Peaks and Dales line - feasibility study submitted

[Topological]

Well, my thinking was that without that extra chord any stone trains using the Buxton line are constrained to pass through the bottleneck of Stockport, so it only makes sense for traffic to and from central Manchester / Ashburys to go that way.

With a new chord at Hazel Grove giving access towards Crewe, many more stone trains could use the Buxton line and avoid the congested Hope Valley line altogether. Especially when/if HS2 phase 2a releases huge capacity for freight between Crewe and the South-East.

If the aim is Crewe then does via Altrincham not work?

I assumed the chord was to get a train from Buxton via Dove Holes to go up onto the line that goes from Hazel Grove west. If you route through Chinley then you can already get onto that line and get to Crewe via Altrincham and Middlewich.

 

[yorksrob]

You don't make the service reliable by spreading your resources even more thinly by adding another barely viable line to the portfolio...

The whole railway is "barely viable" in purely financial terms. That's no justification for not having the network society needs.

 

[Zomboid]

If the aim is Crewe then does via Altrincham not work?

I assumed the chord was to get a train from Buxton via Dove Holes to go up onto the line that goes from Hazel Grove west. If you route through Chinley then you can already get onto that line and get to Crewe via Altrincham and Middlewich.

I think the idea is to avoid the hope valley line, which is not without merit as an idea. But probably not justifiable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The whole railway is "barely viable" in purely financial terms. That's no justification for not having the network society needs.

Society doesn't need this line.

 

[Topological]

I think the idea is to avoid the hope valley line, which is not without merit as an idea. But probably not justifiable.

Chinley has space for more tracks if absolutely needed. The slows turn off to go through New Mills so...

 

[yorksrob]

Society doesn't need this line.

I'm not convinced it doesn't.

 

[Bald Rick]

Except house prices

...and ticket prices

Well quite. It is not clear how spending a couple of billion of taxpayers money on this proposal would resolve either.

Society doesn't need this line.

Exactly. Or put more bluntly, society would be considerably worse off if this line were built.

 

[Zomboid]

Chinley has space for more tracks if absolutely needed. The slows turn off to go through New Mills so...

And that's a much more likely upgrade to actually happen, but a south to west chord at Hazel Grove would be another approach to that problem.

 

[Killingworth]

Chinley has space for more tracks if absolutely needed. The slows turn off to go through New Mills so...

The first iteration of the Hope Valley Capacity Scheme included a loop at Chinley. That was the first major change between the first and second public consultation which saw it omitted. The reason was because there was then no capacity through Stockport. The Bamford loop's lack of freight use warns that capacity in itself doesn't improve matters significantly unless it can be used in practice.

So I'd repeat that the single* line Dore chord through Dore Tunnel on an uphill 90 degree curve can't fulfil its active freight role as well as tightly timed regular passenger services. An occasional diversion, empty coaching stock or steam special is another matter. (*It used to be double track but much shorter with no space for a train to rest between the two main lines.)

 

[Topological]

The first iteration of the Hope Valley Capacity Scheme included a loop at Chinley. That was the first major change between the first and second public consultation which saw it omitted. The reason was because there was then no capacity through Stockport. The Bamford loop's lack of freight use warns that capacity in itself doesn't improve matters significantly unless it can be used in practice.

So I'd repeat that the single* line Dore chord through Dore Tunnel on an uphill 90 degree curve can't fulfil its active freight role as well as tightly timed regular passenger services. An occasional diversion, empty coaching stock or steam special is another matter. (*It used to be double track but much shorter with no space for a train to rest between the two main lines.)

Since the discussion was about freights from the quarries on the extant part of the line between Buxton and Chinley from which the peaks and dales would diverge. Running via Chinley was to get them to the Hazel Grove freight line (which has no junction with the Buxton to Stockport via Dove Holes).

Project Rio managed to use Dore South, but in those days there was only one MML Sheffield to London and no Nottingham to Leeds. I think there were more trains that terminated at Chesterfield from the north, but that might have only been peaks. I just always remember being a little confused by Chesterfield terminators when changing at Sheffield. Even so, that is at least one less train on the MML to cross than there is now.

 

[Nottingham59]

Bamford loop's lack of freight use warns that capacity in itself doesn't improve matters significantly unless it can be used in practice.

Looking at the map, it seems to me that Bamford station could be moved four hundred metres to the East, beyond the start of the loop.

Then make the central road bi-directional. It can still serve as an occasional freight holding loop, as now. But also act as a loop for expresses in either direction to overtake local trains held at Bamford station.

