Oswestry Branch Railway Restoration - The Truth

[CambrianView]

...and back on topic, potential funding streams available now for the restoration of the Oswestry branch line:

We still have no official word on the cancellation of funding for this project. This week I received a flyer from Shropshire Council informing me of service cuts because we have to make a £62 million of savings to keep a balanced budget in 2024/25. This in the same financial year that the council are match funding the restoration of the exterior of Oswestry Station, a building solely occupied by Cambrian Heritage Railways, who recently negotiated to relinquish liability for the maintenance of the interior of the building with the authority.

Because CHR want to contract out the shuttle service to Gobowen (possibly to Transport for Wales), the charity cannot apply for Lottery Heritage Funding. Neither can it approach Europe for obvious reasons. So that leaves either a very, very rich doner or Central Government.

I think the only way CHR can now get funding in the final 40 years of its lease is from the Government as part of wider plans to upgrade the A5 to a dual carriageway rather than a 'stand alone' project, and even this would substantially add to the cost of the scheme.

Meanwhile, traffic levels are increasing with both Whittington and Gobowen becoming increasingly isolated from Oswestry...

 

[Shrop]

...and back on topic, potential funding streams available now for the restoration of the Oswestry branch line:

We still have no official word on the cancellation of funding for this project. This week I received a flyer from Shropshire Council informing me of service cuts because we have to make a £62 million of savings to keep a balanced budget in 2024/25. This in the same financial year that the council are match funding the restoration of the exterior of Oswestry Station, a building solely occupied by Cambrian Heritage Railways, who recently negotiated to relinquish liability for the maintenance of the interior of the building with the authority.

Because CHR want to contract out the shuttle service to Gobowen (possibly to Transport for Wales), the charity cannot apply for Lottery Heritage Funding. Neither can it approach Europe for obvious reasons. So that leaves either a very, very rich doner or Central Government.

I think the only way CHR can now get funding in the final 40 years of its lease is from the Government as part of wider plans to upgrade the A5 to a dual carriageway rather than a 'stand alone' project, and even this would substantially add to the cost of the scheme.

Meanwhile, traffic levels are increasing with both Whittington and Gobowen becoming increasingly isolated from Oswestry...

Mea culpa for the digressing - apologies! With regard to any wish for a dual carriageway along this section, as I've said upthread I think DfT would be hesitant about this, even if it could be justified and funded as a stand-alone project. But it's interesting to hear your updates and I may be wrong about DfT ...

 

[EyeKay]

Having lurked on this thread for a while, I agree with most people that it is going to be difficult to justify reopening, especially if the cost of a bridge over or under the A5 is included. Most of the comments around the level crossing are about retaining it as a railway crossing. If the line is reopened using a VLR vehicle, like the Revolution vehicle, then it could be done as a light rail crossing with ordinary traffic lights for the road. As @Shrop suggested, the speed limit on the A5 would need to be reduced for the section. Perhaps the crossing could have red light/speed cameras to protect it. Given the way people drive on that part of the A5, the cameras may earn more revenue than the train .

Anyway, I’ll put my crayons away now.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Sep 2024 ==

I should have also said that the cycle time for a light rail crossing should be quicker than a heavy rail crossing

 

[CambrianView]

@ Shrop & Eyekay: I welcome the conversation and input of members here.

As Shrop may know there's almost no open discussion in Oswestry about the restoration project, but moving back to some of the suggestions you made earlier; You may be aware of fairly recent modifications made at the Maesbury Road junction on the A483? This involved introducing a speed limit of 50mph and having the junction traffic light controlled, so actually stopping the traffic on the main road to allow other road users coming out of the industrial estate and from Maesbury easier access. The junction has been staggered more effectively with walkers and cyclists directed to use the island via a fenced area.

Perhaps this has made the junction safer. I don't know. It's worth pointing out that the second of the main level crossings on the Oswestry branch line is located just yards away from the junction.

Over ten years ago I did do my own audit of traffic levels on the A5 between Oswestry and Gobowen at the level crossing there. It's woefully out of date now, but serves as an indication of what was going on at that point.

 

[stevieinselby]

Fourth, the short temporary road closures will do little to lengthen journey times. Traffic held for 3 minutes will then travel more quickly for a couple of miles, and by 3 or 4 miles along the road it will have caught up the queue that was in front of it before the crossing. And thanks to the road being “High volume”, then this does indeed constitute most of the traffic at this point. So yes of course there would be a few delays, but it isn’t really reasonable to make much of an alarm out of this.

