How do you solve a problem like Bradford?

[357]

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.

Yeah I made a slight error here this morning - when the speed increases you need to wait for the back of the train to clear the restriction before accelerating so I'm doing 15 until I'm almost at the 40 board, then 25 until I'm past Mill Lane signal box, it's unusual to actually achieve 40 in on that section of track so normally I've got the train in full power from clearing the 40 board right up until the end of Bowling Tunnel where it's time to brake for Low Moor if stopping there.

The bridges at Bradford Interchange have multiple unused arches and the whole area could be made much faster and straighter if the money and willpower was there.

 

[fishwomp]

The bridges at Bradford Interchange have multiple unused arches and the whole area could be made much faster and straighter if the money and willpower was there.

We're rather busy planning to buy something shiny on our credit card right now, please come back when we realize we can't afford it .. sigh..

 

[Dr Hoo]

We're rather busy planning to buy something shiny on our credit card right now, please come back when we realize we can't afford it .. sigh..

Exactly. The apparent ‘decision’ to go for a ‘single (combined) option’ of a new through station outside Bradford City Centre in tandem with a brand new rail link to Huddersfield and the main TransPennine Upgrade plus a tram system into Bradford means that no money or effort will be available for either Interchange or Forster Square for the foreseeable future. This subject only to the possibility that that there may be no option but to close and demolish the bus station part of the Interchange relatively soon.

 

[MichaelTrains]

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?

Because when the Grand Central services are there, along with the Huddersfield/Cottingley terminators there is a lack of platform space with trains regularly held outside the station throat.

So yes, remodelling and extra platforms are needed.

 

[Bantamzen]

We're rather busy planning to buy something shiny on our credit card right now, please come back when we realize we can't afford it .. sigh..

Indeed. I don't know what it is about Labour councils, or at least some. But they seem to want one huge shiny vanity project rather than a series of smaller, and more practical ones that would make way more difference. A bit like Doncaster Council and their airport, these councils get an idea and become laser focused on it, until the day comes when reality kicks in as does the real cost. Donny Council are just starting to get their reality on their precious shiny, I just hope Bradford's pay attention. They won't, but I hope.

Imagine the amount of money needed to build the "Gateway" (I'm starting to loath this name) station, and instead applied to improving both stations and approaches? Throw in wiring to the Interchange, and preferably all down the Calder Valley and we get a heap of tangible improvements. And on that note I was interested to see that the latest document on Northern Growth talks very specifically about Leeds-Bradford getting wired as a priority project, whereas "Gateway" as something to discuss later. I get the very strong impression that when these discussions get down to the fine details, the government will push back on it citing that wires will bring considerable improvements in Leeds-Bradford timings for a fraction of the cost. Hopefully that will signal the end of this vanity project.

 

[Noddy]

And on that note I was interested to see that the latest document on Northern Growth talks very specifically about Leeds-Bradford getting wired as a priority project

What is the point of that? There are no (few?) Leeds services that start at Interchange, so virtually all services would remain diesel. Electrification needs to be at least as far as Halifax and ideally Manchester.

 

[Grimsby town]

What is the point of that? There are no (few?) Leeds services that start at Interchange, so virtually all services would remain diesel. Electrification needs to be at least as far as Halifax and ideally Manchester.

The timescales for electrification are the early 2030s. By that time northern will be introducing bimode and battery trains and the Calder Valley line will be the perfect route for those to operate on, given it will be electrified at both ends. I assume the logic behind electrification to Bradford is reducing emissions in urban areas, reducing the electrification gap for battery trains, speeding up Bradford to Leeds journey times, and potentially allowing electric shuttles at times of higher demand.

 

[357]

Because when the Grand Central services are there, along with the Huddersfield/Cottingley terminators there is a lack of platform space with trains regularly held outside the station throat.

So yes, remodelling and extra platforms are needed.

I will state again that there is not a lack of platform space - but an inefficient use of platform space. The Cottingley sits in platform 1 - the longest platform - and rarely has anything arrive on top of it.