 

[Killingworth]

Since the discussion was about freights from the quarries on the extant part of the line between Buxton and Chinley from which the peaks and dales would diverge. Running via Chinley was to get them to the Hazel Grove freight line (which has no junction with the Buxton to Stockport via Dove Holes).

Project Rio managed to use Dore South, but in those days there was only one MML Sheffield to London and no Nottingham to Leeds. I think there were more trains that terminated at Chesterfield from the north, but that might have only been peaks. I just always remember being a little confused by Chesterfield terminators when changing at Sheffield. Even so, that is at least one less train on the MML to cross than there is now.

You wouldn't plan a railway network like this for today's needs but it has evolved over 150-200 years and in this area freight was vey dominant - coal. In bulk primarily from Notts and Derbyshire collieries to Lancashire industry with many dedicated works sidings. Most stations also had dedicated sidings where domestic coal was the dominant traffic. Passengers were secondary.

The world has moved on with stone and cement the dominant freight traffic save for an occasional wandering train load of bio-mass. Without the line south through Bakewell stone and cement has to go a very long way round to avoid the Dore curve so it mostly doesn't. Guide Bridge is a big diversion to the north.

20+ years ago Project Rio used the Dore curve when Hope Valley stoppers were probably still 2 hourly, not long since to New Mills from both Sheffield and Manchester with all change to travel through.

On the timescales for the Hope Valley scheme (started planning mid-1990s, several changes along the way, delivered in 2024) we can't expect a big project like this to take much less. Earliest delivery by 2045-50? There is considerable environmental opposition to continued quarrying in the Peak Park itself and any new licences will be fought. That excludes most of the quarries around Buxton but even with national interest priority the quantity being extracted may not continue at present rates for all that many more decades.

Suspect through long distance passenger traffic. Dubious local passenger traffic. Questions about longer term freight loads. Paths beyond Ambergate for freight. Looks like the restoring your railways people were right to reject this one. It's feasible, of course, but a massive waste of scarce funding that could otherwise be better spent on many other things that would bring more benefits across the nation. Feasible doesn't mean it should be done.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 May 2026 ==

Looking at the map, it seems to me that Bamford station could be moved four hundred metres to the East, beyond the start of the loop.

Then make the central road bi-directional. It can still serve as an occasional freight holding loop, as now. But also act as a loop for expresses in either direction to overtake local trains held at Bamford station.

Bamford station westbound (south side) platform is currently being raised. This picture is the loop being created in 2023. There used to be a siding to the south side here but you need to look at gradients before thinking of adding new platforms.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Looking at the map, it seems to me that Bamford station could be moved four hundred metres to the East, beyond the start of the loop.

Then make the central road bi-directional. It can still serve as an occasional freight holding loop, as now. But also act as a loop for expresses in either direction to overtake local trains held at Bamford station.

A trip on the Hope Valley Line would show you that the new Bamford loop was cut through and is now next to an almost vertical soil-nailed wall. No site for a station (let alone being even further from Bamford village and the ‘Bus Turnaround’ interchange).

 

[Nottingham59]

A trip on the Hope Valley Line would show you that the new Bamford loop was cut through and is now next to an almost vertical soil-nailed wall. No site for a station (let alone being even further from Bamford village and the ‘Bus Turnaround’ interchange).

Sure. But the cutting is at least 250m beyond the start of the loop, after the line crosses the Upper Hurst Brook. Plenty of space for a 100m platform.

But it's all hypothetical. It's never going to happen.

 

[HSTEd]

I think the stone trains are the elephant in the room for the railways to the south east of Manchester.
Their relatively sluggish acceleration and comparatively low speed seem to be a major factor on defining the timetable.

I think that is, in itself, a major block to any reopening of Matlock-Bakewell, notwithstanding the very low population density.

I think something probably should be done to these routes, given we have two mixed traffic railways right next to each other, both suffering from a lack of traffic segregation. Meanwhile settlements that would probably benefit from an increase in frequency or better placed stations like Whaley Bridge and Chapel-en-le-frith.

I have often thought about a chord connection the Buxton Line to the Hope Valley just to the south of Chapel-en-le-frith, allowing Sheffield-Manchester stopping trains to use the Buxton line and a new station in Chapel-en-le-frith. That would leave the existing line west of their solely for faster passenger trains and stone trains.

 

[Killingworth]

I have often thought about a chord connection the Buxton Line to the Hope Valley just to the south of Chapel-en-le-frith, allowing Sheffield-Manchester stopping trains to use the Buxton line and a new station in Chapel-en-le-frith. That would leave the existing line west of their solely for faster passenger trains and stone trains.

Gradients for starters.

