• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Beeching & beyond Lines that should have been kept open

Status
Not open for further replies.

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,906
Location
Richmond, London
I would very much be in favour of reinstating the triangular junction at the Nippers Dale end. An extra junction and a short amount of extra track.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I would very much be in favour of reinstating the triangular junction at Millers dale end. An extra junction and a short amount of extra track.

In which case Peak Rail might be encouraged to return to Buxton to run trains into the LNWR station from Millers Dale. However I don't think EMT (I'm making a huge presumption here!) would consider it worth while to run Derby to Manchester via Buxton. And I think only a through service woul be viable.

As an aside I wonder what kind of condition the viaducts are in? Perhaps a walk along the line could form the basis of a forum meet? :)
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
44,346
Location
Yorks
In which case Peak Rail might be encouraged to return to Buxton to run trains into the LNWR station from Millers Dale. However I don't think EMT (I'm making a huge presumption here!) would consider it worth while to run Derby to Manchester via Buxton. And I think only a through service woul be viable.

As an aside I wonder what kind of condition the viaducts are in? Perhaps a walk along the line could form the basis of a forum meet? :)

We can't be beholden to what any given franchise might want. It would be up to us to decide where the trains should go.
 

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,906
Location
Richmond, London
We can't be beholden to what any given franchise might want. It would be up to us to decide where the trains should go.

Eh? Since when? At best it will be down to the DfT and I would hardly suggest that they care about us as individuals or I wouldn't be paying so much for my season ticket!
 
Last edited:

Tomnick

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2005
Messages
5,933
Does the cement works branch go near enough to Castleton that a station would be viable? Or are you proposing building some new track?
I'm picking this up a bit late, I know, but it's just under a mile from Castleton along the main road, maybe slightly less along the minor road that runs along the front of the cement works. A new bit of railway wouldn't be a small undertaking, but then neither would the arrangements for running passenger trains over the existing (three reversals for a train coming from Edale or two reversals for one coming from or going to Grindleford, hand points to be clipped, some very sharp curves and no doubt some further protection on the private railway itself - is it operated as a siding or a proper single line??). There have been passenger trains over there in the (recent) past - which I'm sure took a lot of careful planning!
 
Last edited:

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
44,346
Location
Yorks
Eh? Since when? At best it will be down to the DfT and I would hardly suggest that they care about us as individuals or I wouldn't be paying so much for my season ticket!



Franchises are, by their nature, short term affairs. They are simply not in a position to dictate service patterns for years into the future. The new set of arrangements would simply be included in the next round of franchise agreements. (I meant "us"as a country rather than the forum !)

p. s. I don't know why my predictive text keeps turning miller's Dale into Nippers Dale but it does kind of sound like an authentic railway location don't you think !
 
Last edited:

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
9,213
Location
SE London
The new set of arrangements would simply be included in the next round of franchise agreements. (I meant "us"as a country rather than the forum !)

Awww, I'm disappointed. I was soooo looking forward to reading the post from the DfT in this forum asking us for our decision on what December's timetable should look like..... ;)
 

lancastrian

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2010
Messages
537
Location
Bolton, Lancashire
As a late comer to this discussion, my view is simple.

Somewhere between a half and two thirds of the lines closed by Beeching and those who followed him, should never have been closed.

Simples.
 

Lankyline

Member
Joined
25 Jul 2013
Messages
477
Location
Lancashire
In which case Peak Rail might be encouraged to return to Buxton to run trains into the LNWR station from Millers Dale. However I don't think EMT (I'm making a huge presumption here!) would consider it worth while to run Derby to Manchester via Buxton. And I think only a through service woul be viable.

As an aside I wonder what kind of condition the viaducts are in? Perhaps a walk along the line could form the basis of a forum meet? :)

Slightly off my own thread here, but with the cycle lobby getting a shed load of money for the Peak district, will this now seriously affect any propsed rail extension within the Peaks ?
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
44,346
Location
Yorks
Awww, I'm disappointed. I was soooo looking forward to reading the post from the DfT in this forum asking us for our decision on what December's timetable should look like..... ;)

Dare I say it, we‘d probably do a better job :lol:
 

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,906
Location
Richmond, London
Slightly off my own thread here, but with the cycle lobby getting a shed load of money for the Peak district, will this now seriously affect any propsed rail extension within the Peaks ?

