Closure of Bransty Tunnel (near Whitehaven) expected until further notice

[QueensCurve]

This failure does nothing for retention of passenger numbers between say Millom and Barrow.

Another threat is a new bus service from Whitehaven to barrow. I'm not sure how long it takes and I doubt its very comfortable, but it only costs £3.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Apr 2026 ==

I suspect the legislation puts the power in the hands of the EA, and they have a number of legal obligations to check before they can grant the permit - the days of "because the minister said so" are waning.

Strangely enough there has been a tendency for the amount of secondary legislation, in which the minister effectively decides the law, to increase.

 

[35B]

Strangely enough there has been a tendency for the amount of secondary legislation, in which the minister effectively decides the law, to increase.

Indeed there has. But given the size and scale of government bodies, the breadth of ministers' responsibilities and their short time in office, I suggest that while the formal position is that ministers decide, the reality is that the work is done by and within government agencies.

Which means that, instead of being an exercise of political will, these decisions are more likely to be hedged around with restrictions and, if they affect interested parties, subject to the threat of judicial review if not conducted with full care to the process.

In the context of Bransty Tunnel, that means that these other issues may well take precedence over the reopening of a through railway. Saving @yorksrob's belief that the rail reopening is paramount, in this case, i may be that those other interests are politically and economically more important.

 

[Steddenm]

Is the ticket acceptance still in place between Carlisle and Lancaster for Northern on TPE/Avanti services or has this been reminded? I have a day rover for tomorrow, Super League, and was wondering if it can be used on TPE/AWC instead of going round the houses?

 

[janb]

Is the ticket acceptance still in place between Carlisle and Lancaster for Northern on TPE/Avanti services or has this been reminded? I have a day rover for tomorrow, Super League, and was wondering if it can be used on TPE/AWC instead of going round the houses?

No blanket ticket acceptance anymore. Only the standard ticket acceptance on TPE only if a Northern train is cancelled.

 

[Rail Ranger]

That ticket acceptance between Lancaster and Carlisle was rescinded on 27th September 2025, the 200th anniversary day of the railways.

 

[Killingworth]

It's all a bit unfortunate for Cumbrian Coast Railtours like these by The Railway Touring Company on 27th June; https://www.railwaytouring.net/cce-27-06-26 and 15th August; https://www.railwaytouring.net/cce-15-08-26

 

[RGM654]

Indeed - we should be thankful that no one in our government can rule by presidential decree (at least not officially).

Sunak and HS2?

 

[Dave61]

It's all a bit unfortunate for Cumbrian Coast Railtours like these by The Railway Touring Company on 27th June; https://www.railwaytouring.net/cce-27-06-26 and 15th August; https://www.railwaytouring.net/cce-15-08-26

We were on the LakeLander from Nottingham last August (a very long day!) which got diverted back via the Settle - Carlise route which we had intended doing sometime later so were not too dissapointed.

Will still to the LakeLander route as and when the line is reopened.

 

[thenorthern]

RTT is now showing the tunnel closed until at least October 2026.

While Network Rail/Railtrack/British Rail/TOCs have previously used the permanent bustitution to eventually justify closure before I can't see the DfT allowing the bustitution to go on forever. Especially given that the Cumbrian Coast Line passes through 4 constituencies which in recent years have become marginal ones. (Barrow and Furness, Whitehaven and Workington, Penrith and Solway, Carlisle).

It will be interesting to see how long the DfT start getting involved and demand the line is fixed.

 

[Straus]

I was having a think about this earlier and I seen to remember an old H&S construction bulletin where people were injured or killed in their house by gas migration during some mine works nearby.

Is there the risk of gases accumulating in the tunnel as they're effectively pushed out by grout being pumped in? Would the workers need full breathing apparatus etc? Would all machinery need to be spark free for the same reasons?

 

[The Planner]

RTT is now showing the tunnel closed until at least October 2026.

While Network Rail/Railtrack/British Rail/TOCs have previously used the permanent bustitution to eventually justify closure before I can't see the DfT allowing the bustitution to go on forever. Especially given that the Cumbrian Coast Line passes through 4 constituencies which in recent years have become marginal ones. (Barrow and Furness, Whitehaven and Workington, Penrith and Solway, Carlisle).

It will be interesting to see how long the DfT start getting involved and demand the line is fixed.

It will get fixed when there is a solution.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It will get fixed when there is a solution.

Was the suggestion in the railway press discussed above that they had a design for it not correct, then, or has there been further development that would render it not a solution at all?

 

[alf]

How about getting engineers with a “can do” attitude to examine & solve the tunnel problems.
I know plenty of clever enthusiastic civil engineers, including a close relative. But I don’t know any who work for Great British Rail.
I knew two Network Rail engineers who tend to think ‘can’t do’ .Brunel or Stevenson would not have hired them to solve Bransty.

 

[The Planner]

Was the suggestion in the railway press discussed above that they had a design for it not correct, then, or has there been further development that would render it not a solution at all?

The tunnel has a solution, not sure the leakage has.

 

[AndrewE]

The tunnel has a solution, not sure the leakage has.

if they can put a watertight tube around the outside of the railway loading gauge and plug/seal around the 2 tunnel mouths then it might cease to be a problem for the railway. (As the ochre contamination won't be coming from the railway drainage, so isn't legally the railway's problem!)

 

[Gloster]

if they can put a watertight tube around the outside of the railway loading gauge and plug/seal around the 2 tunnel mouths then it might cease to be a problem for the railway. (As the ochre contamination won't be coming from the railway drainage, so isn't legally the railway's problem!)

