Could Rotherham Masborough Reopen?

[MidnightFlyer]

Rotherham & St. Helens are 2 large towns - both with over 100,000 residents - with poor long distance services, partly because their locations are "inconvenient" for railway operators / planners - and probably also because they are "Up North" and "Them in Whitehall" care little about such places, especially those which are unlikely to elect Tory MPs.
I cannot imagine any large towns "down south" being allowed to have such poor services.

Gloucester is similar to Rotherham in that it has well over 100,000 residents yet owing to undesirable railway geography has CrossCountry trains pelt straight through the conurbation non-stop. Solihull has the same numbers, though that is understandable as it would just flood them with locals heading into Birmingham (see also Wolves). Both Gloucester and Solihull have Conservative MPs...

 

[adrock1976]

Gloucester is similar to Rotherham in that it has well over 100,000 residents yet owing to undesirable railway geography has CrossCountry trains pelt straight through the conurbation non-stop. Solihull has the same numbers, though that is understandable as it would just flood them with locals heading into Birmingham (see also Wolves). Both Gloucester and Solihull have Conservative MPs...

Although the Intercity Crosscountry trains run non-stop through Gloucester, they do still call at Cheltenham Spa and Bristol Parkway (which is in Stoke Gifford), therefore the county of Gloucestershire still has Intercity trains serving the northern and southern extremities.

I wonder if there are trains that do not call at any other county town/city that has given its name to the county, but calls at others. I may start a "Trivia" thread.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Although the Intercity Crosscountry trains run non-stop through Gloucester, they do still call at Cheltenham Spa and Bristol Parkway (which is in Stoke Gifford), therefore the county of Gloucestershire still has Intercity trains serving the northern and southern extremities.

I'm not sure that is of much consolation to the residents of Gloucester!

 

[AndyHudds]

Rotherham & St. Helens are 2 large towns - both with over 100,000 residents - with poor long distance services, partly because their locations are "inconvenient" for railway operators / planners - and probably also because they are "Up North" and "Them in Whitehall" care little about such places, especially those which are unlikely to elect Tory MPs.
I cannot imagine any large towns "down south" being allowed to have such poor services.

Maybe things will be addressed by the TfN strategic transport plan? Rotherham strikes me a little of Brighouse, station re-opening in 2000, small usage at first gradually increasing, now it has a London service 3 times a day in each direvtion and passenger numbers have rocketed.

 

[Chester1]

I think not. I would expand Central station and build a new connection from Sheffield across the scrapyard. Central is nearer the the centre of town and has local train and tram interchange as well as being close to the main bus station The new connection could ease curvature too allowing higher through and run-in speeds.

The scrapyard part would be expensive but the east of the station would be much cheaper. I agree in principle though, if faster double track alignments were built and Central rebuilt with 4 platforms then the main line would be unnecessary apart from for diverting freight. A limited number of services could pass through Central without stopping to allow the mainline to be downgraded to cut opperating and renewal costs.

Why bother? Rotherham Central is...er, central to the town with parking, TPE and Northern wouldn’t want to stop their Hull and Cleethorpes services there having just stopped at Meadowhall. XC certainly wouldn’t stop as they don’t even stop at Meadowhall between Sheffield and Doncaster.

Sure, the Holmes Chord isn’t wonderful but it doesn’t seem to cause too many delays.

Why bother? To restore the railway back to how it was in a rose tinted era! Anyone who doesn't support it shouldn't be a member of this forum! Back in the real world Central is clearly the best location for passengers and the past existence of another station is a legacy of a railway network built by competing private companies. I don't support removing these for the sake of it, there needs to be a business case. There was in Rotherham in the 80s and the impact of the tight budget on journey times should be reduced.

Careful! The diversion via Central is in effect an overtaking loop - sending everything that way will have a big capacity impact.

How much of the impact of the single track section would be accounted for by having 4 platforms to allow intercity services to overtake stoppers and tram trains? Would it be worth the cost? The land nearby is low value so its plausible but not worth if for instance it only allowed 1tph of additional services to stop.

 

[edwin_m]

How much of the impact of the single track section would be accounted for by having 4 platforms to allow intercity services to overtake stoppers and tram trains? Would it be worth the cost? The land nearby is low value so its plausible but not worth if for instance it only allowed 1tph of additional services to stop.

Intercity trains currently overtake slower trains while they are on the way round the loop between Holmes and Aldwarke. Running all trains via Central would mean the stopping trains waiting in a platform loop while being overtaken, which will slow them down by several minutes.

