How do you solve a problem like Bradford?

[Bantamzen]

This is still a very silly idea with lots of downsides and very few tenuous upsides. We've gone from "it'll cut Calder Valley journey times" to "Calder Valley to Leeds passengers will have to change, but it'll be okay because at least there's no slow approach to Interchange".

Shafting Bradford passengers wanting the city centre (and Calder Valley to Leeds commuters too) just to "force the hand" of Central Government into funding the tram is frankly, complete and utter guano.

The whole concept is guano. It's a pretty decent bet that there will be no new high speed alignment between Leeds - Bradford - Manchester, despite all the bluster we're hearing. And the tram network is quickly disappearing over the horizon again, which leaves us with the "let's build a brand new station way out of the road of everything" project. And any justification will got something like this:"

Project: "We're giving you a brand new station, which will reduce the time to Leeds and Manchester by a couple of minutes"

Punters: "But it's going to take 5-10 minutes longer to get to the station, and it's uphill, and we have to cross a really busy road that doubles as an F1 driver training circuit. It's going to be a bit grim when it's tipping it down."

Project: "It's only 350 metres as the crow flies"

Punters: "We're not crows, and we don't fly"

Project: "The tram network might eventually serve the new station, maybe, if it ever goes ahead. In the meantime we might put on a free bus every now and again"

Punters: "Why not leave the station where it is, and tart it up a bit. Put some new waiting facilities in, better loos, a few more shops, and maybe chuck in the odd extra train, or at least lengthen the ones that do run?"

Project: "Then we'll have to delete all the lovely renders of the fantasy new station, with all the fantasy new offices blocks, student apartments, white collar workers hanging around looking professional, and generic high street stores that we copied and pasted onto them. Won't someone think of the renders....??"

Punters: <sigh>

 

[mike57]

Punters: <sigh>

And similar scenarios repeat themselves around the country day in day out about all sorts of things, not just rail releated.

The disconnect between politicians and those in 'control' and their interactions with the general public seems greater than at any point in my nearly 70 years

 

[YorksLad12]

This is still a very silly idea with lots of downsides and very few tenuous upsides. We've gone from "it'll cut Calder Valley journey times" to "Calder Valley to Leeds passengers will have to change, but it'll be okay because at least there's no slow approach to Interchange".

Shafting Bradford passengers wanting the city centre (and Calder Valley to Leeds commuters too) just to "force the hand" of Central Government into funding the tram is frankly, complete and utter guano.

Quite. Changing to tram will take as long as the reversal time people complain about, and be a longer journey towards Leeds.

Which is perhaps the whole point of choosing this order of work. It will become much harder to cancel the tram, once St James station is built, because a multitude of through connections will depend on the tram being there.

No. HS2 rather proves the point that assuming a £multi-billion project will go ahead and planning other infrastructure around it doesn't work.

 

[30907]

That's what I thought, but other posters have corrected me.

The new station will replace Interchange according to announcements.

Quite. There wouldn't be much left to terminate at Interchange once all the reversing trains are removed - or at least, not until the direct Huddersfield line opens in 20.....

 

[MichaelTrains]

That's what I thought, but other posters have corrected me.

The new station will replace Interchange according to announcements.

Probably explains why the Bradford Councillor involved in this told me yesterday they are pushing for six platforms and trams at the new station.

 

[HSTEd]

Is it just me or does this project seem to lack a clear articulating vision for what it wants to achieve?

It mostly seems to be about getting Bradford nice things rather than achieving concrete results.
Hence the reliance on renders and vague plans for future tram systems.

 

[Bantamzen]

Is it just me or does this project seem to lack a clear articulating vision for what it wants to achieve?

It mostly seems to be about getting Bradford nice things rather than achieving concrete results.
Hence the reliance on renders and vague plans for future tram systems.

It's a solution looking for a problem.

I'll readily admit I was once firmly in the Bradford needs Crossrail camp. But when you sit back and think about it, it really isn't so much of an issue, and has been made better with pedestrianisation of the centre meaning there's no busy roads to cross to get to the Interchange. All that remains are those few minutes whilst crews swap ends, which for the most part can be done in 3 or 4 minutes including offloading / loading punters. But even with a through station you'd need a good couple of minutes to allow for busy flows, so there's really not that much to be gained.