I think that the tunnel is tight to gauge: the Class 108 DMUs apparently had bars on the windows because of this. I am not sure about the Lightweights; probably in those days it was the passenger’s duty to take care.

 

[Acathater]

I think that the tunnel is tight to gauge: the Class 108 DMUs apparently had bars on the windows because of this. I am not sure about the Lightweights; probably in those days it was the passenger’s duty to take care.

there were DMUs on the Carlisle-Newcastle run with window bars as far back as 1977.
I presume they were the same fleet

 

[Mcr Warrior]

I think that the tunnel is tight to gauge: the Class 108 DMUs apparently had bars on the windows because of this.

Wasn't that also the case (i.e. very tight clearances) with several overbridges on the section of line between Maryport and Carlisle?

 

[marsker]

there were DMUs on the Carlisle-Newcastle run with window bars as far back as 1977.
I presume they were the same fleet

The DMUs othe Tyne Valley Line were South Gosforth based sets that gained window bars for the North Tyneside line after de-electrifcation. I believe that clearances in North Shields tunnel were tight.
Quite a few bridges also had Limited Clearance signs.

 

[Gloster]

The DMUs othe Tyne Valley Line were South Gosforth based sets that gained window bars for the North Tyneside line after de-electrifcation. I believe that clearances in North Shields tunnel were tight.
Quite a few bridges also had Limited Clearance signs.

The Cumbrian Coast sets were based at Kingmoor.

 

[Pinus contorta]

I think that the tunnel is tight to gauge: the Class 108 DMUs apparently had bars on the windows because of this. I am not sure about the Lightweights; probably in those days it was the passenger’s duty to take care.

I mentioned this the other day and was told the bars were for the bridge near Spatrie/ Maryport. Not the tunnel

 

[Bletchleyite]

Wasn't that also the case (i.e. very tight clearances) with several overbridges on the section of line between Maryport and Carlisle?

I did think that was the issue, not the tunnel. It's the reason you can't run 195s or 158s all the way round. At some point the "Hastings solution" (i.e. singling of the problem sections) will be needed to fix that as 40 year old 15x won't go on forever and the northern bit is one of the busier bits of the route so is unlikely to close, unless of course the new bimodes are specced to fit.

 

[MadMac]

The DMUs othe Tyne Valley Line were South Gosforth based sets that gained window bars for the North Tyneside line after de-electrifcation. I believe that clearances in North Shields tunnel were tight.
Quite a few bridges also had Limited Clearance signs.

Several of those units used to run empty to Glasgow Queen Street early Saturday morning to form a Whitley Bay holiday service for that very reason.

 

[EYFanatic]

I did think that was the issue, not the tunnel. It's the reason you can't run 195s or 158s all the way round. At some point the "Hastings solution" (i.e. singling of the problem sections) will be needed to fix that as 40 year old 15x won't go on forever and the northern bit is one of the busier bits of the route so is unlikely to close, unless of course the new bimodes are specced to fit.

I thought a 195 did make it after that derailment a while ago, so its not entirely impossible

 

[Straus]

How about getting engineers with a “can do” attitude to examine & solve the tunnel problems.
I know plenty of clever enthusiastic civil engineers, including a close relative. But I don’t know any who work for Great British Rail.
I knew two Network Rail engineers who tend to think ‘can’t do’ .Brunel or Stevenson would not have hired them to solve Bransty.

Who do you think does the designs?

It's probably best to remain quiet on things you're obviously completely unknowledgeable about.

 

[a_c_skinner]

I thought a 195 did make it after that derailment a while ago, so its not entirely impossible

Isn't the issue for some of the structures on the northern part of the Cumbrian Coast Line that the rolling stock needs end doors as evacuation from the normal side doors is not possible? 195s clearly fit, possibly at walking speed though.

 

[Skymonster]

The EA have a number of legal duties, none of which concern the ability of the travelling public to go about their business. And, bluntly, where this tunnel is concerned, I suspect those duties are of greater public interest than the disrupted journeys.

Such fanciful ideologies are typical of the wider Milliband-esque schemes that are screwing this country and its economy. Somehow we have got our priorities completely misplaced. Service through the tunnel needs to be reinstated as a top priority to get public transport moving properly again, and any other issues be dealt with as and when, not before. i.e. what the EA want or demand should be WELL down the pecking order.

 

[The Planner]

Such fanciful ideologies are typical of the wider Milliband-esque schemes that are screwing this country and its economy. Somehow we have got our priorities completely misplaced. Service through the tunnel needs to be reinstated as a top priority to get public transport moving properly again, and any other issues be dealt with as and when, not before. i.e. what the EA want or demand should be WELL down the pecking order.

But if the issue is in the tunnel, what is the plan? Reopen the tunnel with all the work needed to renew the track etc and then rip it up shortly after?

 

[themiller]

Isn't the issue for some of the structures on the northern part of the Cumbrian Coast Line that the rolling stock needs end doors as evacuation from the normal side doors is not possible? 195s clearly fit, possibly at walking speed though.

The restrictions on the line north of Maryport do not require end doors otherwise classes 142 and 143 wouldn’t have been allowed! 142s were the main units until withdrawn.

 

[12C]

I believe the problem with clearance is also to do with the ‘6 foot’, as in the space between the two running lines, which risks wider stock hitting each other.

I’m sure I’ve heard that when the Network Rail 950 or occasional 195 has ran on the northern section it has been allowed providing nothing else passes on the opposite line.