Beeching & beyond Lines that should have been kept open

[Lankyline]

This is my first thread, so go easy everyone ! So apologies if this or something similar has been covered before, we all know Beeching's report wasn't exactly based on accurate stats, or logic in some cases, but my thread is this,

Since the report, in hindsight, which lines do you think should have been kept open given the economic developments in the last 20+ years or so eg Housing, tourism, industry, road congestion etc that would have made these lines invaluable today and why?

As a starter, my suggestions would be

Preston - Southport, huge increases in housing along the route, road congestion (ever tried driving to Preston in rush hour !) development of both Preston & Southport

Penrith - Keswick (Workington) started with Beeching, simply the massive growth in tourism in the Lakes, (i know there is a campaign to reopen the line)

 

[Mitch in Notts]

Nottingham - Mansfield There were 3 parallel lines I believe - to have closed all three seemed mad - hence the reopening of one.

Also any line which was curtailed to a dead end such as the missing Matlock - Buxton. Through running is surely economically more sound.

 

[RPM]

Well obvious ones are the GCR Main Line and the Waverley Route.

In this part of the world I would suggest Bourne End - High Wycombe and Princes Risborough - Thame - Oxford. Both lines would generate useful amounts of local commuter traffic but their added value is as diversionary routes.

 

[plarailfan]

The Leeds New Line (from Huddersfield to Leeds) via Heckmondwike, Cleckheaton and Gomersal. Recent housing developments along the route, combined with a Leeds "park & ride" interchange at the M62 junction 27 / IKEA / retail outlet, would have brought a phenominal boost for the railway. Alas, Gildersome tunnel has many problems these days, so even a spur from Leeds would be out of the question now !
The railway from Batley to Bradford via Drighlington would have served the same retail centre at IKEA, had it still been open today !!

 

[Harpers Tate]

Beverley <> York.

And, deviating from the subject somewhat, it seems to me that BR missed a trick completely with the whole "nostalgia" thing and might well have re-imagined some routes as historic routes, operated using historic principles but yet still part of the system.

Scarborough <> Whitby shouts out as a likely source of good tourism revenue, done right.

 

[Buttsy]

The Leeds New Line (from Huddersfield to Leeds) via Heckmondwike, Cleckheaton and Gomersal. Recent housing developments along the route, combined with a Leeds "park & ride" interchange at the M62 junction 27 / IKEA / retail outlet, would have brought a phenominal boost for the railway. Alas, Gildersome tunnel has many problems these days, so even a spur from Leeds would be out of the question now !
The railway from Batley to Bradford via Drighlington would have served the same retail centre at IKEA, had it still been open today !!

Would not the Low Moor - Thornhill line, which only closed from Thornhill to Liversedge for oil in the 80s, be useful for this area as it would be easier to re-instate and with a curve in the right place, offer trains to Leeds?

Oxford - Witney - huge housing growth in the latter since closure in 1970 and severe traffic issues into west Oxford.
Blackpool Central - North is inconvenient for the town centre and should have been closed instead.
Poulton - Fleetwood - if north closed, kept a service to Poulton
Rochdale - Bury - Bolton - Avoids Manchester
Bury - Bacup - 15 min service well used until closure
Colne - Skipton - dead end branch removed
Lewes - Uckfield & Eridge - Tunbridge Wells - see other threads on the site
Oxford - MK - in process of re-opening - closed as MK was being built...D'oh!
Beverly - York - was making an operating profit and about to be modernised

 

[The Planner]

Oxford - MK - in process of re-opening - closed as MK was being built...D'oh!

It isn't closed, it is out of use, there is a difference and it is still in the sectional appendix.

 

[edwin_m]

It isn't closed, it is out of use, there is a difference and it is still in the sectional appendix.

But I would add that the continuation from Beford to Cambridge should have been kept, or one of the other east-west routes in the area.

 

[Buttsy]

It isn't closed, it is out of use, there is a difference and it is still in the sectional appendix.