 

[Harpers Tate]

I don't live in Rotherham but do buses not go near Masborough?....

Probably - but then, buses also go to Meadowhall - probably much more frequently and certainly into properly constructed interchange with rail (and tram) and P&R. And Meadowhall is well served by local and medium distance services (NR & TPE) and could (if a demand were identified) be served by XC. It also offers a connection to/from Barnsley, which makes it much more "useful". Which returns me to my point - I see no real commercial case here.

 

[MarkyT]

Probably - but then, buses also go to Meadowhall - probably much more frequently and certainly into properly constructed interchange with rail (and tram) and P&R. And Meadowhall is well served by local and medium distance services (NR & TPE) and could (if a demand were identified) be served by XC. It also offers a connection to/from Barnsley, which makes it much more "useful". Which returns me to my point - I see no real commercial case here.

According to Google Earth, there are a total of 62 separate routes calling or terminating at Rotherham Interchange, The latest Rotherham Bus Partnership map leaflet lists 44 routes. From Rotherham Central station entrance, the near end of the Interchange is a level walk of just over 200m along Bridge Street. Ironically, a temporary bus station is in operation currently even closer to the rail/tram station, on Forge Island, while the Interchange proper is refurbished. That work is meant to finish this month (Mar 2019) I understand. Even so, I think ~200m is a good interchange; that's about a 3 minute walk conservatively. You can have to walk that within many stations, and for those who find such a distance a challenge there are a limited number of routes that also call at a stop outside the station entrance that is a little closer, although they only serve areas to the west of the town centre. Google says Meadowhall has a total of 34 routes, although the Rotherham leaflet only claims 4, presumably only ones that also serve other parts of Rotherham directly. The Google total for both may also include some very infrequent longer distance services.
https://www.travelsouthyorkshire.com/rotherhambusnetworkmap/

 

[Harpers Tate]

@MarkyT - we were talking about reopening Masborough, which is much, much further away. And probably has a miniscule number of buses. That is the comparison I was making, to illustrate the unwarranted (IMO) nature of the suggestion.

 

[MarkyT]

Intercity trains currently overtake slower trains while they are on the way round the loop between Holmes and Aldwarke. Running all trains via Central would mean the stopping trains waiting in a platform loop while being overtaken, which will slow them down by several minutes.

Perhaps some reinstatement of quadruple track out to Swinton might also help with stopping pattern segregation, and a nice grade separation at Aldwarke. For example this with Doncaster express and Wakefield stopper:


And with fast Wakefield Express and Doncaster stopper:

 

[MarkyT]

@MarkyT - we were talking about reopening Masborough, which is much, much further away. And probably has a miniscule number of buses. That is the comparison I was making, to illustrate the unwarranted (IMO) nature of the suggestion.

OK, fair enough. I agree Masborough is a very poor choice for any additional station facilities in Rotherham. All the costs of building and running an additional station without the benefits of a more central location, and would 'lock in' the 50mph tight curve at the south end for all trains, stopping or not.

 

[DanTrain]

What's the difference between Rotherham/Sheffield and Chesterfield/Sheffield, Chesterfield is extremely close to Sheffield too.

Chesterfield serves as a parkway station for much of the Peak District, eastern Derbyshire and south Sheffield. Rotherham serves, well, Rotherham (plus a few villages), not only does Chesterfield already have a station on the mainline (doubt it would be anything like as well served if it didn’t) but it is also, to be very frank, serving a richer area. People living in the Peak District and South/West Sheffield are more likely to be going to London than those in Rotherham...and as for affording XC’s fares... This is not a judgement on Rotherham, just a fact of life (blame the government for that one)!

 

[bennunn]

Rotherham & St. Helens are 2 large towns - both with over 100,000 residents - with poor long distance services, partly because their locations are "inconvenient" for railway operators / planners - and probably also because they are "Up North" and "Them in Whitehall" care little about such places, especially those which are unlikely to elect Tory MPs.
I cannot imagine any large towns "down south" being allowed to have such poor services.

Well, Crawley has a population of 100k+ and arguably suffers just as much from the main trunk route not passing through it. At a pinch, you could argue that Three Bridges is the main station for the town, but it is far from conveniently located.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

I wonder if there are trains that do not call at any other county town/city that has given its name to the county, but calls at others. I may start a "Trivia" thread.

Buckingham, as in Buckinghamshire. No railway at all. Just an elevated walkway along the disused trackbed.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

I cannot imagine any large towns "down south" being allowed to have such poor services.

Gosport, on the south coast: population 83,000. No station at all.