GC have a unit in the station (Mon-Fri):
05:07-06:58 (1)
08:34-08:57 (2)
09:59-10:39 (2)
14:23-15:41 (2)
16:23-16:58 (1)
19:36-19:56 (1)
22:46-23:22 (1)

A quick win with the current layout would be the Cottingley unit that sits in platform 4 from 06:08-06:25 could go on top of the GC in platform 1,

 

[NCT]

Both routes have a mixture of short and longer-distance flows, so you can't entirely separate them out without either closing the local stations (good luck with that!) or building a new route (where's that magic money tree?).
Putting away the crayons both routes will have to continue operating a mixed pattern, it isn't perfect but it's what we've got to work with.

The benefit of releasing two corridors to metro operation would pay for a new direct line. Had there not been the obsessions over new through stations in Warrington, Manchester and Bradford, and focus was concentrated on eliminating mixed running where it would yield the greatest benefit, then NPR could have looked a lot different, with lower costs and higher benefits.

Separating the Bradford Interchange lines away from what you're calling the "West Riding" line (by which I assume you mean the line to Wakefield Westgate) would need more than just rebuilding the immediate Western throat- those routes currently share two tracks up to Armley junction, and separating them out would mean a complete rebuild of the Armley gyratory which the current formation straddles. That might well be a good thing once you've finished, but getting there would be extremely difficult and disruptive for the best part of a decade.

In the grand scheme of things, Armley gyratory is a tiny egg to break in the making of omelettes. In any case, Leeds should embark upon a course of road diets to make its built environment less car centric.

 

[Grumpy]

Maybe if you expected a high speed Leeds-Bradford-Manchester line, or Leeds-Bradford-Huddersfield-Manchester line,

Then you would be extremely naïve.
We apparently can't afford to finish the last few miles of the GW electrification project. Similarly Midland Main line to Leicester and Sheffield. HS2's eastern leg is abandoned as is north of Birmingham. Yet some people imagine billions are to be found to provide a new high speed line from Leeds via Bradford and Huddersfield across the Pennines.

Wherever NPR is proposed to be routed will be a construction nightmare because of the nature of the terrain. It would have to be lots of viaducts, tunnels, bridges etc. i.e. a very high cost/mile. And if the other projects aren't financially viable then this doesn't stand a chance.

The recent announcements from Reeves and the Labour Mayors were just a cynical publicity exercise which partially succeeded in diverting the media attention from Labour's problems. Local Government elections coming up?

 

[Palmerston]

The most recent proposal seems to be only a new line from Bradford to Huddersfield, at which point it then joins the existing line to Manchester. It would then be feasible to run trans-pennine express routes via Bradford. A long way from the original NPR.

 

[fishwomp]

We apparently can't afford to finish the last few miles of the GW electrification project. Similarly Midland Main line to Leicester and Sheffield. HS2's eastern leg is abandoned as is north of Birmingham. Yet some people imagine billions are to be found to provide a new high speed line from Leeds via Bradford and Huddersfield across the Pennines.

Spot on!

Wherever NPR is proposed to be routed will be a construction nightmare because of the nature of the terrain. It would have to be lots of viaducts, tunnels, bridges etc. i.e. a very high cost/mile. And if the other projects aren't financially viable then this doesn't stand a chance.

20% of HS2 is tunnels yet straightforward terrain.. and given the speeds, a lot of viaduct too. We don't need a complex terrain to cause that! Considering it's coming into a dense city, and where it's not city it's hilly, this pie in the sky (or pie in the ground) project has to be over half in tunnel!

The most recent proposal seems to be only a new line from Bradford to Huddersfield, at which point it then joins the existing line to Manchester. It would then be feasible to run trans-pennine express routes via Bradford. A long way from the original NPR.

They need to rethink TPU .. surely they haven't put this in the capacity planning!

You'd not build that line for just one train an hour - let's say three. You can't run existing TPE fasts into Leeds via Bradford - as the additional journey time would make those Leeds - Manchester times slower than today's pre-TPU times!! So how does it join and park up at Huddersfield?

.. If it joins at Battyeford without a flyover, it'll be on the slow line into Huddersfield, making 7 an hour (1x Bradford via Halifax, 2 x Leeds, 1 x Wakefield, 3 x Bradford mega-fast), over junctions on the flat. It'd be using the new bay platforms at Huddersfield - which will still be needed for those slows too.

