Study launched into improving rail connectivity between Goole and Leeds

[waterboo]

Has anyone considered the signalling infrastructure for this line? Is it controlled by part time local boxes or is it remotely controlled from the ROC?

 

[Grumpy]

Indeed - I hardly think that the word “advanced” can be applied to the USA in any rail-related context. That said, I would also consider our standards to have gone too far in terms of recognition of realities - cost of providing fully compliant rail facilities meaning they don’t happen- forcing people onto much more unsafe roads.

Whilst I fully agree with your second sentence, I think "in any rail-related context" is unfair. For example we used the Florida Sunrail services earlier this year. The stations are well thought out with good parking, dedicated bus connections and platform facilities (e.g. seating, weather protection) far superior to anything between Leeds and Goole. Similarly the seats on the push-pull double decker sets are much more comfortable than recent UK examples(although the ride is CAF standard or worse).

 

[SteveyBee131]

Has anyone considered the signalling infrastructure for this line? Is it controlled by part time local boxes or is it remotely controlled from the ROC?

I don't have inside knowledge, but from what I can gather on Railcar diagrams, Goole signals locally to just beyond the junction and Glassworks, then it looks like York ROC signals the rest.

 

[IanXC]

In terms of the service pattern its worth considering what the situation would be if both these improvements and the Askern service were to come off, principle calls only shown:

Option 1
Leeds - Castleford - Knottingley - Goole
Leeds - Wakefield - Knottingley - Doncaster

Option 2
Leeds - Castleford - Knottingley - Doncaster
Leeds - Wakefield - Knottingley - Goole

So option 1 gives a second route from Wakefield to Doncaster which would no doubt take longer than via South Elmsall, so to me Option 2 looks to be the best routing pairing option.

However there are certain issues of unit diagramming which add cost to either (but not necessarily both) schemes. At Knottingley the unit which has arrived via Castleford departs via Wakefield and vice versa. If you wanted one of those to be extended to either Goole or Doncaster, then the other suddenly needs around 35 minutes at Knottingley (unless you want to find new paths in and out of Leeds). The current diagrams mean that there are 3 services on the move at any given time on the "hourly each way Knottingley service", the moment one of them is extended not only does that need another unit and traincrew, the rump of the other service does too.

 

[Kite159]

I guess extending the trains to Doncaster via the Askern route would require upgrades for that line to increase the line speed and platforms constructed at Knottingley for the Askern route (which would probably kill off any hope due to how much it costs to build stations these days

 

[30907]

In terms of the service pattern its worth considering what the situation would be if both these improvements and the Askern service were to come off, principle calls only shown:

Option 1
Leeds - Castleford - Knottingley - Goole
Leeds - Wakefield - Knottingley - Doncaster

Option 2
Leeds - Castleford - Knottingley - Doncaster
Leeds - Wakefield - Knottingley - Goole

Historically the Goole trains all ran to Wakefield as it was ex L&Y - there's probably more demand for Goole-Wakefield than -Castleford but it's 10min slower to Leeds.

However there are certain issues of unit diagramming which add cost to either (but not necessarily both) schemes. At Knottingley the unit which has arrived via Castleford departs via Wakefield and vice versa. If you wanted one of those to be extended to either Goole or Doncaster, then the other suddenly needs around 35 minutes at Knottingley (unless you want to find new paths in and out of Leeds). The current diagrams mean that there are 3 services on the move at any given time on the "hourly each way Knottingley service", the moment one of them is extended not only does that need another unit and traincrew, the rump of the other service does too.

Quite. The only efficient way I can see (1 unit, 2 hourly both routes) involves trains going out via Castleford but returning via Wakefield (or v.v.) - tight turnround at Goole but longer at Doncaster which is wise! But all this is rather academic.