You're contradicting your own point about the concertina effect. When you stop traffic for 3 minutes, that 3-minute delay permeates backwards through the traffic and causes a domino effect that persists long after the road is reopened.
But the situation would be worse southbound, where a 3-minute closure and the associated wave behind it would almost certainly see traffic backing up across the Five Crosses roundabout on a regular basis, which would be much more disruptive to traffic flow.

 

[Shrop]

You're contradicting your own point about the concertina effect. When you stop traffic for 3 minutes, that 3-minute delay permeates backwards through the traffic and causes a domino effect that persists long after the road is reopened.
But the situation would be worse southbound, where a 3-minute closure and the associated wave behind it would almost certainly see traffic backing up across the Five Crosses roundabout on a regular basis, which would be much more disruptive to traffic flow.

Stopping traffic for 3 minutes isn't quite the same thing. The concertina effect is caused by drivers following too close to the vehicle in front (as the vast majority too on busy roads) and then far more than necessary all apply the brakes. Thanks to driver behaviour there are then many ripples along the route which reduces capacity, it is this that is controlled by lower speed limits on motorways. A one-off stop for a crossing point isn't quite the same thing.

I agree that the roundabout would become clogged quickly though. In the unlikely event that this was to all go ahead, this roundabout would need protecting by a clear junction markings, and importantly, enforcement of them!

 

[CambrianView]

From my reading and understanding of City Sciences' "Shropshire Cycling and Walking Plan", they identify safe and direct routes that have minimal impact on other road traffic, and by direct I mean "as the crow flies".

The problem is the pavement that joins Gobowen to Oswestry flip flops from one side of the road to the other at the five junctions roundabout. This means walkers going from Gobowen to Oswestry are directed to cross the road 5 times (that includes once over the A5 at the roundabout). The pavements get very narrow at times and come close to oncoming traffic - so totally unsuitable for cycling along. The bordering hedge tends to overgrow at certain times of year, and I suspect it's an ancient hedgerow as it is fairly close to an old hillfort.

Most of the surrounding villages close to Oswestry are connected via pavements alongside the road, but Gobowen and Whittington are seperated by the busy bypass.

I'm now thinking along the lines of the cheapest way of connecting Gobowen to Oswestry. Perhaps a scheme along the lines of the Mawwdich Trail linking Barmouth to Dolgellau... Take up the existing rotten sleepers and line then lay a dust track. Gates at the level crossing to stop people just going straight out into the road. A central island so you cross one lane at a time and at least visibility would be an improvement on trying to cross at the roundabout.

I think this would be a much cheaper way of using what is in effect public land that is not in use.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Sep 2024 ==

I've attached the Oswestry Appendix of the "Shropshire Cycling and Walking Plan" as compiled by City Science. Earlier in this thread a drew attention to the paragraph on page 41 item 5.1 "Top Performing Schemes" the study says of the unused railway line that connects Oswestry to Gobowen and is owned by Shropshire Council and leased to a railway operator "A scheme was proposed here, to extend the current cycle path along the existing railway corridor to Gobowen, however, we were informed that this did not align with plans to run a shuttle rail service. Otherwise, it is our view that such a scheme would have scored very well".

I wanted to know who had told them that a cycle path did not "align" with the shuttle service. City Science replied: "The text you refer to can be read a few ways. But the intended meaning was that the scheme would have been in the top 10 for the area (if I recall it was #1... had we secured further support. However, the Council had been pushed back on a number of schemes, so to avoid the whole programme being hindered, many schemes like this which could potentially conflict with other proposals were set to one side".

 

[CambrianView]

and your county councillor will be overloaded with getting answers about potholes not being mended and the like and know they have no money (Shropshire has not been able to afford evening and weekend bus services for years) short of central government gimmick funds.

On which, why not concentrate on the most valuable thing identified: highway maintenance at level crossings on heritage railways. This is a genuine problem that I was not aware of and needs solving. Though be careful what you wish for, the solution may be that no heritage railway is able to open a level crossing ever again of course.

Largely agree with, but one minor point:

At Chirk you enter the land of the (friendly) dragon. Transport objectives change considerably, general wellness of those living in an area has more weight than journey times of those passing through. In England it's the other way round.