 

[squingo44]

Manchester needs rail investment along the level of London. I'm happy to concede that my vision for a Peaks and Dales line that carries express commuter services into Manchester is rather far-fetched, but it's something to work towards. It would require, as prerequisites: a through-running tunnel across the centre of Manchester for commuter services, the complete electrification of the Buxton and Hope Valley lines, and probably an addition set of tracks between Stockport and the centre of Manchester. And, of course, the commuter line between Buxton and Manchester (along with all the others) would need turn-up-and-go frequency of at least 6 TPH, hopefully more during peak hours.

Sure, it's ambitious, but that's no reason not to pursue all of this as an overarching strategy for the region's transport network. And a new electrified, high-speed mainline railway connecting Manchester to the East Midlands certainly has a part to play in this.

Also, speaking of freight - such a railway would form a good complement to the F2MN project, connecting Felixstowe directly to Manchester - if only there were a way to avoid the bottleneck at the centre. So why not rebuild the line from Skelton Junction to Glazebrook, and connect onwards to the Chat Moss line just east of Parkside Junction, where they're going to build the new freight terminal? With double-tracking between Skelton Junction and Hazel Grove, that would open up a lot of freight capacity outside the centre of the city.

 

[daodao]

Manchester needs rail investment along the level of London. I'm happy to concede that my vision for a Peaks and Dales line that carries express commuter services into Manchester is rather far-fetched, but it's something to work towards. It would require, as prerequisites: a through-running tunnel across the centre of Manchester for commuter services, the complete electrification of the Buxton and Hope Valley lines, and probably an addition set of tracks between Stockport and the centre of Manchester. And, of course, the commuter line between Buxton and Manchester (along with all the others) would need turn-up-and-go frequency of at least 6 TPH, hopefully more during peak hours.

Sure, it's ambitious, but that's no reason not to pursue all of this as an overarching strategy for the region's transport network. And a new electrified, high-speed mainline railway connecting Manchester to the East Midlands certainly has a part to play in this.

Fantasy!! Where's the money to finance such massive infrastructure enhancements? Manchester is not London. Some limited expansion of and improvements to Metrolink, and completion of TRU, is all that Greater Manchester can reasonably expect in the next 20 years in terms of rail investment. HS2 phase 2b is dead in the water, and full-scale NPR is also unaffordable.

The population of Western Derbyshire is relatively tiny and the existence of the Peak District National Park precludes substantial development that would warrant any rail enhancements in this area.

 

[squingo44]

Fantasy!! Where's the money to finance such massive infrastructure enhancements? Manchester is not London. Some limited expansion of and improvements to Metrolink, and completion of TRU, is all that Greater Manchester can reasonably expect in the next 20 years in terms of rail investment. HS2 phase 2b is dead in the water, and full-scale NPR is also unaffordable.

The population of Western Derbyshire is relatively tiny and the existence of the Peak District National Park precludes substantial development that would warrant any rail enhancements in this area.

We're going to need change the political weather, then. The country needs a more ambitious plan for investing in its transport infrastructure. It's up to the politicians to decide where the money comes from.

I reckon that, at the very least, we'll get HS2 to Manchester, in full, and a make start on the eastern leg. I also believe that, with devolution, we'll see regional governments becoming better able to finance their own infrastructure improvments. There's reason to be optimistic, and to support that we should be coming up with a positive, ambitious vision for the future!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree Manchester needs significant investment, though for most benefit that should go to Metrolink for more expansion and maybe a city centre underground crossing, not an hourly DMU branch line to Bakewell.

 

[Killingworth]

We're going to need change the political weather, then. The country needs a more ambitious plan for investing in its transport infrastructure. It's up to the politicians to decide where the money comes from.

I reckon that, at the very least, we'll get HS2 to Manchester, in full, and a make start on the eastern leg. I also believe that, with devolution, we'll see regional governments becoming better able to finance their own infrastructure improvements. There's reason to be optimistic, and to support that we should be coming up with a positive, ambitious vision for the future!

And when do you expect HS2 to get to Manchester?

1825 Stockton and Darlington. 1830 Liverpool and Manchester, a far more ambitious undertaking. By 1850 Queen Victoria travelled by rail from Edinburgh to London across the Royal Border Bridge over the Tweed and High Level Bridge across the Tyne.

I'd like to think we could match such progress today but somehow can't imagine it happening.

However, my priority would be a northern equivalent of Thameslink and the Elizabeth line intersecting below Manchester to connect north-south and east-west services with more local services above. The single factor causing longer journey times is the slow drag through congested city suburbs. Underground lines can go under and over each other far more easily.

No money. Planning restrictions. Public inquiries. HS2 or the Manchester sub-surface interchange won't happen within 25 years.

