Disused trackbed Leeds.

[83G/84D]

At Leeds West Jn there is a trackbed that heads off over some viaducts. Anyone able to say where the line went and when it closed?

 

[30907]

IIRC originally the LNWR route via Dewsbury. When Leeds Central closed in the mid-60s, the Trans Pennine service was switched to the present route, and a curve built to allow trains from Doncaster to reach Leeds City.
Think it closed with the East Coast electrification?

 

[Ash Bridge]

IIRC originally the LNWR route via Dewsbury. When Leeds Central closed in the mid-60s, the Trans Pennine service was switched to the present route, and a curve built to allow trains from Doncaster to reach Leeds City.
Think it closed with the East Coast electrification?

Was it Farnley Viaduct that this line ran over? If so I've read that it wasn't possible to fit the necessary catenary when electrifying the route into Leeds hence final closure during 1987.

 

[Gemz91]

Is this the track that runs over the viaduct at the bottom end of Holbeck? Plenty of plans too bring it back into life as an urban park walkway from Holbeck into Leeds.

 

[Iskra]

It is the LNWR route, but from the maps it didn't go to Dewsbury. It went: Farnley, Gildersome, Birstall, Cleckheaton, Liversedge, Battyeford, Cooper Bridge where it joined with the current line to Stalybridge. It did not go through Dewsbury, but a connection may have existed onto the L&Y line to Dewsbury.

http://www.lostrailwayswestyorkshire.co.uk/leeds new line 1.htm

 

[CaptainHaddock]

Is this the track that runs over the viaduct at the bottom end of Holbeck? Plenty of plans too bring it back into life as an urban park walkway from Holbeck into Leeds.

Lots of plans but nothing definite as yet....

http://holbeckhighline.org.uk/

 

[Welshman]

It is the LNWR route, but from the maps it didn't go to Dewsbury. It went: Farnley, Gildersome, Birstall, Cleckheaton, Liversedge, Battyeford, Cooper Bridge where it joined with the current line to Stalybridge. It did not go through Dewsbury, but a connection may have existed onto the L&Y line to Dewsbury.

http:// .lostrailwayswestyorkshire.co.uk/leeds new line 1.htm

The LNWR and L&Y lines converged at Farnley and Wortley Junction, and then just after there was a flying junction where the Dewsbury and Gildersome [Leeds New Line] diverged. So it was possible to access both lines.

 

[superkev]

I read somewhere that network rail where considering bringing it back into use to allow transpennine trains from the south side of the station to avoid the station approaches. Seems a good idea.
K

 

[yoyothehobo]

I read somewhere that network rail where considering bringing it back into use to allow transpennine trains from the south side of the station to avoid the station approaches. Seems a good idea.
K

Wouldnt be that great an idea, the TPE services from huddersfield at the moment use p15 and p16 at the southern side of the station and the line from Huddersfield only conflicts with the Wakefield Kirkgate line and the Doncaster stoppers which take the ECML spur. The line to kirkgate is probably the least used of the approaches to Leeds and without significant alterations, you would still end up with conflicts.

With my crayons out though I would connect the old curve from the Bradford line to the Doncaster line at the west of the old viaduct route in (flying over the ECML route but with a couple of spurs to allow running through to Bradford on the ECML because my crayons are out) and then having the Calder Valley trains go along the holbeck viaduct into the south platforms at Leeds. Shoving the TPE trains into the centre roads at Leeds.

A massive engineering project for a low gain. SOunds about right for some ideas on here.

In all honesty the only gain for the original idea would be if there was a massive increase in the amount of Aire Valley - S and C Freight that needed to cross the station throat, however as there are very few paths along the Aire Valley with its level of service it would go down as unlikely.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The LNWR and L&Y lines converged at Farnley and Wortley Junction, and then just after there was a flying junction where the Dewsbury and Gildersome [Leeds New Line] diverged. So it was possible to access both lines.

They were both LNWR - the original was the Dewsbury route from Ravensthorpe, while the "New" line ran via the Spen valley and gave an all-LNWR route from Heaton Lodge into Leeds.
I did it once in the early 60s on a Liverpool-Newcastle service.
Lots of detail here: http://www.lostrailwayswestyorkshire.co.uk/leeds new line 1.htm

 

[snowball]

I read somewhere that network rail where considering bringing it back into use to allow transpennine trains from the south side of the station to avoid the station approaches. Seems a good idea.
K

Or ws it just somebody on here suggesting it?