.. If it does have a flyover - then they've got to get back over to the slow terminal platforms at Huddersfield.

It's a good job this only exists in press releases. What a pity money is to be wasted designing the impossible.

 

[Grimsby town]

They need to rethink TPU .. surely they haven't put this in the capacity planning!

You'd not build that line for just one train an hour - let's say three. You can't run existing TPE fasts into Leeds via Bradford - as the additional journey time would make those Leeds - Manchester times slower than today's pre-TPU times!! So how does it join and park up at Huddersfield?

.. If it joins at Battyeford without a flyover, it'll be on the slow line into Huddersfield, making 7 an hour (1x Bradford via Halifax, 2 x Leeds, 1 x Wakefield, 3 x Bradford mega-fast), over junctions on the flat. It'd be using the new bay platforms at Huddersfield - which will still be needed for those slows too.

.. If it does have a flyover - then they've got to get back over to the slow terminal platforms at Huddersfield.

It's a good job this only exists in press releases. What a pity money is to be wasted designing the impossible.

The fast Bradford trains will run through to Manchester. It'd likely need a tunnel from Manchester to Marsden to provide 8 trains per hour from Manchester to Leeds. Of those 8 trains, 2 or 4 would go via Bradford. This has been under consideration for years so I'd be absolutely shocked if no thought has gone into alignments. There has definitely been consideration of rail capacity.

 

[daodao]

The fast Bradford trains will run through to Manchester. It'd likely need a tunnel from Manchester to Marsden to provide 8 trains per hour from Manchester to Leeds. Of those 8 trains, 2 or 4 would go via Bradford. This has been under consideration for years so I'd be absolutely shocked if no thought has gone into alignments. There has definitely been consideration of rail capacity.

These ideas are unaffordable and their benefits are very dubious - what is the predicted BCR? A tunnel from Manchester to Marsden, even more than the proposed to tunnel from Manchester city centre to Ringway, would be prohibitively expensive.

Routing express trains from Manchester to Leeds via Bradford instead of Dewsbury, similar to routing express trains from Liverpool to Manchester via Ringway instead of Chat Moss, eliminates any benefit from faster speeds. Longer electric trains on slightly re-aligned existing routes would provide most of the benefits that NPR might achieve, but at much less cost.

 

[Topological]

These ideas are unaffordable and their benefits are very dubious - what is the predicted BCR? A tunnel from Manchester to Marsden, even more than the proposed to tunnel from Manchester city centre to Ringway, would be prohibitively expensive.

Routing express trains from Manchester to Leeds via Bradford instead of Dewsbury, similar to routing express trains from Liverpool to Manchester via Ringway instead of Chat Moss, eliminates any benefit from faster speeds. Longer electric trains on slightly re-aligned existing routes would provide most of the benefits that NPR might achieve, but at much less cost.

Except that connectivity from Liverpool to Manchester Airport is massively improved by the proposed route there.

There would be a benefit to Leeds to Bradford and Bradford to Manchester, but are those benefits as large? My inclination is to say no, but then I work in an industry where the global connectivity offered by an airport is highly valuable.

I appreciate you are not a fan of connecting Liverpool to Manchester Airport.

 

[fishwomp]

The fast Bradford trains will run through to Manchester. It'd likely need a tunnel from Manchester to Marsden to provide 8 trains per hour from Manchester to Leeds. Of those 8 trains, 2 or 4 would go via Bradford. This has been under consideration for years so I'd be absolutely shocked if no thought has gone into alignments. There has definitely been consideration of rail capacity.

So, the thing they announced about _first_: a new station line from Bradford to Huddersfield will only work _if_ they build something else that they're not going to build?

From https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...t-travel-upgrade-in-the-north-in-a-generation

The first phase of the programme will deliver improved connections between Sheffield and Leeds, Leeds and York, and Leeds and Bradford. In the North East, development work on the Leamside Line will also be taken forward alongside Northern Powerhouse Rail. This will be followed by a new route between Liverpool and Manchester, running via Manchester Airport and Warrington, and finally by improved connections across the Pennines between Manchester, Leeds, Bradford, Sheffield and York. Regular services will run onward to Newcastle via Darlington and Durham; Hull; and Chester for North Wales connections.