But this is RailUK Forums, and there have been people agitating for a Bradford-avoiding line to save precious seconds, as well as people hand wringing about reversals for as long as I've been on here. So it'll never really go away. Next subject matter, Skipton to Colne....

<puts on tin hat and runs away>

 

[NCT]

Is it just me or does this project seem to lack a clear articulating vision for what it wants to achieve?

It mostly seems to be about getting Bradford nice things rather than achieving concrete results.
Hence the reliance on renders and vague plans for future tram systems.

'Other places have shiny through stations so must we.'

 

[HSTEd]

'Other places have shiny through stations so must we.'

Normally I am very pro station rationalisation and all that, but in this case there doesn't even seem to be a strong operational benefit to be obtained from either the Bradford Crossrail proposal or a new station.

Maybe if you expected a high speed Leeds-Bradford-Manchester line, or Leeds-Bradford-Huddersfield-Manchester line, but if you do expect that you'd want the station fully integrated with that line, so there is no point building it before then.

In the interim seems pointless to do anything that might end up as a white elephant later, especially as there seems little operational advantage to doing so.

 

[The Pelican]

Bradford Crossrail would be a somewhat good idea, joining up seperate stations helped in Manchester and Croydon, but should be done in the cheapest way possible, which is probably a tram. Since both stations have some long distance trains, the tram should be addtional to, not instead of, the existing trains. The Cardiff Crossrail model (for now, a tram-operated spur from the Cardiff bay line to Cardiff Central) shows that it could probably be done fairly cheaply.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Is it just me or does this project seem to lack a clear articulating vision for what it wants to achieve?

It mostly seems to be about getting Bradford nice things rather than achieving concrete results.
Hence the reliance on renders and vague plans for future tram systems.

It isn't even "Bradford getting nice things". It's Bradford councillors getting to stand in front of hoardings with fancy renders on them while making things considerably worse for the people who vote them in and pay their wages... and then maybe getting to stand next to local celebrities (that lad out of One Direction maybe) while ribbons get cut in ten or fifteen years.

 

[MichaelTrains]

Normally I am very pro station rationalisation and all that, but in this case there doesn't even seem to be a strong operational benefit to be obtained from either the Bradford Crossrail proposal or a new station.

Maybe if you expected a high speed Leeds-Bradford-Manchester line, or Leeds-Bradford-Huddersfield-Manchester line, but if you do expect that you'd want the station fully integrated with that line, so there is no point building it before then.

In the interim seems pointless to do anything that might end up as a white elephant later, especially as there seems little operational advantage to doing so.

What Bradford needs is more express services.

I still can't fathom why there isn't a Leeds to Bradford fast express service to either station.

I've done Leeds to Bradford in just under 15 minutes on a 158 when the Wigan’s were diverted.

I’m beginning to think that this new through station won’t solve any problems and we would best off expanding the Interchange to six platforms with dedicated platforms for the London and Huddersfield terminators.

This should then allow for a new express Bradford to Leeds express service missing out New Pudsey and Bramley, allowing passengers quicker journey times to Leeds where we would still have to change trains.

 

[357]

I still can't fathom why there isn't a Leeds to Bradford fast express service to either station.

There is some benefit to skipping Bramley where the line speed is 60mph, but not much.

Skipping New Pudsey doesn't really gain anything due to the close proximity of the 30mph speed restriction through the tunnel.

What would improve journey times much more would be improving the line speed through the tunnel after New Pudsey, increasing the line speeds into Bradford from 15mph to something more reasonable, and finding a method of work for Northern where trains don't sit in platforms for up to 30 seconds before releasing the doors.

 

[MichaelTrains]

There is some benefit to skipping Bramley where the line speed is 60mph, but not much.

Skipping New Pudsey doesn't really gain anything due to the close proximity of the 30mph speed restriction through the tunnel.

What would improve journey times much more would be improving the line speed through the tunnel after New Pudsey, increasing the line speeds into Bradford from 15mph to something more reasonable, and finding a method of work for Northern where trains don't sit in platforms for up to 30 seconds before releasing the doors.

I'd also argue remodelling everything.

The amount of times I’ve been held outside the station due to lack of platforms being available is shocking.

Especially when you've got two platforms out of use because the Grand Central has just come in from London and you've got the Huddersfield stopper also in for it’s 30 minute platform blocking session.

