residents, who make up over half the yearly total for the line. Wennington and Clapham serve very small populations which are for local journeys better served by bus (especially in the case of Clapham!).

I am not advocating closure but I appreciate where that point of view comes from. Certainly if, of the four, only Bentham remained open, with services primarily tailored to through traffic (which in my experience makes up over half the total), savings could be made for (comparatively) little public inconvenience.

So where are the Settle- Lancaster trains with no Bentham line?

The line is a through route for Shipley, Bingley, Keighley and Skipton people to get to N Lancs/S Cumbria. Even people from Leeds and Bradford.

 

[tbtc]

Why, most people on the line are using it from Skipton and beyond to Carnforth and beyond.

…in which case (using the same DMU resources to provide) an extension of the Halifax stopper would maintain a West Yorkshire - Lancaster link, but by serving Bradford/ Halifax/ Burnley/ Blackburn/ Preston (rather than Giggleswick/ Wennington etc) they’d attract a lot more passengers

Call it “getting cars off the road” or “farebox revenue” or “bums on seats” or whatever metric you want but if you can provide a Leeds - Lancaster link via much bigger intermediate stations then why you use resources on stations that only have one passenger per departure?

 

[yorksrob]

…in which case (using the same DMU resources to provide) an extension of the Halifax stopper would maintain a West Yorkshire - Lancaster link, but by serving Bradford/ Halifax/ Burnley/ Blackburn/ Preston (rather than Giggleswick/ Wennington etc) they’d attract a lot more passengers

Call it “getting cars off the road” or “farebox revenue” or “bums on seats” or whatever metric you want but if you can provide a Leeds - Lancaster link via much bigger intermediate stations then why you use resources on stations that only have one passenger per departure?

Except that it would be a longer way round for a large proportion of those through passengers.

Remember, people who would find it more direct and convenient to use copy pit, will likely already be using it, so you will just be making rail travel less attractive for those who don't.

 

[InkyScrolls]

At present there is no regularly scheduled freight traffic over the BL; is there any that could be to free up capacity elsewhere? I suspect not, as both the line's junctions and south-facing.

Clearly the majority of the line's traffic comes from longer distance journeys.

 

[tbtc]

Except that it would be a longer way round for a large proportion of those through passengers.

Remember, people who would find it more direct and convenient to use copy pit, will likely already be using it, so you will just be making rail travel less attractive for those who don't.

A direct train via Bradford/ Burnley/ Blackburn/ Preston would take two hours, that’s about five minutes more than the Giggleswick route BUT serving hundreds of thousands more people (and people on here keep telling me that a direct service is more attractive to passengers)

Seems odd to focus resources on tiny places with “one passenger per train”, when the same resources could benefit many more people

 

[Greybeard33]

A direct train via Bradford/ Burnley/ Blackburn/ Preston would take two hours, that’s about five minutes more than the Giggleswick route BUT serving hundreds of thousands more people (and people on here keep telling me that a direct service is more attractive to passengers)

Seems odd to focus resources on tiny places with “one passenger per train”, when the same resources could benefit many more people

Are there paths available on the 2-track WCML between Preston and Lancaster for such a 75mph 90mph DMU service? And even if paths could be found, is it a sensible use of resources to run more DMUs under the wires just so that the small number of Leeds - Lancaster passengers can avoid a change at Preston?

What would be the journey time increase for, say, Skipton - Lancaster or Keighley - Lancaster compared with the current Bentham line service?

 

[yorksrob]

A direct train via Bradford/ Burnley/ Blackburn/ Preston would take two hours, that’s about five minutes more than the Giggleswick route BUT serving hundreds of thousands more people (and people on here keep telling me that a direct service is more attractive to passengers)

Seems odd to focus resources on tiny places with “one passenger per train”, when the same resources could benefit many more people

Not if you're going from Skipton or Keighley for example to Carnforth or the Cumbrian coast.

By all means bolster services on Copy pit. DMU's should be released by electrification elsewhere, not robbed from the Little North Western.