.. so the _first_ thing is _not_ a Bradford to Huddersfield line. The improvement first is Leeds - Bradford. IIRC even phase 1 doesn't start any time soon. The Marsden new tunnel etc etc is way into 2040s territory.

I don't believe that TPU can have considered this *brand new* pile of bat-dung new line to Bradford in the current Huddersfield - Dewsbury plans, as most of this has been dreamt up and re-dreamt in a different form since the design of Huddersfield-Dewsbury was locked and loaded, and fired..

 

[Grimsby town]

These ideas are unaffordable and their benefits are very dubious - what is the predicted BCR? A tunnel from Manchester to Marsden, even more than the proposed to tunnel from Manchester city centre to Ringway, would be prohibitively expensive.

Routing express trains from Manchester to Leeds via Bradford instead of Dewsbury, similar to routing express trains from Liverpool to Manchester via Ringway instead of Chat Moss, eliminates any benefit from faster speeds. Longer electric trains on slightly re-aligned existing routes would provide most of the benefits that NPR might achieve, but at much less cost.

The longer electric trains on slightly realigned routes are being delivered by the Transpennine Upgrade and the early stages of NPR. Later stages are about improving capacity for the long term. I don't think inconceivable that capacity could be an issue in 2040 and it'd be no longer possible to lengthen trains. The government is making it far easier to build dense housing near station which is obviously going to boost rail demand.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Jan 2026 ==

So, the thing they announced about _first_: a new station line from Bradford to Huddersfield will only work _if_ they build something else that they're not going to build?

From https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...t-travel-upgrade-in-the-north-in-a-generation

.. so the _first_ thing is _not_ a Bradford to Huddersfield line. The improvement first is Leeds - Bradford. IIRC even phase 1 doesn't start any time soon. The Marsden new tunnel etc etc is way into 2040s territory.

I don't believe that TPU can have considered this *brand new* pile of bat-dung new line to Bradford in the current Huddersfield - Dewsbury plans, as most of this has been dreamt up and re-dreamt in a different form since the design of Huddersfield-Dewsbury was locked and loaded, and fired..

Well you don't have to believe it but I can tell you for a fact that TfN/DfT have been considering NPR services via a new Bradford to Huddersfield connection for at least 5 years. Most of what Labour have announced was being considered by the Johnson/May governments.

I think a new station in Bradford can viable without a new line to Huddersfield given it will speed up services passing through Bradford. We'll get confirmation in the summer when the business case is released.

 

[Bantamzen]

The longer electric trains on slightly realigned routes are being delivered by the Transpennine Upgrade and the early stages of NPR. Later stages are about improving capacity for the long term. I don't think inconceivable that capacity could be an issue in 2040 and it'd be no longer possible to lengthen trains. The government is making it far easier to build dense housing near station which is obviously going to boost rail demand.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Jan 2026 ==


Well you don't have to believe it but I can tell you for a fact that TfN/DfT have been considering NPR services via a new Bradford to Huddersfield connection for at least 5 years. Most of what Labour have announced was being considered by the Johnson/May governments.

I think a new station in Bradford can viable without a new line to Huddersfield given it will speed up services passing through Bradford. We'll get confirmation in the summer when the business case is released.

It'll speed up services through Bradford, but not speed up travel times for people in Bradford. Well apart from anyone that might end up in the high density housing, that might be built, assuming that any occupiers actually need / want to travel by train...

Do you still not see what the issue is here? Its a solution looking for a problem. Once TRU is fully completed, travel times between Leeds - Huddersfield - Manchester will increase, as should capacity. So speeding up services on the Calder Valley only becomes useful for other, smaller areas, and even then only by a few minutes at most. Yet some want hundreds of millions, perhaps a lot more to be spent to build a new alignment to avoid the interchange to a new station, all to save a few minutes from the smaller towns along the Calder to Leeds, and stuff the people in Bradford?