Retired now, I was in and out of infrastructure project evaluation over 40 years. No matter the faults in the various desk studies, nor the questions of scheme/objective prioritisation in the local transport plan, my view is the only things that could realistically happen in the next 5-10 years would be small safety improvements, traffic calming etc. Those are up against similar problems elsewhere in the county for prioritisation.

We don't yet know how small scheme funding will work with the new government (I hope random PR captioned competitive bids and 'deals' are behind us, the old way was submitting your scheme when you were ready and waiting for it to bubble up the priority list) but the total amount of money for this is unlikely to change dramatically.

Regarding maintenance at level crossings. According to Highways England, as the railway operator in this case, Cambrian Heritage Railways, has no employees it has no Health & Safety liability in respeact of any of its activities, including at level crossings. With the granting of the TWAO responsibility for the maintenance of all road over and road under rail structures transfered to the land owner, namely Shropshire Council, who incidently match funded the purchase of the Act. That means Shropshire Council must maintain the level crossings on the A5 and A483.

As to the actual operation of level crossings, I recently approached the Office of Rail and Road to ask:

Cambrian Heritage Railways has a TWAO and a Light Railway Order is using manually operated gates over a pedestrian level crossing at Coney Green in Oswestry. The land is owned by the local authority and leased to Cambrian Heritage Railways. The railway operator is a charity that operates a semi-regular heritage service over the line, but it has no employees, only volunteers. Does Cambrian Heritage Railways have the LEGAL right to physically block the public right of way by using the gates on the Coney Green level crossing operated by volunteers?

And their reply was:
"The Oswestry Light Railway Order 1995 states in schedule 2 that wicket gates shall be provided at Coney Green Level Crossing.
[1]https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1995...) Cambrian Railways are permitted to use the gates at Coney Green. Whether it is a railway run by volunteers or a railway with employees does not matter. You may wish to consult the relevant local authority for the answer to your question as they are the enforcing authority for Public Rights of Way legislation."

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Sep 2024 ==

This is a link to a recent issue of my local newspaper "The Advertizer"

Labour transport minister deals blow to Oswestry to Gobowen rail plan

THE reopening of the train line between Oswestry and Gobowen was dealt another blow after a Labour Government minister said projects are being…

www.bordercountiesadvertizer.co.uk

In a nutshell, the Oswestry branch railway restoration was been cancelled due to the money not being available.

That leaves my local council, which according to my potential local Liberal Democrat councillor canvasing for next May's Local Elections "...badly mismanaged and on the verge of bankruptcy", with several miles of unused railway land plus responsibility for the maintenance of level crossings over the A5, A483 amongst others and currently restoring Oswestry Railway Station!

 

[CambrianView]

Some recent photos of Cambrian Heritage Railways current operations in Gobowen as of September 2024:

 

[Llanigraham]

Has anyone made a convincing case for what this short branch would be for, before getting into the tricky stuff like the how?
Oswestry is a small town - the catchment area who cant just as easily get to Gobowen is minimal. And where do the good people of Oswestry want to go, and are those places actually near a railway station?

Exactly!!
No-one has yet managed to provide any worthwhile evidence for re-opening this line, but plenty have shown why it is all "cloud cuckoo land",

A483/A5 south of Ruabon:
One of the biggest problems now is the fact that the 2 viaducts over the River Dee were built as 2 lanes only, and making them a dual carriageway would mean them building new ones, at enormous cost.

We still have no official word on the cancellation of funding for this project. This week I received a flyer from Shropshire Council informing me of service cuts because we have to make a £62 million of savings to keep a balanced budget in 2024/25. This in the same financial year that the council are match funding the restoration of the exterior of Oswestry Station, a building solely occupied by Cambrian Heritage Railways, who recently negotiated to relinquish liability for the maintenance of the interior of the building with the authority.

Didn't I read that there were plans to rent out parts the building to things like office space and a possible restaurant, thereby providing an income stream?

Meanwhile, traffic levels are increasing with both Whittington and Gobowen becoming increasingly isolated from Oswestry...

Are they? Not what I am being told.

 

[CambrianView]

Exactly!!
No-one has yet managed to provide any worthwhile evidence for re-opening this line, but plenty have shown why it is all "cloud cuckoo land",

A483/A5 south of Ruabon:
One of the biggest problems now is the fact that the 2 viaducts over the River Dee were built as 2 lanes only, and making them a dual carriageway would mean them building new ones, at enormous cost.