 

[Bantamzen]

What Bradford needs is more express services.

I still can't fathom why there isn't a Leeds to Bradford fast express service to either station.

I've done Leeds to Bradford in just under 15 minutes on a 158 when the Wigan’s were diverted.

I’m beginning to think that this new through station won’t solve any problems and we would best off expanding the Interchange to six platforms with dedicated platforms for the London and Huddersfield terminators.

This should then allow for a new express Bradford to Leeds express service missing out New Pudsey and Bramley, allowing passengers quicker journey times to Leeds where we would still have to change trains.

To a degree I agree, although I think wiring the line would give better acceleration especially up the hills so that should be the long term solution to quicker times.

 

[357]

I'd also argue remodelling everything.

The amount of times I’ve been held outside the station due to lack of platforms being available is shocking.

Especially when you've got two platforms out of use because the Grand Central has just come in from London and you've got the Huddersfield stopper also in for it’s 30 minute platform blocking session.

The only time GC has two trains in the station simultaneously on the old timetable was on a Sunday around 12:00 (if you don't count 06:50-06:59)

I'm not sure of any time on the new timetable there are two GC units in the station.

Regarding the stopper, I don't see why they never put anything into the platform on top of it. Same for the GC units.

Platform 1 is a 10-car platform, but most of the time has a 2 car sprinter using it while trains wait outside!

Platform 2 can fit 8 carriages from memory

 

[Grumpy]

The only time GC has two trains in the station simultaneously on the old timetable was on a Sunday around 12:00 (if you don't count 06:50-06:59)

I'm not sure of any time on the new timetable there are two GC units in the station.

Regarding the stopper, I don't see why they never put anything into the platform on top of it. Same for the GC units.

Platform 1 is a 10-car platform, but most of the time has a 2 car sprinter using it while trains wait outside!

Platform 2 can fit 8 carriages from memory

Indeed. Platform 1 is 209m, P2 203m, P3 127m and P4 128m. There are only 4 GC trains/day-5 car sets approx 120m . Northern trains are typically 3 cars long, with the odd 4 car plus 2 car Huddersfield. The core service is basically 4 trains/hour short length DMUs flowing from the Dryclough direction towards Leeds which happen to call at Bradford for 2-3 minutes to unload/load passengers, whilst at the same time the driver changes ends. It's not really complicated. GC apart why would you really need more than 2 platforms?

 

[Palmerston]

Normally I am very pro station rationalisation and all that, but in this case there doesn't even seem to be a strong operational benefit to be obtained from either the Bradford Crossrail proposal or a new station.

Maybe if you expected a high speed Leeds-Bradford-Manchester line, or Leeds-Bradford-Huddersfield-Manchester line, but if you do expect that you'd want the station fully integrated with that line, so there is no point building it before then.

In the interim seems pointless to do anything that might end up as a white elephant later, especially as there seems little operational advantage to doing so.

I'd agree that a new through station could be a bit of a white elephant, but if there is going to be an express Leeds-Bradford-Huddersfield-Manchester line, this probably needs a new station, as otherwise the route is just too slow (and more likely to be delayed) compared to the existing Leeds-Huddersfield-Manchester route. You would ideally open them at the same time, or as close to this as possible.

The other proposed improvements seem to be:

• electrification - good in either scenario but it would seem easier not to bother with Interchange if it then gets demolished a year or so later so a joined up approach is sensible.
• the tram. Doesn't make a new station 'better' in terms of location, but does reduce the impact for anyone with limited mobility. If the tramline has to cross a main road, you'd presume some sort of walkway could be built at the same time.
• new services to Sheffield. Again, doesn't require a new station, but makes more sense if a quick route to Huddersfield exists. It might also necessitate more platforms than Interchange has. It's not a reason to build a new station but does make the effective cost a bit lower.

Whatever gets done, there isn't a perfect solution.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Indeed. Platform 1 is 209m, P2 203m, P3 127m and P4 128m. There are only 4 GC trains/day-5 car sets approx 120m . Northern trains are typically 3 cars long, with the odd 4 car plus 2 car Huddersfield. The core service is basically 4 trains/hour short length DMUs flowing from the Dryclough direction towards Leeds which happen to call at Bradford for 2-3 minutes to unload/load passengers, whilst at the same time the driver changes ends. It's not really complicated. GC apart why would you really need more than 2 platforms?