 

[bennunn]

Gosport, on the south coast: population 83,000. No station at all.

Though Portsmouth Harbour is well connected via the ferry and arguably more useful than Gosport station ever was.

I visited Gosport a couple of weeks ago and was right in the town centre within 15-20 minutes of my train pulling into Portsmouth Harbour. Surprised at just how convenient it was.

 

[bennunn]

Buckingham, as in Buckinghamshire. No railway at all. Just an elevated walkway along the disused trackbed.

And, if I understand the question correctly, most trains calling at Warwickshire stations do not serve Warwick. Lincoln/shire probably also qualifies.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

And, if I understand the question correctly, most trains calling at Warwickshire stations do not serve Warwick. Lincoln/shire probably also qualifies.

Do any passenger trains run through Warwick Station without stopping? Lincoln is certainly a major station in the county and I'm sure no passenger trains pass through without stopping.

 

[VT 390]

Do any passenger trains run through Warwick Station without stopping? Lincoln is certainly a major station in the county and I'm sure no passenger trains pass through without stopping.

Yes the hourly Cross Country service from Newcastle to Reading runs via Solihull but is non stop Birmingham New Street to Leamington Spa and one of the two Chiltern Railways Birmingham to London Marylebone pass through without stopping (though these ones call at Warwick Parkway). So (off-peak) there are 2tph in each direction which do not stop at Warwick.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

Yes the hourly Cross Country service from Newcastle to Reading runs via Solihull but is non stop Birmingham New Street to Leamington Spa and one of the two Chiltern Railways Birmingham to London Marylebone pass through without stopping. So (off-peak) there are 2tph in each direction which do not stop at Warwick.

Thank you very much. I've learned something!

 

[si404]

I cannot imagine any large towns "down south" being allowed to have such poor services.

Maidstone - similar population to Rotherham, similar railway backwater to Rotherham. Despite being the county town of Kent, it is the most poorly connected of the large Kentish urban areas (or urban areas of Kent): to both London, and within Kent. Rotherham has direct trains to both Leeds and Hull (as well as Sheffield and Doncaster). Maidstone gets the equivalent of just one of them, and Canterbury is definitely no Leeds (nor Dover, if there were direct trains, would be a Hull).

Slough has poor long-distance services (and is bigger than Doncaster and is Warrington-sized) with just one of the Oxford/Cotswolds trains stopping each hour, but 6 intercity trains an hour passing through fast - going to the more important GWML destinations like Cardiff and Bristol.

Basildon (145k) is closed off with access to the NR network that isn't the LTS route either meaning walking between stations in London or Southend, or changing twice via the Overground or Underground - though the LTS route is good. Southend itself is 300k, and has very poor train service that isn't London commuter train: no long-distance or fast trains at all.

 

[MarkyT]

Maidstone - similar population to Rotherham, similar railway backwater to Rotherham. Despite being the county town of Kent, it is the most poorly connected of the large Kentish urban areas (or urban areas of Kent): to both London, and within Kent. Rotherham has direct trains to both Leeds and Hull (as well as Sheffield and Doncaster). Maidstone gets the equivalent of just one of them, and Canterbury is definitely no Leeds (nor Dover, if there were direct trains, would be a Hull).

Slough has poor long-distance services (and is bigger than Doncaster and is Warrington-sized) with just one of the Oxford/Cotswolds trains stopping each hour, but 6 intercity trains an hour passing through fast - going to the more important GWML destinations like Cardiff and Bristol.

Basildon (145k) is closed off with access to the NR network that isn't the LTS route either meaning walking between stations in London or Southend, or changing twice via the Overground or Underground - though the LTS route is good. Southend itself is 300k, and has very poor train service that isn't London commuter train: no long-distance or fast trains at all.

Every largeish town in the southeast can't have direct long distance services to widespread areas of Britain; In many cases the routes to do this don't exist and never have. Even if they did, the service patterns would become impractically complex, and paths on common sections required for dominant flows would be wasted on low demand peripheral links. All these towns have pretty frequent high capacity services to London however, which is the gateway to many other parts of the country, albeit usually via a terminal transfer. Maidstone in particular could get better orbital connectivity within the south east quadrant through extension of Medway Valley local services at either end, perhaps to Gatwick for Brighton line interchange and reversing at Strood to better serve the Medway towns. My argument for Rotherham becoming a longer distance 'Intercity', NPR, perhaps even HS2 stop is based on Sheffield and South Yorkshire being big enough to warrant more than one stop, my preferred Rotherham Central expansion proposal (see posts above) being a suitable site to serve a major town centre linked development of brownfirld to the west of the Don while also offering potential as a 'parkway' site and even a faster route for trains NOT stopping at Rotherham. Adding the stop, perhaps in place of Meadowhall for some trains, would be operationally very simple and easy to understand for the public.