 

[superkev]

Or ws it just somebody on here suggesting it?

Defoe not here. It was on YouTube pwi I think.

K

 

[NorthernSpirit]

I read somewhere that network rail where considering bringing it back into use to allow transpennine trains from the south side of the station to avoid the station approaches. Seems a good idea.

Isn't Leeds suppose to be getting some more platforms?

Could the reopening of the viaduct (along with a potential Leeds United FC Halt, sime the line runs nearby) be somewhat connected to a possible platform 18?

 

[Welshman]

They were both LNWR - the original was the Dewsbury route from Ravensthorpe, while the "New" line ran via the Spen valley and gave an all-LNWR route from Heaton Lodge into Leeds.
I did it once in the early 60s on a Liverpool-Newcastle service.
Lots of detail here: http://www.lostrailwayswestyorkshire.co.uk/leeds new line 1.htm

Of course they were!! What was I thinking saying one was L&Y?

Incidentally, I too managed a trip over the Leeds New Line before it closed, from the front seat of a "Trans-Pennine" dmu [the guard never came to throw me out of the 1st Class!]. I remember it was a bendy, steeply-graded switch-back - throttle, brake, throttle, all the way from Heaton Lodge.

 

[LDECRexile]

Not sure about the 60s or earlier, but I lived in Halifax 1985 to 2001 and I wager half a pint (not the full pint, I'm not that certain) that I travelled the viaduct when going from Leeds to Kings Cross and back.

This map:

http://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17&lat=53.7907&lon=-1.5563&layers=168&b=1

Shows that it was at least physically possible.

If you haven't seen the National Library of Scotland maps site before, explore and enjoy!

 

[Welshman]

Not sure about the 60s or earlier, but I lived in Halifax 1985 to 2001 and I wager half a pint (not the full pint, I'm not that certain) that I travelled the viaduct when going from Leeds to Kings Cross and back.

Yes, your pint's safe!
When it ceased to be used by Manchester via Huddersfield trains, a connecting curve was built where the line went under the Wakefield Westgate line, and it was used by London services and those going to Wakefield, Sheffield and south. This was to relieve the pressure on the new Holbeck curve, which had been built to allow services which had used Central station to access City, and Central to be closed in 1967. It was considered that services from Bradford via New Pudsey and Manchester via Huddersfield would be enough for this new, twin-tracked Holbeck curve, without the London services too.

However, as Ash Bridge has said upthread, it was not possible to construct the catenary for the electrification of the London line on this viaduct, so the route reverted to the original passing the old Copley Hill mpd.

 

[Ash Bridge]

I've just been looking at Google Satellite Imagery and interestingly there still appears to be a fair bit of track in place across the viaduct, are these old images or is it still the case does anyone know?

 

[LDECRexile]

Yes, your pint's safe!
When it ceased to be used by Manchester via Huddersfield trains, a connecting curve was built where the line went under the Wakefield Westgate line, and it was used by London services and those going to Wakefield, Sheffield and south. This was to relieve the pressure on the new Holbeck curve, which had been built to allow services which had used Central station to access City, and Central to be closed in 1967. It was considered that services from Bradford via New Pudsey and Manchester via Huddersfield would be enough for this new, twin-tracked Holbeck curve, without the London services too.

However, as Ash Bridge has said upthread, it was not possible to construct the catenary for the electrification of the London line on this viaduct, so the route reverted to the original passing the old Copley Hill mpd.

Phew! My pint's safe AND I haven't lost my marbles! Thank you for your interesting reply.

 

[Senex]

However, as Ash Bridge has said upthread, it was not possible to construct the catenary for the electrification of the London line on this viaduct, so the route reverted to the original passing the old Copley Hill mpd.

Does that mean it couldn't be restored for an electrified trans-Pennine route for the same reason? (Not that one would really want it, given the very low-speed curves at the eastern end.)

 

[Ash Bridge]

Does that mean it couldn't be restored for an electrified trans-Pennine route for the same reason? (Not that one would really want it, given the very low-speed curves at the eastern end.)