Didn't I read that there were plans to rent out parts the building to things like office space and a possible restaurant, thereby providing an income stream?

Are they? Not what I am being told.

The case (although not convincing) is there is currently no out of hours operating public service that will take staff and or visitors from the mainline to the hospital and directly into town and that a restored line would create jobs and attract tourists (as detailed in the SOBC).

You are absolutely right about crossing the Dee Valley on the A483/A5. There is no question that traffic builds up and slows down on that stetch of road.

You did read that Shropshire Council are hoping to rent out rooms in the restored Oswestry Railway Station, but they have owned the building for almost a couple of DECADES now and other businesses and shops have come and gone. Now only CHR use it. So, what makes Shropshire Council think that once the restoration is complete other businesses will want to use the building? And, the almost £1 million price tag for this 2nd restoration is for the exterior of the building ONLY.

As to traffic levels building on the A5, please share your information. I can only point to my own expereince trying to cross the 5 junction roundabout twice daily.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Sep 2024 ==

...on a slightly different note, I was once told in confidence that the reason Shropshire County Council were persuaded to buy the entire railway line was that the seller was only willing to speak to the authority (not the railway club), and that it was really to get access to some brownfield site owned by Advantage West Midlands to develop into business units in a prime spot close to the centre of town.

...and, at some point Tesco wanted to buy the Old Oswestry Railway Station to use as an entrance point to a new store to be built behind it. The council strongly objected to the proposal.

With the benefit of hindsight, I think the Tescos proposal would have created more jobs and cost the rate payer less money!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Oct 2024 ==

Seeking clarification of funding for the restoration of the Oswestry branch line, I recently wrote to the Department for Transport asking for their official position. They responded:

"The Department is undertaking a review of various infrastructure projects, including those under the Restoring Your Railway programme. This includes the Oswestry to Gobowen line project. This review work will go on to inform preparations for the Spending Review.

However, ministers have been clear that the Government will not be able to afford to take forward all projects under the funding that we have available. Ultimately, the Government believes that local transport authorities and local leaders are best placed to prioritise and take forward transport projects which are most appropriate for the areas they serve, particularly where they will support economic growth, job creation, more and better housing, and, ultimately, demonstrate a good business case."

 

[Steve Boulding]

The best option for the rail service from Oswestry to Gobowen (calling intermediately at Park Hall, adjacent to the Orthopaedic Hospital, where there are now more than 5000 entries and exits daily, patients, outpatients, staff, visitors, etc.) will be a lightweight rail car, such as the Revolution VLR currently being demonstrated at the former Ironbridge Power Station site at Buildwas. This will be operated under "Light Railway" (i.e. Tramway) rules, the driver driving "on sight", without fixed signals.

Therefore the A5 crossing can be achieved with traffic lights, not barriers. The vehicle would be limited to 25mph throughout the journey, slowing to 5mph whilst crossing the A5, and the characteristics of this type of vehicle enable it to "stop on a sixpence", unlike heavy rail vehicles.

So: traffic lights turn red, traffic stops, driver proceeds at 5mph, ready to brake to a stop in the event of any chancer jumping the lights, as soon as clear of the crossing re-accelerates.to 25mph, the track circuit detects that the crossing is clear, lights turn to green, traffic proceeds. Total time that traffic lights are red: 42 seconds. Multiply that by two railcar round trips per hour, 4 x 42s. = 2m.48s. Not going to add a single second to the overall journey time of 99% of A5 users,whether doing a fairly local trip or a longer-distance through journey. Even if the service becomes so successful that we increase the frequency to three round trips per hour, the maximum feasible, the total hourly downtime would be 4m.12s, so the traffic would be briefly held up for, at worst, 13% of each hour, and unobstructed for the remaining 87%.

In any case, the HGV traffic on the A5 has decreased measurably since Brexit, as all the vehicles which used to come by ferry to Newhaven or Dover, or through the Channel Tunnel, driving all the way through England to Holyhead and Ireland, now get on the ferry from Cherbourg to Larne, a service which used to run once or twice a fortnight, but now runs two or three times every 24 hours, week in, week out.