 

[si404]

Every largeish town in the southeast can't have direct long distance services to widespread areas of Britain; In many cases the routes to do this don't exist and never have. Even if they did, the service patterns would become impractically complex, and paths on common sections required for dominant flows would be wasted on low demand peripheral links. All these towns have pretty frequent high capacity services to London however, which is the gateway to many other parts of the country, albeit usually via a terminal transfer. Maidstone in particular could get better orbital connectivity within the south east quadrant through extension of Medway Valley local services at either end, perhaps to Gatwick for Brighton line interchange and reversing at Strood to better serve the Medway towns. My argument for Rotherham becoming a longer distance 'Intercity', NPR, perhaps even HS2 stop is based on Sheffield and South Yorkshire being big enough to warrant more than one stop.

I totally agree with this (though Maidstone's links with London are really dismal in comparison to other places a similar size and distance from London), and never said otherwise.

My point was a narrow one about how Rotherham-esque poor long-distance links could never happen in the South. They do. It's only in Dick Whittington that streets of London are paved with gold!

 

[edwin_m]

I totally agree with this (though Maidstone's links with London are really dismal in comparison to other places a similar size and distance from London), and never said otherwise.

My point was a narrow one about how Rotherham-esque poor long-distance links could never happen in the South. They do. It's only in Dick Whittington that streets of London are paved with gold!

Parts of Kent are relatively deprived, although HS1 has helped.

It's important also not to bundle the south-west in with the "South". In economic terms much of it is more like Northern England.

 

[VT 390]

Maidstone - similar population to Rotherham, similar railway backwater to Rotherham. Despite being the county town of Kent, it is the most poorly connected of the large Kentish urban areas (or urban areas of Kent): to both London, and within Kent. Rotherham has direct trains to both Leeds and Hull (as well as Sheffield and Doncaster). Maidstone gets the equivalent of just one of them, and Canterbury is definitely no Leeds (nor Dover, if there were direct trains, would be a Hull).

Slough has poor long-distance services (and is bigger than Doncaster and is Warrington-sized) with just one of the Oxford/Cotswolds trains stopping each hour, but 6 intercity trains an hour passing through fast - going to the more important GWML destinations like Cardiff and Bristol.

Basildon (145k) is closed off with access to the NR network that isn't the LTS route either meaning walking between stations in London or Southend, or changing twice via the Overground or Underground - though the LTS route is good. Southend itself is 300k, and has very poor train service that isn't London commuter train: no long-distance or fast trains at all.

I thought that off-peak both Oxford trains called at Slough each hour which along with the Local trains to Reading where connections can be maid is not as good as it could be but better than other places and when Cross Rail finally arrives the frequency of services to Slough will be increased.

 

[MarkyT]

I thought that off-peak both Oxford trains called at Slough each hour which along with the Local trains to Reading where connections can be maid is not as good as it could be but better than other places and when Cross Rail finally arrives the frequency of services to Slough will be increased.

In early HST days, Bristol services routinely called at Slough. I don't know exactly when that stopped. It might have been when Intercity emerged as a separate business sector.

 

[si404]

It's important also not to bundle the south-west in with the "South".

Very true (though the same applies to places that are SE - Hastings, Thanet, Luton, etc). The op had "north" and "south".

I thought that off-peak both Oxford trains called at Slough each hour which along with the Local trains to Reading where connections can be maid is not as good as it could be but better than other places

You are right, it is both.

 

[backontrack]

And, if I understand the question correctly, most trains calling at Warwickshire stations do not serve Warwick. Lincoln/shire probably also qualifies.

No Clackmannanshire services serve Clackmannan!

Back on topic, I think the main consensus is that Rotherham really should have better rail services, but nobody can agree on the best way of doing so.

Reinstating Rotherham Masborough is perhaps simpler, but I would favour improving Rotherham Central according to @MarkyT's suggested plan. @Jorge Da Silva argues that Masborough would be easier and cheaper; however, Rotherham Central has a vastly better location and would justify the additional expense (which does necessitate an alternative to the Holmes Chord).

In terms of services, I'd like to see the Newcastle-Reading CrossCountry services stop at Rotherham Central if it were possible, at least once every two hours. I'd also argue for the EMT Leeds, York and Scarborough extensions to do the same.