I'm sorry if I'm starting to sound like a broken record, but other than a tenuous hope that some form of regeneration will pop up around a new station like magic, and even that seems to have been scaled back to just housing in this thread, there does not seem to be any real justification to this. I know for a fact that this station is wanted by local councillors purely simply because it's new and shiny, Labour politicians in the area are well known for getting distracted by such regardless of their actual value. Very people local politicians have sat down and actually thought this through, they just lap up whatever concepts are thrown at them. They think it's a vote winner, and I know that because I know one of the main characters personally. But it isn't, it's daft and a waste of money when other areas of the network are screaming out for investment.

 

[Grimsby town]

So speeding up services on the Calder Valley only becomes useful for other, smaller areas, and even then only by a few minutes at most. Yet some want hundreds of millions, perhaps a lot more to be spent to build a new alignment to avoid the interchange to a new station, all to save a few minutes from the smaller towns along the Calder to Leeds, and stuff the people in Bradford?

Halifax is a fairly large town with pretty awful journey times to Leeds. West Lancashire and Blackburn are fairly large urban areas too. I think its possible that knocking 6 or 7 minutes off those journeys and improving reliavbility could make a positive business case.

I also think its quite likely that development occurs at a new station site. The government are making it far easier to develop land with 800 metres of a railway station so naturally that will attract developers. You don't know that a developer isn't already on board. I'm sure such considerations will be set out in the business case.

 

[Bantamzen]

Halifax is a fairly large town with pretty awful journey times to Leeds. West Lancashire and Blackburn are fairly large urban areas too. I think its possible that knocking 6 or 7 minutes off those journeys and improving reliavbility could make a positive business case.

I also think its quite likely that development occurs at a new station site. The government are making it far easier to develop land with 800 metres of a railway station so naturally that will attract developers. You don't know that a developer isn't already on board. I'm sure such considerations will be set out in the business case.

But this is a business case being made by Bradford Council. Why would they care about Blackburn or even Halifax timings? Not to mention people in Blackburn are more likely to gravitate towards Manchester, that's why the Todmorden Curve was built so services could run around from there to Manchester. This is what makes this idea so daft, it will only an advantage to people not living in Bradford.

As for the council having potential developers in the bag, well history does not serve them well. Just research the whole sorry tale of the original Broadway build and the ten years of a giant hole in the city centre. Or even more recently the sorry mess they got into over Bradford Live. You'll see why I am highly cynical about this whole thing.

 

[Grimsby town]

But this is a business case being made by Bradford Council. Why would they care about Blackburn or even Halifax timings? Not to mention people in Blackburn are more likely to gravitate towards Manchester, that's why the Todmorden Curve was built so services could run around from there to Manchester. This is what makes this idea so daft, it will only an advantage to people not living in Bradford.

I imagine the council see it as a way of getting serious investment into passenger facilities while improving capacity for future additonal services. A new station is also a pretty good advertisement for development in an area that small investment in existing facilities will never match. High profile schemes tend to attract investment.

I also think there is a real risk that nothing happens to Bradford Interchange. Why would a government invest heavily in a station which would likely need to be replaced in the 2040s through its development plan.

 

[Bantamzen]

I imagine the council see it as a way of getting serious investment into passenger facilities while improving capacity for future additonal services. A new station is also a pretty good advertisement for development in an area that small investment in existing facilities will never match. High profile schemes tend to attract investment.

No, it's a hangover from when Bradford Council thought there was going to be a brand new, high speed line through from Leeds to Manchester. All they've done since is hang onto the concept without any thought other than they want their new station. The concept was never to replace the Interchange, but to facilitate NPR without the complexity of getting through or under the city centre. This fixation of trying to attract new development ignores the fact that for people travelling to and from Bradford journey times will get longer, not shorter.

I also think there is a real risk that nothing happens to Bradford Interchange. Why would a government invest heavily in a station which would likely need to be replaced in the 2040s through its development plan.

What exactly is the risk of nothing happening though? Bradford's not likely to see any vast increase in services, new station or otherwise because constraints with the entire line up to Leeds and down to Manchester. And there's pretty much no chance of a new alignment before 2040. So let's keep things simple, plan to wire the route & finish TRU, and once Northern's new stock lands try to increase unit lengths to offer more capacity. There are tons of other development opportunities inside what is the city centre, as well as plenty of scope to make improvements to the existing stations without spending stupid amounts of money saving a few minutes on for everyone not travelling to or from Bradford.