Steve Boulding

Railfuture (West Midlands Branch), committee member for Shropshire and Telford

 

[8H]

The best option for the rail service from Oswestry to Gobowen (calling intermediately at Park Hall, adjacent to the Orthopaedic Hospital, where there are now more than 5000 entries and exits daily, patients, outpatients, staff, visitors, etc.) will be a lightweight rail car, such as the Revolution VLR currently being demonstrated at the former Ironbridge Power Station site at Buildwas. This will be operated under "Light Railway" (i.e. Tramway) rules, the driver driving "on sight", without fixed signals.

Therefore the A5 crossing can be achieved with traffic lights, not barriers. The vehicle would be limited to 25mph throughout the journey, slowing to 5mph whilst crossing the A5, and the characteristics of this type of vehicle enable it to "stop on a sixpence", unlike heavy rail vehicles.

So: traffic lights turn red, traffic stops, driver proceeds at 5mph, ready to brake to a stop in the event of any chancer jumping the lights, as soon as clear of the crossing re-accelerates.to 25mph, the track circuit detects that the crossing is clear, lights turn to green, traffic proceeds. Total time that traffic lights are red: 42 seconds. Multiply that by two railcar round trips per hour, 4 x 42s. = 2m.48s. Not going to add a single second to the overall journey time of 99% of A5 users,whether doing a fairly local trip or a longer-distance through journey. Even if the service becomes so successful that we increase the frequency to three round trips per hour, the maximum feasible, the total hourly downtime would be 4m.12s, so the traffic would be briefly held up for, at worst, 13% of each hour, and unobstructed for the remaining 87%.

In any case, the HGV traffic on the A5 has decreased measurably since Brexit, as all the vehicles which used to come by ferry to Newhaven or Dover, or through the Channel Tunnel, driving all the way through England to Holyhead and Ireland, now get on the ferry from Cherbourg to Larne, a service which used to run once or twice a fortnight, but now runs two or three times every 24 hours, week in, week out.

Steve Boulding

Railfuture (West Midlands Branch), committee member for Shropshire and Telford

Always a pleasure to hear someone advocating for and promoting a railway rather than someone being shocked and affronted at a scheme for a new passenger service. There will be many genuine problems to be solved in reinstating this line and legitimate questions regarding its public transport value, but the lazy overall assumption that the notion itself is silly and that the car and lorry are unchallengeable kings is rather depressing. Thanks!

 

[Western Lord]

The best option for the rail service from Oswestry to Gobowen (calling intermediately at Park Hall, adjacent to the Orthopaedic Hospital, where there are now more than 5000 entries and exits daily, patients, outpatients, staff, visitors, etc.) will be a lightweight rail car, such as the Revolution VLR currently being demonstrated at the former Ironbridge Power Station site at Buildwas. This will be operated under "Light Railway" (i.e. Tramway) rules, the driver driving "on sight", without fixed signals.

Therefore the A5 crossing can be achieved with traffic lights, not barriers. The vehicle would be limited to 25mph throughout the journey, slowing to 5mph whilst crossing the A5, and the characteristics of this type of vehicle enable it to "stop on a sixpence", unlike heavy rail vehicles.

So: traffic lights turn red, traffic stops, driver proceeds at 5mph, ready to brake to a stop in the event of any chancer jumping the lights, as soon as clear of the crossing re-accelerates.to 25mph, the track circuit detects that the crossing is clear, lights turn to green, traffic proceeds. Total time that traffic lights are red: 42 seconds. Multiply that by two railcar round trips per hour, 4 x 42s. = 2m.48s. Not going to add a single second to the overall journey time of 99% of A5 users,whether doing a fairly local trip or a longer-distance through journey. Even if the service becomes so successful that we increase the frequency to three round trips per hour, the maximum feasible, the total hourly downtime would be 4m.12s, so the traffic would be briefly held up for, at worst, 13% of each hour, and unobstructed for the remaining 87%.

In any case, the HGV traffic on the A5 has decreased measurably since Brexit, as all the vehicles which used to come by ferry to Newhaven or Dover, or through the Channel Tunnel, driving all the way through England to Holyhead and Ireland, now get on the ferry from Cherbourg to Larne, a service which used to run once or twice a fortnight, but now runs two or three times every 24 hours, week in, week out.

Steve Boulding

Railfuture (West Midlands Branch), committee member for Shropshire and Telford

Or just run a bus which can serve other places, not just stations.