 

[squingo44]

I agree Manchester needs significant investment, though for most benefit that should go to Metrolink for more expansion and maybe a city centre underground crossing, not an hourly DMU branch line to Bakewell.

I doubt the new line would be unelectrified. There'd be no point, it wouldn't be able to achieve a very high speed with all those gradients.

And when do you expect HS2 to get to Manchester?

1825 Stockton and Darlington. 1830 Liverpool and Manchester, a far more ambitious undertaking. By 1850 Queen Victoria travelled by rail from Edinburgh to London across the Royal Border Bridge over the Tweed and High Level Bridge across the Tyne.

I'd like to think we could match such progress today but somehow can't imagine it happening.

However, my priority would be a northern equivalent of Thameslink and the Elizabeth line intersecting below Manchester to connect north-south and east-west services with more local services above. The single factor causing longer journey times is the slow drag through congested city suburbs. Underground lines can go under and over each other far more easily.

No money. Planning restrictions. Public inquiries. HS2 or the Manchester sub-surface interchange won't happen within 25 years.

Optimistically, the late '30s or early '40s. This would require both a significant increase in yearly capex on major projects, and an overhaul of our development planning system, but I reckon we'll be in for a positive surpise on both counts over the next decade.

I agree that a through-running tunnel through Manchester is absolutely a necessity. I don't consider it more or less important than HS2, though. If anything, we should aim to deliver them both at the same time and plan a larger Manchester Piccadilly underground station to accommodate both.

Once all of that extra capacity opens up for Manchester, then commuter rail services from beyond Buxton start making sense. It would only add to the case for building the peaks and dales line for freight & regional passenger service.

 

[Bald Rick]

but I reckon we'll be in for a positive surpise on both counts over the next decade.

How much do you want to bet on that?

 

[Killingworth]

I doubt the new line would be unelectrified. There'd be no point, it wouldn't be able to achieve a very high speed with all those gradients.

Optimistically, the late '30s or early '40s. This would require both a significant increase in yearly capex on major projects, and an overhaul of our development planning system, but I reckon we'll be in for a positive surpise on both counts over the next decade.

I agree that a through-running tunnel through Manchester is absolutely a necessity. I don't consider it more or less important than HS2, though. If anything, we should aim to deliver them both at the same time and plan a larger Manchester Piccadilly underground station to accommodate both.

Once all of that extra capacity opens up for Manchester, then commuter rail services from beyond Buxton start making sense. It would only add to the case for building the peaks and dales line for freight & regional passenger service.

Well I admire your optimism.

However, major infrastructure projects do sometimes appear to shoot forward out of seemingly nowhere to those not closely involved.

Manchester's Metrolink. Nottingham's NET. Tyne & Wear Metro. Croydon and West Midlands Trams. Docklands Light Railway and a few others I haven't time to type. Those closest to them will know better how long they took from first thoughts to activation. I don't expect this project to be one that shoots forward, not having been knocked back twice at very early stages by the Restoring Your Railway Fund.

 

[zwk500]

Manchester's Metrolink. Nottingham's NET. Tyne & Wear Metro. Croydon and West Midlands Trams. Docklands Light Railway and a few others I haven't time to type. Those closest to them will know better how long they took from first thoughts to activation. I don't expect this project to be one that shoots forward, not having been knocked back twice at very early stages by the Restoring Your Railway Fund.

Note how all of those projects that 'shot forward' are urban projects closely linked to major and rapid developments.

 

[The Planner]

How much do you want to bet on that?

Like burning fivers to keep warm.

 

[Topological]

Like burning fivers to keep warm.

That is the most optimistic post about the line on here.

It is almost burning the contents of the National Gallery level.

I think we will get a surface level HS station in Manchester and the tunnel to the airport. I think it will be plugged into HS2 and that there will be something towards Liverpool. The tunnel through Standedge may well come eventually. Connecting big cities has value and the major parties do need to do something for the north. But, none of that helps Peaks and Dales, nor changes the fact that no one wants the number of peak district residents to increase.

 

[overthere 2]

How many times over could we have built HS2 by now, with the money we would have saved if we didn't spend a fortune on consultants rehashing these vampire routes every few years?