 

[Grimsby town]

What exactly is the risk of nothing happening though? Bradford's not likely to see any vast increase in services, new station or otherwise because constraints with the entire line up to Leeds and down to Manchester. And there's pretty much no chance of a new alignment before 2040. So let's keep things simple, plan to wire the route & finish TRU, and once Northern's new stock lands try to increase unit lengths to offer more capacity. There are tons of other development opportunities inside what is the city centre, as well as plenty of scope to make improvements to the existing stations without spending stupid amounts of money saving a few minutes on for everyone not travelling to or from Bradford.

So leave interchange (with perhaps a few small upgrades) exactly as it is until new capacity is needed because of new lines in 2040? There's no point in spending a couple of hundred million on a station that won't facilitate your plans in 15 years time. It doesn't matter if its an new line via Huddersfield or upgraded lines, Interchange could clearly become the main constraint on capacity in the future which would require it to be replaced.

 

[Grumpy]

Tunnels are now the easy (and probably fast) way to build
.

Re Bantamzen's comment above( "Labour politicians in the area are well known for getting distracted by such regardless of their actual value. Very people local politicians have sat down and actually thought this through, they just lap up whatever concepts are thrown at them. They think it's a vote winner, and I know that because I know one of the main characters personally").
Perhaps a road tunnel from the M606 to the Aire Valley trunk route, with 3 or 4 strategic entries/exits might be a better investment. Would open up a swifter access to the motorway network from north Bradford and Airedale and take a lot of traffic off the congested local road network. Probably have a more positive effect on the local economy and peoples lives-lets face it most Bradfordians never use trains. Real vote winner!

 

[Bantamzen]

So leave interchange (with perhaps a few small upgrades) exactly as it is until new capacity is needed because of new lines in 2040? There's no point in spending a couple of hundred million on a station that won't facilitate your plans in 15 years time. It doesn't matter if its an new line via Huddersfield or upgraded lines, Interchange could clearly become the main constraint on capacity in the future which would require it to be replaced.

And if there's no new line? You don't completely shift a city centre station away in the hope that one day it'll have a new alignment to justify it. I've said this before and I'll say it again, if HS2 struggles to reach the north of England, there is zero chance of a new alignment across the Pennines. NPR as was and is going to be way down the list of priorities, mark my word. Labour may be banding the idea about at the moment, but they are panicking chasing votes. Come the next General Election, this one will have not even reached a full financial commitment, and will be easily kicked into the long grass when budgets tighten. It's practically a nailed on guarantee.

 

[yoyothehobo]

And if there's no new line? You don't completely shift a city centre station away in the hope that one day it'll have a new alignment to justify it. I've said this before and I'll say it again, if HS2 struggles to reach the north of England, there is zero chance of a new alignment across the Pennines.

Lets be honest, any new alignment that is predominantly tunnel from Huddersfield to Bradford is going to have some quite spectacular issues in construction due to the phenomenal amount of legacy coal mining there.

It would not be cheap. And would likely be the first thing on any budgetary chopping block.

The intricate design required for any new station regarding routes, track alignment would make it folly to construct anything major in advance of this mythical new route.

Look around the country at all the bodged bits of motorways that were connected together or where we have massive junctions because there was an airy scheme about future works that were so far up the magic money tree.

Bradford doesnt need the promise of something shiny in the 2040s, it needs something much sooner or it will continue to fall behind Leeds to the point where in 15 years it may just be a satellite town to Leeds.

I have lived in Leeds since 2008 and have seen just how much building has gone on in the last 5 to 10 years alone. You see the commuter flows in the morning and Bradford is a long way behind.

The money you would spend on this station and alignment would massively outweigh the cost for electrification of the calder valley line and some enhancements at interchange with real money left over for regeneration of Bradford, not leaving it with idle hope in regeneration around a new station in an industrial estate.

You can then regenerate an area that is suitable. Kirkstall forge as an example should by now be a huge metropolis around a station with services direct to Bradford and Leeds. But i believe its developer went bust, the majority of thr site stands empty with one unfinished house, yet less than 3 miles away huge numbers of buildings are going up in Leeds city centre.