 

[6Gman]

Always a pleasure to hear someone advocating for and promoting a railway rather than someone being shocked and affronted at a scheme for a new passenger service. There will be many genuine problems to be solved in reinstating this line and legitimate questions regarding its public transport value, but the lazy overall assumption that the notion itself is silly and that the car and lorry are unchallengeable kings is rather depressing. Thanks!

I do not consider "the car and lorry ... unchallengeable kings" but with 20 years experience as a train planner I know certain ideas are impractical and unrealistic and with 20+ years experience as a councillor I also know councils can be easily distracted by daft populist ideas.

My judgement is that the idea of restoring a rail service between Gobowen and Oswestry falls within both categories.

 

[8H]

Or just run a bus which can serve other places, not just stations.

Aaaaaarrrrgghhh

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Oct 2024 ==

I do not consider "the car and lorry ... unchallengeable kings" but with 20 years experience as a train planner I know certain ideas are impractical and unrealistic and with 20+ years experience as a councillor I also know councils can be easily distracted by daft populist ideas.

My judgement is that the idea of restoring a rail service between Gobowen and Oswestry falls within both categories.

Fair play, all reasonable, do you think sometimes us ex and current railway people often end/ended up automatically defending an orthodoxy of deeply ingrained rules and finance restrictions squashing enhancements and innovations? Think Switzerland maybe where landscape is difficult and population often very sparse but where the railway often penetrates to and thus enhances connectivity, sometimes with buses! Seems to me that post 222 is being reasonable too?

 

[Shrop]

Aaaaaarrrrgghhh

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Oct 2024 ==


Fair play, all reasonable, do you think sometimes us ex and current railway people often end/ended up automatically defending an orthodoxy of deeply ingrained rules and finance restrictions squashing enhancements and innovations? Think Switzerland maybe where landscape is difficult and population often very sparse but where the railway often penetrates to and thus enhances connectivity, sometimes with buses! Seems to me that post 222 is being reasonable too?

"Think Switzerland"? I used to when one of my jobs was trying to encourage cycling in our local authority area. Many people argued that they would cycle if only there weren't so many hills. This was in central England where there really weren't many hills, and the locals really didn't like it (or understand) when I told them how popular cycling is in Switzerland, some found it hard to believe but it really is true. The point is that many people in the UK are simply unable to think laterally, and a great many of those who can't simply default to objection

 

[Bald Rick]

So: traffic lights turn red, traffic stops, driver proceeds at 5mph, ready to brake to a stop in the event of any chancer jumping the lights, as soon as clear of the crossing re-accelerates.to 25mph, the track circuit detects that the crossing is clear, lights turn to green, traffic proceeds. Total time that traffic lights are red: 42 seconds. Multiply that by two railcar round trips per hour, 4 x 42s. = 2m.48s. Not going to add a single second to the overall journey time of 99% of A5 users,whether doing a fairly local trip or a longer-distance through journey.

You might want to check your Maths.

2m48sec of road closure per hoyr, per hour, assuming an even spread of A5 users through the hour and day, will affect 4.667% of users by at least a second (and most of those for longer), even assuming no effects of the queue.

 

[Shrop]

You might want to check your Maths.

2m48sec of road closure per hoyr, per hour, assuming an even spread of A5 users through the hour and day, will affect 4.667% of users by at least a second (and most of those for longer), even assuming no effects of the queue.

I wonder what these 4.667% would have done with that extra second if it had been available?

 

[6Gman]

Aaaaaarrrrgghhh

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Oct 2024 ==


Fair play, all reasonable, do you think sometimes us ex and current railway people often end/ended up automatically defending an orthodoxy of deeply ingrained rules and finance restrictions squashing enhancements and innovations? Think Switzerland maybe where landscape is difficult and population often very sparse but where the railway often penetrates to and thus enhances connectivity, sometimes with buses! Seems to me that post 222 is being reasonable too?

I think the key is whether the balance between benefit and cost (you could call it a Benefit:Cost Ratio ) is reasonable.

In this particular case and knowing the area reasonably well I'd say the cost is disproportionate to the benefit.

To put it another way, the same amount of money spent elsewhere (or on other measures in the same area) would bring more benefit.

 

[CambrianView]

The best option for the rail service from Oswestry to Gobowen (calling intermediately at Park Hall, adjacent to the Orthopaedic Hospital, where there are now more than 5000 entries and exits daily, patients, outpatients, staff, visitors, etc.) will be a lightweight rail car, such as the Revolution VLR currently being demonstrated at the former Ironbridge Power Station site at Buildwas. This will be operated under "Light Railway" (i.e. Tramway) rules, the driver driving "on sight", without fixed signals.