Purely going off Google Maps/Street View again, the course of the railway does now appear to be virtually obliterated and partly built over in places between the location of the former connecting curve to the electrified main line to Wakefield and Farnley & Wortley Junction on the Dewsbury line.

 

[xotGD]

Isn't Leeds suppose to be getting some more platforms?

Could the reopening of the viaduct (along with a potential Leeds United FC Halt, sime the line runs nearby) be somewhat connected to a possible platform 18?

Platform 18? Would that be in the foyer of the Doubletree Hotel? Seriously, would require some serious building work out over the access road to Granary Wharf, and almost touching Candle House.

 

[eisenach]

I remember the viaduct being the main route to Westgate and King's X when I was a teenager in Leeds in the mid-70s. By the time of electrification, I had left. In what way was the viaduct "unsuitable" for electrification ?

 

[snowball]

It's hard to see why this couldn't have been wired. It looks very solid.

 

[Spartacus]

IIRC originally the LNWR route via Dewsbury. When Leeds Central closed in the mid-60s, the Trans Pennine service was switched to the present route, and a curve built to allow trains from Doncaster to reach Leeds City.
Think it closed with the East Coast electrification?

A stub of it survived after electrification as a single track headshunt, it might too as I'm sure I can recall seeing a picture of a 225 set in Intercity livery stabled on it, though it could have been pushed there. This stub was then taken out with the last rebuild of Leeds. I don't think there's anything particularly stopping it being used, apart from that it just introduces as many conflicting moves as it resolves, and with limited freight down the Aire Valley now the conflicts would certainly be more frequent.

 

[NorthernSpirit]

Platform 18? Would that be in the foyer of the Doubletree Hotel? Seriously, would require some serious building work out over the access road to Granary Wharf, and almost touching Candle House.

There's a evacuation point at the end of platform 17, I would and did think that a possible platform 18 could go there - if there's space.

 

[Mr Mean]

I vaguely remember travelling on this viaduct on a summer Saturday service from Leeds to Torquay. This would have been the mid 80s.

There was a single electrified siding there until Leeds station was rebuild in the late 90s that stretched a fair way over towards Holbeck. I could be wrong but I believe the reason for lack of use / taken out of use was the very tight curves at the Leeds end preventing mk4s which were introduced in the late 80s from passing each other safely.

 

[The_Engineer]

A stub of it survived after electrification as a single track headshunt, it might too as I'm sure I can recall seeing a picture of a 225 set in Intercity livery stabled on it, though it could have been pushed there.

I was on an IC225 set, as a Metro-Cammell engineer, when it did a pre-service demonstration run from London to Leeds and back. It was pre-service for the Mk.IVs but well into their commissioning programme. It was possibly a press run, as we certainly did at least one such run pre-service, a well as a special to York for the I.Mech.E. conference.

By arrival at Leeds, a couple of the Auxiliary Converters had tripped. The BR traction inspector requested that we were set back onto the viaduct siding line to stable between runs, in order to be able to get track level access to the auxiliary converters on some of the coaches, something we couldn't do at the platform. I was in the DVT cab as we drove onto the viaduct, it was electrified at least as far for the Class 91 to propel us. After a quick investigation, we managed to rectify the faults and get them going again during the booked layover time.

So that photo may have been taken on that occasion, though I can not recall ever seeing one.

 

[Ash Bridge]

It's hard to see why this couldn't have been wired. It looks very solid.

I wonder could the actual reason have been cost rather than unable to, as the DfT or whatever they called themselves back in the 1980s perhaps considered it an expensive unneeded duplication back then?

 

[The_Engineer]

I wonder could the actual reason have been cost rather than unable to, as the DfT or whatever they called themselves back in the 1980s perhaps considered it an expensive unneeded duplication back then?

Hit the mail on the head. I can recall that traffic planning demonstrated the viaduct line was not needed and the other lines could cope with traffic. With 20-20 hindsight and today's traffic levels we can say "bad decision"....

 

[Ash Bridge]

Hit the mail on the head. I can recall that traffic planning demonstrated the viaduct line was not needed and the other lines could cope with traffic. With 20-20 hindsight and today's traffic levels we can say "bad decision"....

How very true!
...and a most interesting posting above regarding the demonstration run may I say.