Doctor Who?

[LE Greys]

And the MoT (as it was then) spending most of its money on lots of shiny new long-distance motorways, meaning that road journey times could start to become competitive with rail.

And if you want to know just how ridiculously badly some of that was done...

http://pathetic.org.uk/

Still, I do happen to live right next to the Great North Road and the motorway that will never be finished despite linking the capitals of England and Scotland. Not that I'm sore or jealous of the Midlanders at all.

 

[Eagle]

Still, I do happen to live right next to the Great North Road and the motorway that will never be finished despite linking the capitals of England and Scotland.

There's a reason the A1 won't be upgraded north of Newcastle, and that's that the quickest route between London and Edinburgh is via the M6, A74(M) and A702, so that takes away a lot of the traffic.

(About 15 or 20 years ago there was a plan to build a motorway roughly along the line of the A702, the so-called "Fastlink"; it would have been numbered M7. Never got very far in the planning process due to the difficult terrain.)

 

[Zoe]

There's a reason the A1 won't be upgraded north of Newcastle, and that's that the quickest route between London and Edinburgh is via the M6, A74(M) and A702, so that takes away a lot of the traffic.

The A702(T) though is 40 miles of S2 from Abington to Edinburgh which if it's busy could be at just 40 mph. I'd have thought some people would stay on the M74 to Glasgow.

 

[exile]

How can you say rightly whether or not a branch line on which the majority of the traffic is inward, e.g. to holiday resorts, can or can't make a profit?

Easy - holiday resort traffic was mainly concentrated into 6 weeks of the year. This would make very little impact on overall profitability unless the line could be mothballed for the rest of the year.

 

[Schnellzug]

Now that I agree with. Another part of this was the 'bustitution' idea. If buses replace trains on a rural line, they can serve places much closer to village centres and run with more flexibility. Trouble is, people simply didn't use them, mostly because they preferred travelling in a nice comfortable train rather than a rattly country bus which was often slower. .

One reason for that being, don't forget, that Rail Replacement Bus Services meant just that; they were scheduled to follow the railway line exactly, and call at the stations, which were often, as we know, in a different village altogether to the one on the nameboards.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Easy - holiday resort traffic was mainly concentrated into 6 weeks of the year. This would make very little impact on overall profitability unless the line could be mothballed for the rest of the year.

And that's the problem; looking at things in isolation, purely in terms of the revenue they generate, rather than as part of a network.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

Employing Dr Beeching to prepare a report on rationalizing BR, would be similar to Richard Branson employing David Cameron to do a report on how to rationalize Virgin.:roll:
Yes savings had to be made. Having buses to replace late services on branch lines, (enabling several signal boxes/ stations to close early etc) Yes some lines would have closed/ mothballed. Updating freight. Switching steam to 1 Electric and 2 diesel traction. The surveys used were very flawed.

 

[Gwenllian2001]

Easy - holiday resort traffic was mainly concentrated into 6 weeks of the year. This would make very little impact on overall profitability unless the line could be mothballed for the rest of the year.

An interesting point which only regurgitates the thinking of the Sixties. It does not, however, address the needs of the resident populations of 'resorts'. The seaside branches in the West country are now thriving because the services are, largely, designed to suit those who live there.

To come nearer home, for me that is, the short branch from Barry to Barry Island was regarded as 'seasonal' until the late Eighties and had only a skeletal service during the winter months. The considerable resident population was ignored until someone woke up to the fact that it was there. Trains needed to travel half way along the branch to reverse and then stand idle waiting time at Barry. Madness, but on paper no doubt an economy. The sensible decision was made to extend the trains the extra hundred yards or so to Barry Island instead. It now has a year round frequency of 3tph.

As for mothballing lines, I know of one that never made it back to life. That was the branch to Porthcawl, a popular seaside destination. Consent was given to the withdrawal of regular passenger services on the 'assurance' that the summer trains would run. Porthcawl station remained open for enquiries and the handing in and collection of parcels etc. During the first winter of closure, my late neighbour, who was Station Master, was confronted by a gang of men who had arrived to demolish his station. Despite his protestations and frantic 'phone calls, the place was knocked down about his ears and the track ripped up. So much for 'mothballing'.

The annoying part of all this is that the branch served a population of around 25,000, taking Porthcawl and its outlying large villages of Kenfig Hill; Nottage and Pyle into account. It is now, probably, a lot more and all this in prime commuter country.

But there you are, it was a 'seaside branch'. Things are not always as simple as they look and had the line been allowed to survive, I'm certain, it would now be a thriving concern.

I'm sure that there are many other examples, known to people on this forum, which would have flourished, given the chance.

 

[Schnellzug]

is it just coincidence, i wonder, that if you look at a list of what might be generally considered to be succesful seaside resorts, they're almost always the ones that still have a rail service, whereas those in (for example) north Norfolk or north Devon that do not, do not now see perhaps the numbers of visitors that they once did.