Therefore the A5 crossing can be achieved with traffic lights, not barriers. The vehicle would be limited to 25mph throughout the journey, slowing to 5mph whilst crossing the A5, and the characteristics of this type of vehicle enable it to "stop on a sixpence", unlike heavy rail vehicles.

So: traffic lights turn red, traffic stops, driver proceeds at 5mph, ready to brake to a stop in the event of any chancer jumping the lights, as soon as clear of the crossing re-accelerates.to 25mph, the track circuit detects that the crossing is clear, lights turn to green, traffic proceeds. Total time that traffic lights are red: 42 seconds. Multiply that by two railcar round trips per hour, 4 x 42s. = 2m.48s. Not going to add a single second to the overall journey time of 99% of A5 users,whether doing a fairly local trip or a longer-distance through journey. Even if the service becomes so successful that we increase the frequency to three round trips per hour, the maximum feasible, the total hourly downtime would be 4m.12s, so the traffic would be briefly held up for, at worst, 13% of each hour, and unobstructed for the remaining 87%.

In any case, the HGV traffic on the A5 has decreased measurably since Brexit, as all the vehicles which used to come by ferry to Newhaven or Dover, or through the Channel Tunnel, driving all the way through England to Holyhead and Ireland, now get on the ferry from Cherbourg to Larne, a service which used to run once or twice a fortnight, but now runs two or three times every 24 hours, week in, week out.

Steve Boulding

Railfuture (West Midlands Branch), committee member for Shropshire and Telford

Hello Steve

Many thanks for your contribution. You say that traffic levels on the A5 have dropped since Brexit. Are you speaking generally or just along the Oswestry Bypass section? Please can you provide evidence of this drop in traffic use?

I'm including here a link to a Shropshire Council document giving details of the now completed construction of the double roundabout on the A5 at Mile End. The new configuration of roundabouts are to allow access points for a large scale residential development on one side of the road and an industrial estate on the other side. These developments will increase use of the A5 around Oswestry.

https://www.shropshire.gov.uk/media/13390/mile-end-roundabout-improvements-consultation-boards.pdf

 

[8H]

I think the key is whether the balance between benefit and cost (you could call it a Benefit:Cost Ratio ) is reasonable.

In this particular case and knowing the area reasonably well I'd say the cost is disproportionate to the benefit.

To put it another way, the same amount of money spent elsewhere (or on other measures in the same area) would bring more benefit.

Yes you are right to mention benefit/cost ratio, although I didn’t say it, I often wonder is that part of the problem too! Is the modelling and the weighting of factors the way it currently works climate crisis proofed? I am not sure it works in favour of rail, but horribly expensive road schemes that generate more road traffic seem to do OK, as do out of town housing and commercial sites despite decades of data telling us they simply create more road traffic. I suppose the really substantive issue is should we routinely be doing things that encourage more road traffic at all? Maybe pushing a new railhead to Oswestry via the hospital and buses radiating from the town is better than the present Gobowen railhead? I don’t know the answer for sure, but I don’t think petrol or electric road vehicles are a viable answer to our future in their current numbers.

 

[HSTEd]

Yes you are right to mention benefit/cost ratio, although I didn’t say it, I often wonder is that part of the problem too! Is the modelling and the weighting of factors the way it currently works climate crisis proofed? I am not sure it works in favour of rail, but horribly expensive road schemes that generate more road traffic seem to do OK, as do out of town housing and commercial sites despite decades of data telling us they simply create more road traffic. I suppose the really substantive issue is should we routinely be doing things that encourage more road traffic at all? Maybe pushing a new railhead to Oswestry via the hospital and buses radiating from the town is better than the present Gobowen railhead? I don’t know the answer for sure, but I don’t think petrol or electric road vehicles are a viable answer to our future in their current numbers.

So far as I know the analysis includes all sorts of things.
The other question is whether the road traffic is truly worse for the climate than another diesel railway from one small town to another.

The car-based transport system appears to have a more credible trajectory to decarbonisation than the diesel railway at this time - 6-7% of cars on the road are already plug in. Within a decade or so, even if sales stop increasing it would be something like a quarter or more, indeed assuming the simple ICE car ban holds a very large fraction of cars will be plug-in in a decade.