The Huddersfield is currently a "round the houses" Leeds via Dewsbury service, does it still run as a 2-car all day or is it strengthened for the peaks?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Jan 2026 ==

I'd agree that a new through station could be a bit of a white elephant, but if there is going to be an express Leeds-Bradford-Huddersfield-Manchester line, this probably needs a new station, as otherwise the route is just too slow (and more likely to be delayed) compared to the existing Leeds-Huddersfield-Manchester route. You would ideally open them at the same time, or as close to this as possible.

The other proposed improvements seem to be:

• electrification - good in either scenario but it would seem easier not to bother with Interchange if it then gets demolished a year or so later so a joined up approach is sensible.
• the tram. Doesn't make a new station 'better' in terms of location, but does reduce the impact for anyone with limited mobility. If the tramline has to cross a main road, you'd presume some sort of walkway could be built at the same time.
• new services to Sheffield. Again, doesn't require a new station, but makes more sense if a quick route to Huddersfield exists. It might also necessitate more platforms than Interchange has. It's not a reason to build a new station but does make the effective cost a bit lower.

Whatever gets done, there isn't a perfect solution.

A through service to Sheffield makes more sense than this silly through station boondoggle, but even if a more direct Huddersfield route was in place it'll always be constrained by the slow route beyond Huddersfield via Penistone. Unless you were to rebuild the Crigglestone curve and route it that way, but AIUI the route through Darton is at capacity as is the northern approach to Sheffield. If you were going that way, you probably wouldn't waste time going into Huddersfield en-route anyway.

 

[Grimsby town]

A through service to Sheffield makes more sense than this silly through station boondoggle, but even if a more direct Huddersfield route was in place it'll always be constrained by the slow route beyond Huddersfield via Penistone. Unless you were to rebuild the Crigglestone curve and route it that way, but AIUI the route through Darton is at capacity as is the northern approach to Sheffield. If you were going that way, you probably wouldn't waste time going into Huddersfield en-route anway.

I'd have thought the best route would be via a rebuilt Crigglestone curve. Yes, Sheffield is at capacity and any freed up capacity is likely to be used by additonal fast services via Wakefield Wesgate, but if there's 4 fast services from Sheffield to Leeds via Westgate, then there's less need for limited stop services via Barnsley and Kirkgate. A fast Sheffield to Barnsley service could be diverted to Bradford. A Leeds to Barnsley service could backfill any connectivity needs from Leeds to Barnsley. That might require additional infrastructure at Barnsley though.

If a line from Brighouse to Low Moor is opened, the service would probably be fairly competitive journey time wise.

 

[MatthewHutton]

Yes, Sheffield is at capacity

There’s clearly a cross northern problem that the big city stations are all full. I wonder how much of a big win it would be to just fix that?

 

[daodao]

There’s clearly a cross northern problem that the big city stations are all full. I wonder how much of a big win it would be to just fix that?

The Northern big city stations appear to be full, but mostly of short trains, often diesel, using paths that criss-cross each other. The primary solution is more electrification, longer trains and service pattern simplification repeating where possible half-hourly, with more use made of through stations such as Manchester Victoria. Bradford Exchange/Interchange should be treated as a through station in effect, although trains have to reverse, and doesn't need replacing/relocating. It is a major city station, so trains waiting there for 4-5 minutes while they reverse is appropriate to allow large numbers of passengers to alight and board. The solution to rail issues in the North is not more infrastructure per se, in particular proposals for expensive tunnels and high speed lines should be shelved; all the key cities are relatively close together so very high speeds are unnecessary, unlike for journeys to London.

 

[cle]

The Northern big city stations appear to be full, but mostly of short trains, often diesel, using paths that criss-cross each other. The primary solution is more electrification, longer trains and service pattern simplification repeating where possible half-hourly, with more use made of through stations such as Manchester Victoria. Bradford Exchange/Interchange should be treated as a through station in effect, although trains have to reverse, and doesn't need replacing/relocating. It is a major city station, so trains waiting there for 4-5 minutes while they reverse is appropriate to allow large numbers of passengers to alight and board. The solution to rail issues in the North is not more infrastructure per se, in particular proposals for expensive tunnels and high speed lines should be shelved; all the key cities are relatively close together so very high speeds are unnecessary, unlike for journeys to London.