 

[Grumpy]

In terms of the service pattern its worth considering what the situation would be if both these improvements and the Askern service were to come off, principle calls only shown:


Option 2
Leeds - Castleford - Knottingley - Doncaster
Leeds - Wakefield - Knottingley - Goole

I think you've got that right.
With respect to Knottingley-Doncaster would you really need to spend anything at Knottingley or Askern? Simply run Pontefract-Doncaster direct and see if the service looks viable before trying to justify incremental spend. And if an otherwise necessary T&S renewals requirement came along at Knottingley , then just move the pointwork to the east of the station.
I realise this is only indirectly related to Goole itself but perhaps the Askern line is worth a punt. Between them, Castleford and Pontefract have twice as many rail users as Goole and 3 times the population. However , travelling to the south by rail isn't attractive(2 Northbound trains/day). Thus Ponte to Doncaster is approx 70 minutes via Wakefield . Direct it's 27 minutes. Castleford to Doncaster is approx. 70 mins via Wakefield. Direct would be approx 37 minutes. Changing at Doncaster would make many southbound journeys more attractive.

Reverting to the Goole line is there any reason why the morning Goole-Leeds train doesn't arrive in Leeds till 0853? Possibly too late for many morning commuters? Would it not make more sense to run this half an hour earlier from Goole, running from Knottingley in the path of the existing Knottingley-Leeds train?

My recollection may be faulty but I think the old Goole-Leeds service was slashed in 1991 , just as plans were being made to reintroduce the Knottingley-Wakefield service the following year. One might have fed some traffic into the other. In the days of one controlling mind, services for the benefit of the public not shareholders etc which we are now moving back into

 

[YorksLad12]

I think you've got that right.
With respect to Knottingley-Doncaster would you really need to spend anything at Knottingley or Askern? Simply run Pontefract-Doncaster direct and see if the service looks viable before trying to justify incremental spend. And if an otherwise necessary T&S renewals requirement came along at Knottingley , then just move the pointwork to the east of the station.

Yes, you would. If it's an additional service, then it's fine to bypass Knottingley (Grand Central already do that). Otherwise, Knottingley's service gets cut in half and cuts the link to either of Wakefield or Knottingley depending on which service you extend.

Given that there's at least one class 150 in P0 at Leeds during the day, could this be used as a shuttle between Knottingley and Goole with same-platform interchange to/from, say, existing services via Castleford? Tests the market without having to alter the existing timetable.

 

[Grumpy]

Yes, you would. If it's an additional service, then it's fine to bypass Knottingley (Grand Central already do that). Otherwise, Knottingley's service gets cut in half and cuts the link to either of Wakefield or Knottingley depending on which service you extend.

You're absolutely right. Cant believe I missed that.
Back to the barrow crossing then!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

My recollection may be faulty but I think the old Goole-Leeds service was slashed in 1991 , just as plans were being made to reintroduce the Knottingley-Wakefield service the following year. One might have fed some traffic into the other. In the days of one controlling mind, services for the benefit of the public not shareholders etc which we are now moving back into

I think that's correct time-wise, although the service from Wakefield Kirkgate via Featherstone didn't initially run through to Knottingley. It terminated at Pontefract Monkhill as this allowed the service to be operated with a single unit (usually a class 141 in the early days) shuttling back & forth.

 

[bigmanaiq]

I feel like the Pontefract line has gone really unnoticed, a regular direct service between Leeds and Goole makes a lot more sense than Knottingley (adding to this - there could even be a station at the east side of the town and I believe there was a feasibility study for this some years back). Could have every other service via castleford go to goole instead (although this would require a decent timetable shake up considering trains coming from castleford go back via wakefield and vice versa)

As for the Askern line, would love it but Askern is the only suitable place for a station on the line. Simply not enough people in Norton or Womersley, and not to mention either the huge faff of either completely redoing the track or building two new platforms at Knottingley - a market between pontefract and doncaster could do

I doubt either will happen but if both happen, could potentially have every other castleford service through to goole and every wakefield service down to Doncaster. Maybe one day when there’s enough stock

 

[yorksrob]

There's an article on the BBC website now:

Goole to Leeds rail passengers call for more direct trains

Commuters call for regular direct trains between Goole and Leeds as consultation launched.

www.bbc.co.uk

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Oct 2025 ==

Rail passengers travelling between Goole and Leeds want more direct regular train services so they can get to and from work, while also being able to get home for childcare.