 

[EyeKay]

The other question is whether the road traffic is truly worse for the climate than another diesel railway from one small town to another.

A VLR solution is likely to be battery, especially for the short distance involved. I agree that a diesel solution would be poor.

 

[8H]

So far as I know the analysis includes all sorts of things.
The other question is whether the road traffic is truly worse for the climate than another diesel railway from one small town to another.

The car-based transport system appears to have a more credible trajectory to decarbonisation than the diesel railway at this time - 6-7% of cars on the road are already plug in. Within a decade or so, even if sales stop increasing it would be something like a quarter or more, indeed assuming the simple ICE car ban holds a very large fraction of cars will be plug-in in a decade.

Hi there! I believe a problem with electric road vehicles is that they still produce 70% of the pollutants that a diesel/petrol vehicle does. With battery tech and rail interface instead of tarmac things might be better by rail? Essentially not sure how road traffic volumes can continue. Oswestry could be the sort of step,worth taking to model a change to future rural transport.

 

[Llanigraham]

Gobowen Hospital.
I keep seeing people suggesting that any rail link could be used to bring patients into the hospital, but has anyone actually looked at the numbers involved and where they come from? It appears to me they haven't and certainly haven't looked at the timings. I know from experience, having been a patient there and having friends who go there, that travelling from anywhere on the Cambrian would be a huge no-no. It would take ages: just from Newtown to Shrewsbury is an hour on the train then you'd have to change to a another train to Gobowen and then to a third train/tram/whatever to the Hospital, whereas I can drive that journey in just over an hour. Which do you think people would choose, and which is the more comfortable? I know from experience that the majority of patients aren't local, so that journey could be from a very large area.

The A5.
Steve Boulding's idea of some traffic light controlled "thing" across the road is a level crossing by any other name and to suggest putting this so close to a roundabout I find fanciful. I also suspect his time calculations are nowhere near accurate enough. Whilst the HGV traffic might have reduced my own observations are that private car traffic has increased along the Oswestry by-pass, especially at "rush hour" times, and that is only going to get worse if/when the Technology Park is built.

Whilst it might be lovely to reopen a line this certainly isn't the right one and any service between Oswestry and Gobowen would more than adequately be provided by a road bus service, be that petrol, diesel or electric powered.

 

[CambrianView]

Here's an old BBC link regarding plans to reopen Baschurch Station along the same line as Gobowen Station:

BBC - Baschurch Station reopening is still on track

news.bbc.co.uk

If Baschurch was opened it would be the only stop between Gobowen and Shrewsbury, but it my opinion Shropshire Council couldn't really afford yet another old railway station restoration, especially when you consider that ticket offices are being replaced with machines (sadly) on the main network.

 

[Shrop]

Here's a link regarding plans to reopen Baschurch Station:

BBC - Baschurch Station reopening is still on track

news.bbc.co.uk

If Baschurch was opened it would be the only stop between Gobowen and Shrewsbury.

This dates right back to 2011. There's a lot more recent stuff than this, for example https://baschurchstation.org.uk/public-meeting-15th-july-2022/
(Link to videos of public meeting 15 July 2022)
The main problem as I see it, is that the railway doesn't run through the village, only along the extreme north-eastern side of it, which means that most potential users would have a fair distance to walk to use it. Then, if they were intending to drive to the station instead, they may well be inclined to drive all the way to their destinations rather than taking the train. That said, personally I have no issue whatsoever with walking at least 10-15 minutes to catch a train, I regularly do (at pension age) which would then cover most of Baschurch, it's just that I'm generally regarded as unusual!

 

[Llanigraham]

Linking the provision of superfast broadband to reopening a station really is clutching at straws. But then this was in 2011!

 

[CambrianView]

I too am approaching pension ago, but don't mind walking.

Opening Baschurch Station seems like a good idea on paper as it's on an operating line, unlike the Oswestry branch line. And there's no doubt there has been a big expansion of residential properties built there. A reopened station may (may) take pressure of the notorious Shototon Crossroads on the A5, where there's a blind corner and reduction of speed limit to 40 mph - and it's still an accident black spot.

But I think there are parallels with the Oswestry branch line, not least potential effects on existing public transport (bus services on the same route going through other villages, such as Rhuyton XI Towns), and level crossings. A rail service stopping at Baschurch would bring the barriers down on the level crossing for longer and could cause traffic to build up for longer.