Agree with this fully. Longer trains and looking at teeny bays (Sheffield) is probably the easiest win. Sheffield as a station probably needs the most love. Bradford at least has two options to Leeds (one even wired!) - and quite uniform services out towards its hinterland.

Bradford Interchange needs permissive working - maybe some services split and frankly, faster journeys to Leeds and to Manchester. The Calder Valley should really be running more trains overall - there is tons of potential. Raise the biggest restrictions, load in some fasts (and a few more stoppers - eg Rochdale extensions, or a second Tod curve local) - and built out a good 4 fast, 4 slow type of network.

The Leeds-Chester seems ripest to be the non-stop Bradford-Leeds someone mentioned upthread. It should feel more like a premium, dare I say, IC-type service, same stock as TPE, etc.

 

[Grimsby town]

There’s clearly a cross northern problem that the big city stations are all full. I wonder how much of a big win it would be to just fix that?

That's what's being proposed with NPR. Leeds, York, Sheffield are getting capacity upgrades for the existing stations in the first phase. The problem with just doing the station upgrades is that the north is made up of mainly 2 track lines with a mixture of stopping and fast trains. For Bradford that means capacity is limited by the mixture of fast and stopping services on the Calder Valley line. Both issues need solving to increase services. Take the Hope Valley Line, it's upgrade hasn't led to additional trains because there isn't capacity in Sheffield or Manchester for additional services.

 

[D6130]

Take the Hope Valley Line, it's upgrade hasn't led to additional trains because there isn't capacity in Sheffield or Manchester for additional services.

.... or sufficient rolling stock to operate them!

 

[357]

Bradford Interchange needs permissive working

Every platform at BDI is permissive - but there seems to be a fear of using this facility. No idea why.

 

[fishwomp]

Every platform at BDI is permissive - but there seems to be a fear of using this facility. No idea why.

Institutional memory of the runaway accident at Exchange? Are there any other stations that have buffer stops at the end of a 1/4 mile stretch of 1 in 50 downhill?

If you look at the sectional appendix it's 15mph all the way down the hill, but 25 mph up it. That must be out of a very large chunk of caution. That is way slower than the braking characteristics ( in the uphill direction, I suspect it's slower than acceleration too ). If they want to knock a minute off or more for an in and out service, there must be something there

 

[D6130]

Are there any other stations that have buffer stops at the end of a 1/4 mile stretch of 1 in 50 downhill?

Glasgow Queen Street (High-level).

 

[357]

Institutional memory of the runaway accident at Exchange? Are there any other stations that have buffer stops at the end of a 1/4 mile stretch of 1 in 50 downhill?

If you look at the sectional appendix it's 15mph all the way down the hill, but 25 mph up it. That must be out of a very large chunk of caution. That is way slower than the braking characteristics ( in the uphill direction, I suspect it's slower than acceleration too ). If they want to knock a minute off or more for an in and out service, there must be something there

I don't need to look at the sectional appendix, I sign it

The 15 boards going in are in roughly the same place as the speed increases to 25 on the way out.

On the way out I reduce power to keep to the 15 and then the 25 restrictions. With an average unit I am doing the 70mph linespeed by somewhere in Bowling tunnel.
Regarding the line towards Leeds, I don't know how much could be done because of the curves but it does seem like it could be made at least a little bit faster. It is 30mph for quite a long way.

 

[fishwomp]

I don't need to look at the sectional appendix, I sign it

Excellent

The 15 boards going in are in roughly the same place as the speed increases to 25 on the way out.

I couldn't find the SA for the Bowling/Low Moor tunnel part online - so I can't see much about that side. This is what is online: 25 on the curves both directions, then 15 going in - and coming out doesn't become 25mph until 350 yards (18 chains) from the buffer stops.

On the way out I reduce power to keep to the 15 and then the 25 restrictions. With an average unit I am doing the 70mph linespeed by somewhere in Bowling tunnel.

Blimey! Some umph in those! But yeah, that's as I thought - taking the power down on the way out - on what is a pretty straight piece of track to Halifax, doesn't feel 'Powerhouse' like, Northern, Railway, but not Powerhouse...

Regarding the line towards Leeds, I don't know how much could be done because of the curves but it does seem like it could be made at least a little bit faster. It is 30mph for quite a long way.

A bit of a Miles Platting job required!!