From your "one passenger per train" remark it's obvious that you never use the line anyway.

 

[30907]

A direct train via Bradford/ Burnley/ Blackburn/ Preston would take two hours, that’s about five minutes more than the Giggleswick route BUT serving hundreds of thousands more people (and people on here keep telling me that a direct service is more attractive to passengers)

Having checked current schedules I make it 2h8 via Preston and 1h52 via Carnforth, so 15min not 5min (it does seem to be pathable westbound but not eastbound BTW, and it could easily be a 90mph unit) -

From your "one passenger per train" remark it's obvious that you never use the line anyway.

I think he means "stations that average one passenger per train" which I suppose is about right for Wennington.

 

[InkyScrolls]

I do think the LNW route is worth retaining for through traffic at the very least. A hypothetical service calling at Leeds > Keighley > Skipton > Bentham > Carnforth > Lancaster, for example, would take approximately 1 hr 30 mins, inclusive of recovery time, and is possible to path without altering the timetables of the Airedale Line or WCML. This would save nearly 25 mins on the best current schedule and lose virtually none of its traffic. The S&C could see a similar service calling at Leeds > Keighley > Skipton > Settle > Kirkby Stephen > Appleby > Carlisle, for example, which would take around half an hour less than the current usual service calling at all stops, i.e. circa 2 hrs 10 mins. This would suit through traffic, which accounts for around half the total, much better than an all-stops. Again, this is possible to work into the current timetable.

Local services calling at all stations could be served by a two-hourly shuttle alternating between Skipton > Carlisle/Carnforth.

 

[Ken H]

I do think the LNW route is worth retaining for through traffic at the very least. A hypothetical service calling at Leeds > Keighley > Skipton > Bentham > Carnforth > Lancaster, for example, would take approximately 1 hr 30 mins, inclusive of recovery time, and is possible to path without altering the timetables of the Airedale Line or WCML. This would save nearly 25 mins on the best current schedule and lose virtually none of its traffic. The S&C could see a similar service calling at Leeds > Keighley > Skipton > Settle > Kirkby Stephen > Appleby > Carlisle, for example, which would take around half an hour less than the current usual service calling at all stops, i.e. circa 2 hrs 10 mins. This would suit through traffic, which accounts for around half the total, much better than an all-stops. Again, this is possible to work into the current timetable.

Local services calling at all stations could be served by a two-hourly shuttle alternating between Skipton > Carlisle/Carnforth.

Why not stop the semis fasts at Giggleswick. Its really Settle South.
Lots get off and on at Horton and Ribblehead. Prob worth stopping the semi fasts there.

 

[TheBigD]

I do think the LNW route is worth retaining for through traffic at the very least. A hypothetical service calling at Leeds > Keighley > Skipton > Bentham > Carnforth > Lancaster, for example, would take approximately 1 hr 30 mins, inclusive of recovery time, and is possible to path without altering the timetables of the Airedale Line or WCML. This would save nearly 25 mins on the best current schedule and lose virtually none of its traffic. The S&C could see a similar service calling at Leeds > Keighley > Skipton > Settle > Kirkby Stephen > Appleby > Carlisle, for example, which would take around half an hour less than the current usual service calling at all stops, i.e. circa 2 hrs 10 mins. This would suit through traffic, which accounts for around half the total, much better than an all-stops. Again, this is possible to work into the current timetable.

Local services calling at all stations could be served by a two-hourly shuttle alternating between Skipton > Carlisle/Carnforth.

Not sure where you've got your journey time reductions from.
A few timetables ago the 0949 ex Leeds and 1504 ex Carlisle did just the stops you mentioned. It was only 10 minutes quicker than those that served all stops. 0949 had a 2hr26 journey time and the 1504 2hr33.
The quickest you could make the Leeds Lancaster as a limted stop would be around 1hr40.

 

[Greybeard33]

Not sure where you've got your journey time reductions from.
A few timetables ago the 0949 ex Leeds and 1504 ex Carlisle did just the stops you mentioned. It was only 10 minutes quicker than those that served all stops. 0949 had a 2hr26 journey time and the 1504 2hr33.
The quickest you could make the Leeds Lancaster as a limted stop would be around 1hr40.