Bradford needs real investment today. Not the promise of riches in 20 years time.

 

[Grimsby town]

And if there's no new line? You don't completely shift a city centre station away in the hope that one day it'll have a new alignment to justify it. I've said this before and I'll say it again, if HS2 struggles to reach the north of England, there is zero chance of a new alignment across the Pennines. NPR as was and is going to be way down the list of priorities, mark my word. Labour may be banding the idea about at the moment, but they are panicking chasing votes. Come the next General Election, this one will have not even reached a full financial commitment, and will be easily kicked into the long grass when budgets tighten. It's practically a nailed on guarantee.

Then Bradford has a more reliable station with better passenger facilities albeit potentially increase in journey time of a couple of minutes from some areas of the city centre.

There being very little investment in infrastructure in the north is nailed on? A region of 16 million people in one of the biggest economies on the planet. Deapite a labour government making infrastructure one of biggest priorities. That isn't cynicism, that's being blinkered to reality.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Jan 2026 ==

The money you would spend on this station and alignment would massively outweigh the cost for electrification of the calder valley line and some enhancements at interchange with real money left over for regeneration of Bradford, not leaving it with idle hope in regeneration around a new station in an industrial estate.

Unless the Calder Valley line is considered a long term key freight route, full electrification is pointless. Its a relatively low speed line that can easy be served by battery or bimode trains which will likely in service before full electrification can be delivered. The reason Bradford is so far down the pecking order in terms of investment is that Manchester and Leeds are at capacity. So those capacity problems need to be solved first before services can be improved from Bradford.

 

[yoyothehobo]

Unless the Calder Valley line is considered a long term key freight route, full electrification is pointless. Its a relatively low speed line that can easy be served by battery or bimode trains which will likely in service before full electrification can be delivered. The reason Bradford is so far down the pecking order in terms of investment is that Manchester and Leeds are at capacity. So those capacity problems need to be solved first before services can be improved from Bradford.

What are you on about?

The main reason for electrification is that it allows for much quicker acceleration which is vital for a mixed traffic, mixed service density route like the Calder Valley. It will also remain the main route for East to West freight across the Pennines.

The only capacity improvements Leeds will be getting will be untangling platform 17 from the E and F line approaches with G line. (If that ever actually does go ahead) to ensure that there is no conflicting movements there and increase reliability.

East of Leeds is electrification to improve the acceleration of services on a heavily trafficked mixed use section of line. (And to plug a big gap)

There are numerous interventions you could do along the Calder valley line that would improve the service. Minor line speed improvements, electrification, platform extensions, that would benefit the whole Calder valley without having to build a whole new railway line and station that would deliver marginal benefits.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Right I've got my crayons out...

It should keep everyone happy

 

[NCT]

I think a new station in Bradford can viable without a new line to Huddersfield given it will speed up services passing through Bradford. We'll get confirmation in the summer when the business case is released.

What services passing through Bradford? Only toy trains serving small communities generating very small through flows.

The history of the Bradford saga is something like this:

- Initially they wanted a super-duper NPR route via Oldham and Bradford, tunnelling under either urban areas or the widest part of the Pennines. All fast Manchester - Leeds trains would use this route and Bradford would get metro frequency to both. It was completely bonkers.
- They realised such a route would indeed be bonkers, and realised that investments in TRU meant it made no sense for a future NPR route to not go via Huddersfield
- Once Huddersfield was decided upon it became clear that Huddersfield - Bradford - Leeds would never be quicker than Huddersfield - Dewsbury - Leads (or indeed any future straight fast route).
- Bradford was never going to be on the fastest Manchester - Leeds services. We are back to only Calder Valley toy trains going to/via Interchange. The rationale for 'getting through Bradford quicker' completely evaporates.

Bradford's existing city centre diameter between Forster Square and Interchange is less than 700 metres. Interchange to St James is 1km, along a hostile Wakefield Road. Bradford City Centre is not going to double in size. It just isn't. Plonking a station there isn't going to turn it into Bristol Temple Meads. It'll look like Reading West at best. Let's be clear, a bus station relocated to St James would simply be bypassed by the majority of bus routes.

But of course in order to save face, local leaders must have something, even if it means harming the actual city.