In all fairness, I'm afraid its highly unlikely that the line will ever be re-opened. Peak Rail don't have the funds to do it and NR will argue that they have more important priorities.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
19,352
Location
Yorkshire
To get back on topic, the OP mentioned Penrith-Keswick-Workington. I understand that the stretch from Penrith to Keswick is yet another that is occasionally mentioned in relation to reopening. I know it wasn't a Beeching closure (1970 if I remember rightly) but is this a line that has a reasonable (as in, it's at least do-able!) chance of ever being re-opened?
 

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,906
Location
Richmond, London
To get back on topic, the OP mentioned Penrith-Keswick-Workington. I understand that the stretch from Penrith to Keswick is yet another that is occasionally mentioned in relation to reopening. I know it wasn't a Beeching closure (1970 if I remember rightly) but is this a line that has a reasonable (as in, it's at least do-able!) chance of ever being re-opened?

Sadly the chances of re-opening the line are very slim as at least part of the track bed now has a road built on it. Such a stupid decision given the number of tourists that the Lake District attracts, even if the line had only been retained as far as Keswick.
 

Tobbes

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2012
Messages
1,242
Sadly the chances of re-opening the line are very slim as at least part of the track bed now has a road built on it. Such a stupid decision given the number of tourists that the Lake District attracts, even if the line had only been retained as far as Keswick.

I understood that the Penrith to Keswick section was doable (albeit with some changes to the Penrith end), but that beyond Keswick a road had been built on the formation to the coast. Would be a great addition to the network, though.

Tobbes
 
Last edited:

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
44,346
Location
Yorks
In all fairness, I'm afraid its highly unlikely that the line will ever be re-opened. Peak Rail don't have the funds to do it and NR will argue that they have more important priorities.

If the cards are forever stacked against reopening, its very easy to find other priorities.
 

L+Y

Member
Joined
4 Jul 2011
Messages
502
To get back on topic, the OP mentioned Penrith-Keswick-Workington. I understand that the stretch from Penrith to Keswick is yet another that is occasionally mentioned in relation to reopening. I know it wasn't a Beeching closure (1970 if I remember rightly) but is this a line that has a reasonable (as in, it's at least do-able!) chance of ever being re-opened?

Closed in March 1972.

I would guess (off the top of my head) that the major stumbling block for Keswick is the fact that the branchline joins the WCML on a north-facing junction, which then makes it pretty difficult to run a through service from Keswick to Preston or Manchester without an annoying reversal at Penrith. And the fact that Keswick has such a small population doesn't exactly help things.

The only investment I see the Lake District lines getting in the next 25 years are wires to Windermere and maybe a passing loop on the Windermere branch if they're lucky. Keswick is a line that probably shouldn't have been closed, but nor can I see it being a viable candidate for reopening.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
44,346
Location
Yorks
Closed in March 1972.

I would guess (off the top of my head) that the major stumbling block for Keswick is the fact that the branchline joins the WCML on a north-facing junction, which then makes it pretty difficult to run a through service from Keswick to Preston or Manchester without an annoying reversal at Penrith. And the fact that Keswick has such a small population doesn't exactly help things.

If you were to reopen it, you wouldn't want to leave out Penrith as you'd be missing out on a lot of potential local custom. Fortunately Penrith still has it's down loop available for any reversals.
 

Buttsy

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2011
Messages
1,374
Location
Hanborough
City Union line in Glasgow / St Enoch Station. A shopping centre stands on the site of the station but now they're talking about building a new station next door to it. Can't believe they demolished this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:St_Enoch_railway_station_in_1879.jpg

I agree. If things had been planned better in the 60s, St Enoch could have become Glasgow's ONLY station as virtually all lines currently served by Queen Street/Central could have run to St Enoch with the addition of 3-4 curves in strategic places.
 

Helvellyn

Established Member
Joined
28 Aug 2009
Messages
2,575
I would guess (off the top of my head) that the major stumbling block for Keswick is the fact that the branchline joins the WCML on a north-facing junction, which then makes it pretty difficult to run a through service from Keswick to Preston or Manchester without an annoying reversal at Penrith. And the fact that Keswick has such a small population doesn't exactly help things.