Using the rule of thumb of 2 minutes per station stop, including braking and acceleration, the services you mention must have had very leisurely timings if they only saved 10 minutes by skipping 12 stations between Carlisle and Leeds.

Back in 1973, I recall I caught an express direct from Appleby to Nottingham, after a walking holiday on the Pennine Way. I believe it had originated in Glasgow, loco hauled corridor stock and quite well loaded. I do not remember the details of the stopping pattern or timings, but at that time BR had closed all the intermediate stations between Appleby and Settle, and it was certainly much quicker than today's all shacks DMU.

I think the S&C is better suited to that sort of interregional service, providing a reasonably quick link from Carlisle to Leeds and the E Midlands, than the current pattern of crawling between all the little stations in the middle of nowhere, which are never going to generate much footfall.

 

[zwk500]

I think the S&C is better suited to that sort of interregional service, providing a reasonably quick link from Carlisle to Leeds and the E Midlands, than the current pattern of crawling between all the little stations in the middle of nowhere, which are never going to generate much footfall.

The more important question is not what the infrastructure is suited to but what the traffic demand is. Does anybody have numbers for East Mids and Yorks to Carlisle/Western Scotland?

 

[HSTEd]

I just looked it up in the electronic sectional appendix. Carnforth to the junction with the S&C isn't far off 25 miles, and its got nothing higher than 60mph and significant stretches less than that.

The 43 minutes from Long Preston to Carnforth doesn't look too bad on that score. [Especially as that is about 27 miles]

EDIT: Even if you could instantaneously brake and accelerate to exactly match the speed limit you aren't going to get much less than 35 minutes given the stretches of 40/45mph running.

 

[tbtc]

Are there paths available on the 2-track WCML between Preston and Lancaster for such a 75mph DMU service?

No need to restrict it to 75mph, given that Northern have 90/100mph DMUs

And even if paths could be found, is it a sensible use of resources to run more DMUs under the wires just so that the small number of Leeds - Lancaster passengers can avoid a change at Preston?

I know that the combined passenger numbers for the “unique” Bentham like stations are fairly low but you’re telling me that through passengers from Leeds to Lancaster are only a small number?

In which case we could probably just cut Bentham line services without needing replacement via another route.

Maybe just an occasional shuttle from Skipton to Carnforth/ Lancaster instead, it would save some paths at the Leeds end (if there are only a tiny number of long distance passengers, as you say)

What would be the journey time increase for, say, Skipton - Lancaster or Keighley - Lancaster compared with the current Bentham line service?

Not if you're going from Skipton or Keighley for example to Carnforth or the Cumbrian coast

To answer the two similar points above, there’d obviously be a big time penalty for those kind of “intermediate” journeys

But that’s the point; there aren’t that many people doing those kind of journeys

We closed Skipton to Colne, meaning a long diversion for passengers between the two places, because demand between those two wasn’t much… same applies here

From your "one passenger per train" remark it's obvious that you never use the line anyway.

I think he means "stations that average one passenger per train" which I suppose is about right for Wennington.

As @30907 says, I’m taking about the number of departing passengers for the sixteen services a day at the Bentham line stations (eight a day in each direction) - I’ve quoted the exact numbers earlier on this thread (and on previous threads)

The more important question is not what the infrastructure is suited to but what the traffic demand is. Does anybody have numbers for East Mids and Yorks to Carlisle/Western Scotland?

I don’t, but before Covid we had a bi-hourly service from Derby/ Sheffield/ Wakefield/ Leeds to Motherwell/ Glasgow

If it’s a huge direct market then you could double that frequency with just one more unit (by extending the XC Edinburgh terminators to Glasgow), but I always suspect that these debates are more about nostalgia for “St Pancras/ Nottingham to Glasgow” trains than any major demand between places hundreds of miles apart

 

[InkyScrolls]

Not sure where you've got your journey time reductions from.
A few timetables ago the 0949 ex Leeds and 1504 ex Carlisle did just the stops you mentioned. It was only 10 minutes quicker than those that served all stops. 0949 had a 2hr26 journey time and the 1504 2hr33.
The quickest you could make the Leeds Lancaster as a limted stop would be around 1hr40.