How many times over could we have reversed the Beeching and other closures with the money we would have saved if we didn't spend a fortune on consultant's and MPs telling us that HS2 is needed for all these years





I have noticed that Reform is not exactly Rail Forums members favourite political party but if you ignore the hysterics from the left, luvvies, Celeb's and the PC brigade and actually look at them without prejudice you will see they are actually trying to do some good:

www.derbyshiretimes.co.uk/news/politics/council/derbyshire-council-backs-peak-district-railway-plan-despite-fears-for-monsal-trail-8646444

Derbyshire council backs Peak District railway plan – despite fears for Monsal Trail​

By Jon Cooper
Published 28th May 2026, 14:23 BST

Derbyshire County Council has voted to support plans for the reinstatement of the Peaks and Dales railway line between Matlock and Buxton – despite concerns about the effects this could have on popular tourist beauty spots including the Monsal Trail.​

Cllr Melandra Smith proposed the motion for the Reform-controlled authority to back the plans, which are designed to boost the local and wider economy, support tourism, reconnect key destinations including Matlock, Bakewell and Buxton and to reduce the impact of increasing traffic in the Peak District National Park.

The Reform UK Councillor, who represents Buxton North and East, told the meeting: ““This is not about restoring an old railway for sentimental reasons. It’s about modern transport, economic resilience and giving isolated rural communities inside the National Park better options for the future.”



Project developer and sponsor, Peaks and Dales Line, have been working on a study assessing the feasibility of reopening the Peaks and Dales railway which has now been submitted to the Department for Transport ahead of a Strategic Outline Business Case.

Cllr Smith said the study concludes that reopening the route is technically feasible with no major barriers identified at this stage.

She argued the original closure of the Matlock to Buxton line in 1968 following a decline in passenger numbers, the impact of the Beeching cuts and the gradual withdrawal of services left the area less well connected for generations.
Cllr Smith claims reopening the line will create benefits for Derbyshire and beyond including the North West and the East Midlands and transform Buxton by reconnecting the High Peak town into the wider regional rail networks improving the local economy, business and work opportunities while supporting opportunities for youngsters and opening up health care.


She also said the scheme would reduce the growing and concerning number of cars in the Peak District National Park as well as HGVs while increasing more, alternative freight opportunities, adding that the scheme has received positive engagement from the Department for Transport.

Liberal Democrat Cllr Sue Burfoot, who represents Matlock, argued other solutions such as electric buses should be considered and she questioned claims there are currently no technical environmental planning or delivery constraints when you consider having to reopen Haddon Tunnel and when there are no details on how assets like the Monsal Trail could be enhanced.

I always smile in a pitying way when ever I hear somebody suggest that the alterative to Re-opening a railway should be "put on some electric buses" because I have never come across any motorist who has said: "I'm not getting on a nasty diesel fuelled bus but give me an electric bus and I will be first in the queue".

Green Party Cllr Gez Kinsella said: “I do welcome the motion and I do think getting people out of their cars is really important, but whether this is the best way or not – I do not know.”

Fellow Green Party Cllr Lian Pizzey said he feels the scheme is something that should be looked into positively and he supported Cllr Smith’s motion to back the reinstatement of the railway line.
Independent Cllr Amy Wheelton, who also spoke on behalf of Derbyshire Independents Group Leader, Cllr Ruth George, said it is hard to get to the Peak District so people come by cars leaving residents struggling with parking.

What I find interesting is that the party line is the Greens hate Reform and want nothing to do with them yet I have come across a few things where Reform and the Greens are working together and sometimes you have Reform and Greens on one side and all the rest including the Conservatives on the other.



A Facebook link about the railway: www.facebook.com/groups/223987098898/posts/10165068805788899/

While searching for a link to provide I came across another Facebook page which I now cant find, that was for/about the local conservatives, and it was striking how many posters said they were walkers/cyclists and used the trail so would be sorry if it had to disappear if there was no way to run it by the railway or re-route it but it would be being sacrificed for the greater good.

 

[Bald Rick]

I always smile in a pitying way when ever I hear somebody suggest that the alterative to Re-opening a railway should be "put on some electric buses" because I have never come across any motorist who has said: "I'm not getting on a nasty diesel fuelled bus but give me an electric bus and I will be first in the queue".

That’s not the point.

The point is that an electric bus/coach wins hands down in environmental terms compared to a diesel railway. And therefore any environmental argument used for opening a new line has to take that into account.

 

[Killingworth]

That’s not the point.

The point is that an electric bus/coach wins hands down in environmental terms compared to a diesel railway. And therefore any environmental argument used for opening a new line has to take that into account.

It wins hands down on flexibility of service in largely rural areas with few people wanting to travel between the same two points at the same time during most of the day.

Although some buses in the Peak District can be crowded the majority are lightly loaded. I don't see how a few trains a day just between Derby and Manchester would take a noticeable number of cars off the roads or attract significant numbers of extra rail users. I accept there'd be rail enthusiasts like on Settle & Carlisle - but enough to justify the huge costs?