The only investment I see the Lake District lines getting in the next 25 years are wires to Windermere and maybe a passing loop on the Windermere branch if they're lucky. Keswick is a line that probably shouldn't have been closed, but nor can I see it being a viable candidate for reopening.
As others have said, not much of a reversal as it's a couple of miles from where the former junction at Redhills to Penrith. Also the A66 bypass cut the south facing part of the triangle, so on a cost basis reinstating the north facing curve would be the more cost effective option anyway. Plus why miss a town of 14,000 people off the map that would add to local traffic the route could provide? Remember, with the Windermere branch the main town Kendal isn't on the West Coast mainline - if it had been I wonder if the Windermere branch would have survived past the 1970s.
 

L+Y

Member
Joined
4 Jul 2011
Messages
502
As others have said, not much of a reversal as it's a couple of miles from where the former junction at Redhills to Penrith. Also the A66 bypass cut the south facing part of the triangle, so on a cost basis reinstating the north facing curve would be the more cost effective option anyway. Plus why miss a town of 14,000 people off the map that would add to local traffic the route could provide? Remember, with the Windermere branch the main town Kendal isn't on the West Coast mainline - if it had been I wonder if the Windermere branch would have survived past the 1970s.

Not really sure what the argument being made here is?

I mentioned the fact that the curve is north facing as a distinct disadvantage to the prospects of a restored Keswick branch. And Keswick has a population of 14,000? Wikipedia suggests something nearer to a third of that might be nearer to the mark which puts Keswick firmly behind somewhere like Skelmersdale in terms of projected custom for a theoretical North West reopening.

Not sure what Kendal has to do with things...?
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
44,346
Location
Yorks
Not really sure what the argument being made here is?

I mentioned the fact that the curve is north facing as a distinct disadvantage to the prospects of a restored Keswick branch. And Keswick has a population of 14,000? Wikipedia suggests something nearer to a third of that might be nearer to the mark which puts Keswick firmly behind somewhere like Skelmersdale in terms of projected custom for a theoretical North West reopening.

Not sure what Kendal has to do with things...?

I suspect that the tourism potential for Keswick is somewhat greater than for Skelmersdale !
 

Helvellyn

Established Member
Joined
28 Aug 2009
Messages
2,575
Not really sure what the argument being made here is?

I mentioned the fact that the curve is north facing as a distinct disadvantage to the prospects of a restored Keswick branch. And Keswick has a population of 14,000? Wikipedia suggests something nearer to a third of that might be nearer to the mark which puts Keswick firmly behind somewhere like Skelmersdale in terms of projected custom for a theoretical North West reopening.

Not sure what Kendal has to do with things...?
How is the curve being North facing a disadvantage? You made its sound like if the South facing curve was still there (and my point about the A66 explains that's a non-starter) the line would be more likely to reopen than by using the North facing curve and the trains having to operate a couple of miles to Penrith. It is Penrith that is the town with a population of 14,000, and a very good catchement area to boot. So my point was that the North facing curve is an advantage as it allows local traffic Keswick and intermediate stations to Penrith, as well as adding in local traffic from Penrith to any through services. If the branch only had the South facing connection to the WCML then in my view any reopening would be virtually likely never to happen.

I mentioned Kendal as some on here seem to think that the Windermere branch supports itself on traffic from Winderemere alone, but my point was that if Kendal was directly on the WCML then the Windermere branch might have closed just like the Keswick one. The fact that it also serves to connect Oxenholme with Kendal (pop. 27500) seems to get overlooked at times and was likely a factor in why the former adminstrative town of Westmorland remained connected to the rail network.
 
Last edited:

Eagle

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2011
Messages
7,106
Location
Leamingrad / Blanfrancisco
It's a branch line, those people can travel on a connecting service. You know, like you have to to get to Kendal or Windermere. Not everywhere has to have a through service to a big city.

Plus what about all the tourists coming from Scotland?
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,430
If I'm perfectly honest, if not altogether serious, I'd like to see all of them open. But recognising that probably isn't realistic - my criteria for which lines should have been kept open would be:

* providing direct links between large towns and cities which currently don't exist
* all sizeable "market towns" (places the size of Romsey, Alton, Wimborne, etc) should have kept their rail service
* large villages or small towns with a large commuter population to a large city (London, Birmingham etc) should have a rail service.