Currently, there are only two direct trains from Goole to Leeds a day, with only one returning from Leeds at the end of the working day.

Goole rail users can get home by using a longer route through South Yorkshire and changing at Doncaster, but commuters from Snaith and Rawcliffe have no alternative trains........

 

[YorksLad12]

Beat me to it! Interesting that Northern says that it "welcomed" the survey, when it probably doesn't care either way (so long as someone else is paying).

 

[johntea]

I must say I did chuckle at councillor Anne Handley adding 2 and 2 together to get 5 via moaning about how Siemens Rail are based in Goole so why can’t we have more train services

 

[yorksrob]

I must say I did chuckle at councillor Anne Handley adding 2 and 2 together to get 5 via moaning about how Siemens Rail are based in Goole so why can’t we have more train services

I'd say it's a reasonable observation, even if the trains serving there aren't built there. Afterall, railway towns building trains have traditionally had good services (Ashford, Eastleigh, Derby , York etc).

 

[Harpers Tate]

As I see it:
- this route is currently used by passenger services (to a very limited extent) and is therefore considered suitable for this purpose
- the route is single track and heavily rationalised between Drax junction and Goole and double track elsewhere
- the current passenger service takes 16/17 minutes to travel between Drax Junction and Goole.
- the rationalised part of the route is hardly routinely used by anything else

I conclude (perhaps erroneously) that a train therefore needs only occupy the single track section for, say, 45-50 minutes in order to make a round trip (allowing for the reversal at Goole if that is where it terminates) and that therefore with nothing more than rolling stock and personnel resource, i.e. with absolutely no capital investment, this route could support an hourly frequency in both directions.

Perhaps I'm being cynical, but I'm awaiting the feasibility studies and business cases that cite millions of needed upgrade work before any service increase can be contemplated......

 

[yorksrob]

Perhaps I'm being cynical, but I'm awaiting the feasibility studies and business cases that cite millions of needed upgrade work before any service increase can be contemplated......

That could be a problem. A benefit of the Speller act was that it enabled the railway to test the water before forcing the railway to commit.

It would be a step backwards if such proposals were killed by the railway being forced to spend millions beforehand.

 

[Zomboid]

Are there level crossings that might need attention before significantly increasing the service?

 

[anothertyke]

As I see it:
- this route is currently used by passenger services (to a very limited extent) and is therefore considered suitable for this purpose
- the route is single track and heavily rationalised between Drax junction and Goole and double track elsewhere
- the current passenger service takes 16/17 minutes to travel between Drax Junction and Goole.
- the rationalised part of the route is hardly routinely used by anything else

I conclude (perhaps erroneously) that a train therefore needs only occupy the single track section for, say, 45-50 minutes in order to make a round trip (allowing for the reversal at Goole if that is where it terminates) and that therefore with nothing more than rolling stock and personnel resource, i.e. with absolutely no capital investment, this route could support an hourly frequency in both directions.

Perhaps I'm being cynical, but I'm awaiting the feasibility studies and business cases that cite millions of needed upgrade work before any service increase can be contemplated......

Depends on the terms of reference, but any outline study worth its salt would ask

1. What could you do using existing infrastructure and trains (direct operating costs only)?

2. What could you do with existing infrastructure and one (or more) additional train requirement?

3. Beyond that, what would require new infrastructure?

Create a menu. That shouldn't cost the earth. Then see where you are and see what NR and Northern have to say. Manage expectations and focus on whoever might be paying!

 

[yorksrob]

Are there level crossings that might need attention before significantly increasing the service?