I appreciate that there is a techincal difference, however, passenger services ceased in 1968 and, since the 1990s, it has been impossible to even consider running a train down there as at least 1 level crossing is fenced off. I understand that the OOU bit is Steeple Claydon - Newton Longville approx.

I know it was in use in the 80s as I used to see 115s on the viaduct at Bletchley and liner trains at Bicester London Road.

I may have misunderstood the OP's question as I assumed he was on about passenger services that had ceased rather than the lines ripped up.

 

[L+Y]

Preston - Southport, huge increases in housing along the route, road congestion (ever tried driving to Preston in rush hour !) development of both Preston & Southport

I'm not sure if the line should have been kept open in its entirety in the 1960s: I'm fairly sure it genuinely was losing a lot of money, although the fact it was never dieselised can't have helped. The Meols Cop-Crossens electric stretch at least, though, should have been kept open.

The trackbed should have been kept clear, though, as I'd say Banks, Longton and Penwortham at least would be well able to support railway stations today. I'd suggest a best case scenario for the line would be the proposed opening of a nuclear power station near Hesketh Bank in the late 1960s: the track was left down between Preston and HB until about 66/67 for this purpose. So, open the power station and you retain the line through Penwortham. Couple that with the Crossens electrics surviving, and the line could easily have been reopened to passengers throughout in the 1980s or 1990s when passenger levels were more buoyant.

Sadly, the trackbed at both Preston and Southport ends (as well as at Longton) has now been pretty thoroughly obliterated, so the line ain't coming back!

 

[Andyjs247]

Two routes spring to mind:

(Crediton) - Okehampton - Tavistock - Bere Alston

Spalding - Boston - Grimsby (might be difficult due to the new A16 alignment)

 

[Buttsy]

I'm not sure if the line should have been kept open in its entirety in the 1960s: I'm fairly sure it genuinely was losing a lot of money, although the fact it was never dieselised can't have helped. The Meols Cop-Crossens electric stretch at least, though, should have been kept open.

The trackbed should have been kept clear, though, as I'd say Banks, Longton and Penwortham at least would be well able to support railway stations today. I'd suggest a best case scenario for the line would be the proposed opening of a nuclear power station near Hesketh Bank in the late 1960s: the track was left down between Preston and HB until about 66/67 for this purpose. So, open the power station and you retain the line through Penwortham. Couple that with the Crossens electrics surviving, and the line could easily have been reopened to passengers throughout in the 1980s or 1990s when passenger levels were more buoyant.

Sadly, the trackbed at both Preston and Southport ends (as well as at Longton) has now been pretty thoroughly obliterated, so the line ain't coming back!

A connection between the 2 could be done 'on the cheap' with a new curve at Burscough...

 

[yorksrob]

The Cuckoo Line.

Hailsham and Heathfield alone would contribute plenty of passenger traffic to the route.

 

[The Ham]

On a linked topic, if rather than having manned stations (often with several members of staff) would it have been better to run trains (up to 3 coach DUM's) with the ticket sales being done by the guard (like they are done on the Reading-Guildford-Gatwick services)? In doing so it would have reduced the costs of operating services and possibly made more lines viable.

Although there would have been the risk that the unions could have kicked up just as much fuss as they did, at least the public could have been more accepting of the changes if they were aware that the only real alternative was closure of the line.

The big problem with retaining many more lines would have been the cost of providing the extra rolling stock required (given how quickly steam was replaced). Although if it meant rail retained a greater percentage of market share it could have been cost effective.

The one risk with trying to work out which lines would have been good to keep about 50 years after the event is that some stations, which now have a good case, could well not have had such a good case in the 60's (or in some cases not even in the 90's)

 

[Lankyline]

I appreciate that there is a techincal difference, however, passenger services ceased in 1968 and, since the 1990s, it has been impossible to even consider running a train down there as at least 1 level crossing is fenced off. I understand that the OOU bit is Steeple Claydon - Newton Longville approx.

I know it was in use in the 80s as I used to see 115s on the viaduct at Bletchley and liner trains at Bicester London Road.