So in my area, I'd suggest - or agree if the suggestion has already been made - with the following:

* Romsey - Andover - Swindon via Stockbridge and Ludgershall. Rationale: no direct links between Southampton and Swindon or Cheltenham/Gloucester; no north/south links from Andover. "Regional Railways"-style service (158 or similar) Southampton to Cheltenham every 2 hours, using the existing line north of Swindon. Even though in an ideal world I would open all stations, a compromise solution would be to open only the larger places (Stockbridge, Ludgershall etc) to allow an all-stations service which is relatively fast for longer-distance journeys.

* The Somerset and Dorset (know this has come up before) Bristol to Bournemouth, with some sort of alteration at the north end to allow trains to get onto the main GW lines. For similar reason to above, limited intermediate stations: Radstock, Midsomer Norton, Shepton Mallet, Templecombe, Sturminster Newton, Blandford. Again, Regional Railways-type service, 158 or similar, again every 2 hours, with peak additionals Bristol-Shepton Mallet and Blandford-Bournemouth. Rationale: Bristol and Bath to Bournemouth direct services but also several stationless towns and a wide area with no stations.

* As an *alternative* to the Somerset and Dorset, how about Bournemouth to Salisbury, though the route the original line took was a bit odd. A better route would be direct up the Avon Valley serving Ringwood. Rationale: direct link Bournemouth to Salisbury, Bath and Bristol; station at Fordingbridge. Service: extend some of the London-Salisbury stoppers and/or Bristol to Westbury stoppers (via Warminster, Salisbury and this line)

* Castleman's Corkscrew, to serve Ringwood, Wimborne and the surrounding areas. Some sort of curve at the west end to allow trains to run back into Poole and Bournemouth which would be the most useful thing to do. Probably best to electrify to allow London, or at least Southampton, through services rather than a perhaps poorly-used branch. A suggestion which has come up before somewhere has been to reroute the xx39 out of Waterloo over this line beyond Brockenhurst, which would give a direct Southampton service or direct but slow London service.

* Guildford to Cranleigh. Cranleigh is a sizeable place well within London commuter territory. Really needs through services so electrify immediately and introduce hourly service (450 detached off the London-Portsmouth or London-Haslemere stoppers), half-hourly in peak hours.

* Would concur with Winchester to Alton though couldn't really do it now as it would disrupt the Watercress Line. Alton, Farnham etc are a PITA to get to from the Solent area, and extremely expensive given the as-the-crow-flies distance. Maybe a realistic proposal would be to turn the 64 bus into a "rail bus" (given it's run by the same people as the railway) and allow use via rail tickets, such that Southampton to Alton, for example, tickets would be valid on the bus and be priced similarly to say, Southampton to Petersfield, a similar as-the-crow-flies distance.

* Don't really know the routes of the lines, but places like Glastonbury and Wells could do with a train service, though it would probably have to be direct to Bath and Bristol to be viable.

* Did Bedwyn to Marlborough ever exist?

* Curves at Dorchester and at Yeovil to allow through Bournemouth-Exeter services, Bournemouth to the southwest must be a complete pain at the moment. Not sure if they ever existed though.

Purely fantasy, and didn't even fully exist back in the day, but I mention as it was my local area:

* Haslemere to Chichester via Midhurst, giving a more direct Chichester to London service as well as giving a rail link to an area which is something of a blank on the map. Topography would render it extremely difficult to construct, but as I said, purely a fantasy idea :)
 
Last edited:

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,906
Location
Richmond, London
It's a branch line, those people can travel on a connecting service. You know, like you have to to get to Kendal or Windermere. Not everywhere has to have a through service to a big city.

Plus what about all the tourists coming from Scotland?

However through services help to attract customers, as a through service is much more convenient. Having climbed a number of fells this summer I can't recall hearing many accents from north of the Border. Perhaps you are unaware of Scotland’s Munros?
 

paul1609

Established Member
Joined
28 Jan 2006
Messages
7,992
Location
K
Surely the most stupid idea ever was to retain the Esk Valley line in to Whitby. Nice though it is all the other (closed) routes to Whitby seem to have more potential for traffic!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top