Both those timings have an inordinate amount of recovery time, due in part to the FO S&C diagram detaching carriages (at Skipton, I believe). The timings I've given are certainly possible.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Dec 2022 ==

I just looked it up in the electronic sectional appendix. Carnforth to the junction with the S&C isn't far off 25 miles, and its got nothing higher than 60mph and significant stretches less than that.

The 43 minutes from Long Preston to Carnforth doesn't look too bad on that score. [Especially as that is about 27 miles]

EDIT: Even if you could instantaneously brake and accelerate to exactly match the speed limit you aren't going to get much less than 35 minutes given the stretches of 40/45mph running.

Not significant stretches. Two short 30 moh sections over a weak bridge (CPY) and barrow crossing (GIG), and 40 mph through Melling tunnel/a short section heading away from the east portal.

As a side note, the 24.5 miles from Carnforth to Settle Jct. is the longest signal section in the British Isles.

 

[Greybeard33]

No need to restrict it to 75mph, given that Northern have 90/100mph DMUs

You previously suggested that your proposed replacement service could be provided using the existing Halifax stopper and Bentham line DMUs, i.e 90mph 158s. Before the 100mph 195s entered service, Northern had trouble getting WCML paths for 158s to work the Manchester to Cumbria services.

I know that the combined passenger numbers for the “unique” Bentham like stations are fairly low but you’re telling me that through passengers from Leeds to Lancaster are only a small number?

In which case we could probably just cut Bentham line services without needing replacement via another route.

Maybe just an occasional shuttle from Skipton to Carnforth/ Lancaster instead, it would save some paths at the Leeds end (if there are only a tiny number of long distance passengers, as you say)

Well, clearly only a proportion of the passengers on the infrequent 2/3-car Bentham line DMUs are travelling the whole way from Leeds to Lancaster. And even @yorksrob only claims that said DMUs are "comfortably loaded", nowhere near full and standing. So is it really justifiable to run a lightly loaded 2-car DMU from Preston to Lancaster and back, just to save those few passengers a change at Preston? Surely the existing hourly York to Blackpool service would have sufficient spare capacity to accommodate the Leeds to Lancaster travellers who currently use the Bentham line, if the Bentham line were closed without any replacement service?

 

[TheBigD]

Both those timings have an inordinate amount of recovery time, due in part to the FO S&C diagram detaching carriages (at Skipton, I believe). The timings I've given are certainly possible.

The southbound service had a few extra minutes dwell at Skipton, but the northbound service was pretty tightly timed. Both services were single 2 car 158s and did not detach or attach carriages anywhere.

Around 2hr25m is the best you'd get with the current infrastructure.

Leeds to Skipton is 35 minutes, you won't get any quicker unless you remove the electric stopping services.
Skipton to Carlisle would need to be 1hr35m for your 2hr10 time.
Skipton to Carlisle is around
85 miles, with linespeed is no more than 60mph, with much lower speeds (eg, 30mph) at places like Ribblehead and Dent. There are also lower speeds elsewhere along the route. Around 1hr45-1hr50 is the best you'd get on this section, giving you around 2hr25.

The S&C may have been an 80mph mainline back in the olden days, but 60mph is the maximum these days.

Edit - The current limited stop 1340 Carlisle to Leeds takes 2hrs25m. It has just 2.5 minutes of allowances between Carlisle and Skipton.

 

[D6130]

The southbound service had a few extra minutes dwell at Skipton, but the northbound service was pretty tightly timed. Both services were single 2 car 158s and did not detach or attach carriages anywhere.

On the rare occasions when I drove the Southbound train - covering for unavailable Leeds drivers - prior to my early retirement in 2012, we often had a wait of 5-6 minutes at Settle and then frequently another 2-3 minutes at Skipton.