I may have misunderstood the OP's question as I assumed he was on about passenger services that had ceased rather than the lines ripped up.

Essentially both, the main point really wasn't what to bring back (though i suspect in a lot of cases they should be) but what should never had been removed / lifted in the first place, with hindsight of course !
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A connection between the 2 could be done 'on the cheap' with a new curve at Burscough...

If only ! add a rebuilt Midge Hall station, double track or at least passing loops and put back the connection at Ormskirk for Liverpool, hey presto, direct Liverpool & Southport services again, sorry getting carried away there back to reality

 

[L+Y]

A connection between the 2 could be done 'on the cheap' with a new curve at Burscough...

Indeed: although is the market there, I wonder? I certainly doubt whether Rufford or Croston would provide more than 60 Southport-bound travellers between them daily, and I think the number of people wanting to go to Preston from Bescar Lane and New Lane would be even lower. Bearing this in mind, is a restoration of the North Curve going to be financially viable? Optimistically I doubt more than 200 passengers per day would use it.

A better bet for Burscough, to my mind, is to restore the South Curve, and have the electrics run through both Burscough stations and then on to Southport, turning the Merseyrail Northern Line into a large loop. In my ideal world, then, you'd get a mixture of stopping and semi-fast electrics, with the stoppers continuing to terminate at Southport/Ormskirk, and the semis running around the loop, but skipping out the inner-Liverpool stations besides Moorfields and Central.

My own Ormskirk-Preston line is unlikely to ever be viable for electrification, but if you moved the interchange with the electrics to Burscough Junction then you could definitely give the line a basic hourly service, with perhaps through running from Preston-Ormskirk continuing in the commuter hours.

 

[Buttsy]

Indeed: although is the market there, I wonder? I certainly doubt whether Rufford or Croston would provide more than 60 Southport-bound travellers between them daily, and I think the number of people wanting to go to Preston from Bescar Lane and New Lane would be even lower. Bearing this in mind, is a restoration of the North Curve going to be financially viable? Optimistically I doubt more than 200 passengers per day would use it.

A better bet for Burscough, to my mind, is to restore the South Curve, and have the electrics run through both Burscough stations and then on to Southport, turning the Merseyrail Northern Line into a large loop. In my ideal world, then, you'd get a mixture of stopping and semi-fast electrics, with the stoppers continuing to terminate at Southport/Ormskirk, and the semis running around the loop, but skipping out the inner-Liverpool stations besides Moorfields and Central.

My own Ormskirk-Preston line is unlikely to ever be viable for electrification, but if you moved the interchange with the electrics to Burscough Junction then you could definitely give the line a basic hourly service, with perhaps through running from Preston-Ormskirk continuing in the commuter hours.

Perhaps a Preston - Burscough - Wigan - Manchester service alongside a semi-fast Southport - Wigan - Manchester with connections at Burscough Bridge into the Southport - Ormskirk - Liverpool service would add connections and therefore mobility. How much is removing the inconvenience of walking between Wallgate and North Western worth, let alone the greater range of destinations from Preston?

Also means you could get rid of the bridge...

 

[Lankyline]

If Beeching's report condemned Preston Southport, was the Preston Ormskirk Liverpool line ever considered for closure ?

 

[TBY-Paul]

Harrogate - Northallerton, For many reasons. It would have meant Ripon was still connected to the rail network. It was also used as a route between the North east and Manchester and a diversion route for ECML.

It almost got a reprieve shortly after closure, when there was an accident on the main line and it had to be brought back into use. That should have been the wake-up call BR needed, but sadly it was not to be.

Middlesbrough/Nunthorpe - Guisborough, Guisborough is 3 times the size it was in 1964, and set to grow even bigger, it's only it's poor transport links that's holding it back. It's basically a commuter town with hardly any commuter links.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Beverley <> York.

Scarborough <> Whitby shouts out as a likely source of good tourism revenue, done right.