It does have level crossings (can't remember how many as have only been along it a couple of times). I think they're protected with barriers etc.

 

[eldomtom2]

Are there level crossings that might need attention before significantly increasing the service?

Ideally the sensible approach would be to look at the increased risk of level crossing accidents from a more frequent service and compare it to the reduced risk of road accidents from drivers switching to the train.

 

[YorksLad12]

It does have level crossings (can't remember how many as have only been along it a couple of times). I think they're protected with barriers etc.

The most obvious one is just to the east of Whitley Bridge, which is also the closest to an M62 junction if you're trying to encourage modal shift (you'd need a bigger car park, of course). There's a bridge over the canal to the south but no landing area north of the station if you were to fund an extension to it to cover the railway.

 

[30907]

I must say I did chuckle at councillor Anne Handley adding 2 and 2 together to get 5 via moaning about how Siemens Rail are based in Goole so why can’t we have more train services

I assumed (charitably?) that she thought there might be potential commuter traffic to Goole - rather than Leeds, which has been the prevailing theme.

Are there level crossings that might need attention before significantly increasing the service?

There are loads, a mixture of full and half barriers (and even one unbarriered, if Googlemaps is up-to-date - in Gowdall), but I would guess that the roads aren't massively busy.

1. What could you do using existing infrastructure and trains (direct operating costs only)?

Nothing at all realistic

2. What could you do with existing infrastructure and one (or more) additional train requirement?

An hourly service, if you didn't mind using one route out and another back; realistically, 2 hourly with one extra unit and crews.

3. Beyond that, what would require new infrastructure?

Apart from necessary level crossing upgrades, I think we would be far too deep into fantasy-land

 

[Zomboid]

I assumed (charitably?) that she thought there might be potential commuter traffic to Goole - rather than Leeds, which has been the prevailing theme

Goole does have a reasonable amount of industry, though if we're going crayon mad then eastward commuting might be more of a thing if the train carried on to Hull.

That's probably another couple of units and crew though.

 

[tbtc]

IMO the Castleford / Pontefract/ Knottingley services have probably been bottom of the food chain, in terms of departures from Leeds

Look at the thousands of parked cars at Glasshoughton each weekend and compare that to the hourly trains it gets - all two coach 1980s DMUs - it's no wonder rail isn't attractive

That's what I'd personally be focusing resources on, rather than the hamlets east of Knottingley

But the taxpayers of East Riding are paying someone to do a survey into the eastern end of the line, so don't be expected if the firm compliantly deliver results that show that, yes, the people of Goole would very much like someone to pay for Goole to have a significantly improved train service, thank you very much

 

[The exile]

Look at the thousands of parked cars at Glasshoughton each weekend and compare that to the hourly trains it gets - all two coach 1980s DMUs - it's no wonder rail isn't attractive

That's what I'd personally be focusing resources on, rather than the hamlets east of Knottingley

Depends on where those cars have come from, though.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Depends on where those cars have come from, though.

I'd presume that they'll mostly be fairly local, because if you're coming from further afield you wouldn't choose Glasshoughton as your railhead. There are other stations not too far away with double the frequency, if you've already got onto the motorway network.

 

[The exile]

I'd presume that they'll mostly be fairly local, because if you're coming from further afield you wouldn't choose Glasshoughton as your railhead. There are other stations not too far away with double the frequency, if you've already got onto the motorway network.

I imagine that most of them are visiting the local facilities (leisure centre or whatever it is) rather than using the station.

 

[Zomboid]

That's what I'd personally be focusing resources on, rather than the hamlets east of Knottingley

But if Northern are imminently ordering new trains which will improve the service west of Knottingley, then isn't they the time to figure out if a couple of extra units could provide a better service to Goole, Snaith and the various other places that the train would serve?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I imagine that most of them are visiting the local facilities (leisure centre or whatever it is) rather than using the station.

People driving to Xscape or the Outlet will park at the vast parking area at the outlet, not at the 100-space station car park.