I would add in Whitby- Boulby as well. If the proposed potash mine at Whitby get planning permission it could be linked into the line and benefit from the extra freight revenue. But once again the problem would be where some of the line has been lost (Whitby West Cliff to Sandsend section)

 

[Morgsie]

The Somerset and Dorset

 

[Metrailway]

Birmingham Snow Hill - Wolverhampton Low Level

 

[NorthernSpirit]

Cranleigh to Christ's Hospital and Christ's Hospital to Steyning - the only problem on the latter is that Lintot Square in Southwater has been built essentially knackering up any possible oppitunity to reopen the line.

There is also Harrogate to Ripon, the latter's station site is now on the A61 mainline. There is Otley too.

 

[harry42]

nottingham - mansfield there were 3 parallel lines i believe - to have closed all three seemed mad - hence the reopening of one.

Also any line which was curtailed to a dead end such as the missing matlock - buxton. Through running is surely economically more sound.

matlock-buxton needs reopening!!!

 

[Essexman]

Another vote for Exeter to Plymouth via Okehampton & Tavistock, not only to serve this wide area of Devon (and places further north and west for which some stations could act as rail head) but to prevent everywhere west of Exeter being dependent on trains being able to negotiate the Dawlish - Teignmouth sea wall.

 

[Greenback]

My list (in no particular order and favouring the areas I know best!) would be

Carmarthen - Aberystwyth
Bangor - Caernarfon
Blackpool South - Blackpool Central
The line through the Lakes serving Keswick
Haltwhistkle - Alston
Borders Route
Scarborough - Whitby
Matlock - Buxton
Norwich - Kings Lynn
Yarmouth - Lowestoft
Cambridge - St Ives
Ryde - Newport and Cowes
Maiden Newton - Bridport
Paignton - Kingswear
Bath - Bournemouth

I know that some of these actually closed several years after Beeching, but so what!

 

[Gareth Marston]

As the savings Beeching claimed never materialized from the line closure programme you have to question the whole methodology used. Looking into it the working assumption that people would railhead in the same numbers and therefore most of the revenue would remain on the system underpinned a large number of closure proposals - the numbers are crunched for York-Beverley in the report. A lot of the lines closed were viable if modernised and operated efficiently it was that the assumed savings by closure were deemed better value on the erroneous hope of rail heading. You can easily draw up a list of 10 in each Govt office region.

 

[edwin_m]

I agree that minimum-cost operating methods weren't really considered, as things like Paytrains and bus shelter stations only really came in later on those lines that were still running. These could have made a difference on some lines but I think others were real no-hopers, including several named on this thread!

Where bus replacement took place (rightly or wrongly) it was badly done. Maybe it would have worked if properly integrated with the remaining train service (connections, through ticketing, included in railway timetable) as happens today in Germany and Switzerland.

With hindsight we can say that that the same developments that resulted in reasonably comfortable and affordable bus services would before very long give rise to near-universal car ownership. Then rural buses came under threat from loss of patronage and urban ones from traffic congestion, in both cases resulting in spirals of decline where people deserted the buses, fewer buses were run, more people deserted etc etc.

 

[route:oxford]

As the savings Beeching claimed never materialized from the line closure programme you have to question the whole methodology used. Looking into it the working assumption that people would railhead in the same numbers and therefore most of the revenue would remain on the system underpinned a large number of closure proposals - the numbers are crunched for York-Beverley in the report. A lot of the lines closed were viable if modernised and operated efficiently it was that the assumed savings by closure were deemed better value on the erroneous hope of rail heading. You can easily draw up a list of 10 in each Govt office region.

Can you imagine trying to run those calculations back in the 60s?

Today, you'd grab the passenger data and costs then run a quick pivot table in excel.

sorted.

Back then...

An army of clerks and Comptometers.

 

[dysonsphere]

Potteries loop line would solve a lot of local problems. However I gather there was clearnce problems with new stock in the 60's

 

[IanXC]

I seem to recall (perhaps from Ian Hislop's TV programme?), a good summary of the situation:

1/3 of lines closed should never have been built
1/3 of lines closed probably were right for closure
1/3 of lines closed probably should have been kept.