Don Valley railway

[YorkshireBear]

stemming from another thread where it was mentioned that lines with links into big cities will do better got me wondering about this again

The donvalley railway project was to build a double track heritage line on part of the old woodhead route up to stocksbridge to be used for heritage and commuter purposes

It has dissapeared, but nothing has been lost because of it, i last recieved an update last september(2009) when they said talks were beign held throughout autum with SYPTE and NR. Never got anything since.

How many of you out there would support a project like this? A double track heriatage railway on the old woodhead route up stocksbridge witha connection to near city centre tram network and with clever planning a reversal into sheffield midland itself?

when i say support i do mean would visit. It is something i hope someone will resurect as soon as possible as the rails are still there and Network rail have long term aspirations to operate the line as service up to stockbridge to give them better city centre links....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Also does anyone have any information on how useful sheffield victoria was back in the day?

 

[sprinterguy]

Sounds like a sensible proposal: There is still single track along the route they want to reopen, so that's a solid foundation for a preservation group to build on. I presume that the southerly terminus would be somehwere around Sheffield Victoria. Sounds like a good idea, I'd be sceptical about any proposals to run into Sheffield Midland though, I wouldn't think there's the space available amongst all the national rail services.

I'm not sure if Sheffield Victoria saw much use after the Woodhead route passenger services were withdrawn (1970?). I think it's remaining pasenger traffic (diesel units from the Penistone line I suspect) was diverted to Midland station after this date.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Sounds like a sensible proposal: There is still single track along the route they want to reopen, so that's a solid foundation for a preservation group to build on. I presume that the southerly terminus would be somehwere around Sheffield Victoria. Sounds like a good idea, I'd be sceptical about any proposals to run into Sheffield Midland though, I wouldn't think there's the space available amongst all the national rail services.

I'm not sure if Sheffield Victoria saw much use after the Woodhead route passenger services were withdrawn (1970?). I think it's remaining pasenger traffic (diesel units from the Penistone line I suspect) was diverted to Midland station after this date.

thanks for info on victoria....

The reversal into midland i was only gonna suggest for a sunday....

well as far as i know its gone completely quiet.... they havent responded for over a year and new has dissapeared everywhere...

Hope it still is but i think its gone which means it needs setting up again.....

 

[E&W Lucas]

http://www.donvalleyrailway.org/index2.php

Some questions to ask of any "new start" heritage railway project:

• Where are you going to get track from?
• Where are you going to find heritage rolling stock?
• Where are you going to find serviceable steam locos?
• Does your plan involve reinstating any level crossings? If so, think again!
• Above all, where's the money going to come from?

Sorry, but this is one of the most unrealistic schemes that I've ever come across. Buying city centre real estate - how on earth are they going to afford that!?!

 

[YorkshireBear]

http://www.donvalleyrailway.org/index2.php

Some questions to ask of any "new start" heritage railway project:

• Where are you going to get track from?
• Where are you going to find heritage rolling stock?
• Where are you going to find serviceable steam locos?
• Does your plan involve reinstating any level crossings? If so, think again!
• Above all, where's the money going to come from?

Sorry, but this is one of the most unrealistic schemes that I've ever come across. Buying city centre real estate - how on earth are they going to afford that!?!

track, well its still there? the line is still there so the track and level crossings points are not valid... i dont believe there is any level crossign anyway.....

the other two points i agree with completely, but theres many unserviceable steam locos out there that they could resurrect, any one railway has 25% of its steam fleet in operational condition at one time, all you need is to take a few off them and restore and they will be fine....

at the moment without backing and investment (which SYPTE AND NR were getting the ball rolling on providing) it is unrealistic, but one fo the most unrealistic youve come across? hardly....

 

[E&W Lucas]

It's unrealistic, as it doesn't seem that this project has actually identified what it is. If we're talking commuter railway, then they need to be thinking higher speed, modern equipment, etc. That means TPWS, OTMR, centralised door locking, etc, etc. Yet they're trying to pitch for the heritage market as well. The former is something that would be funded by government and investment banks. So why the not for profit charity bit?


I've come away with the impression that it's a bunch of enthusiasts trying to dress their hobby railway up as something else?

Unserviceable steam locos - it's down to money - think 300k to 600k++ for a 10 year overhaul on a mainline sized loco.

 

[YorkshireBear]

It's unrealistic, as it doesn't seem that this project has actually identified what it is. If we're talking commuter railway, then they need to be thinking higher speed, modern equipment, etc. That means TPWS, OTMR, centralised door locking, etc, etc. Yet they're trying to pitch for the heritage market as well. The former is something that would be funded by government and investment banks. So why the not for profit charity bit?


I've come away with the impression that it's a bunch of enthusiasts trying to dress their hobby railway up as something else?

Unserviceable steam locos - it's down to money - think 300k to 600k++ for a 10 year overhaul on a mainline sized loco.

Ah i see what you mean there and i agree sorry i didnt quite understand what you were getting at before

so would you say more realistic if they sorted out what it was? and had a more developed plan or do you think intergrating the two is out of the question?

 

[sprinterguy]

It seems a far more sensible proposal than many of the first major preservation schemes were thirty or forty years ago. With such a seemingly defeatist attitude, E&W Lucas, I doubt that many of the fine preservation outfits we have today would be with us.

In common with most, if not all, railway preservation projects, there are challenges to overcome but they are far from insurmountable: The line proposed for reopening already has single track in place throughout it's length and handled heavy freight traffic wel into the nineties. There are no level crossings and, IIRC, no major structures along the line.

Acquiring motive power for the line would probably follow the long established practice of initially hiring a suitable small diesel loco from one of the established preserved lines, and then, if the line proves successful, the preservationists can then turn their attention to getting hold of an operational steam loco or two in a similar arrangement, and then one day maybe take on their own restoration of one of the derelict steam locos still awaiting a return to service lying around any number of preserved railways.

I have no idea where the seemingly bountiful supply of carriages for use on preserved lines keeps coming from; the mark 2 fleet on the Wensleydale Railway, a recent development, are former Riviera Trains carriages; so it is likely that a couple of pressure ventilated mark 2s could be sourced for an initial service.

The first tentative steps of operation would probably see weekend operation of heritage stock, gradually being built up (if successful) until the preservationists reach their aim of a regular weekday commuter service.

Of course, stations need to be reconstructed, signalling reinstalled and the track alignment bought from Network rail, so the main obstacle, as with all projects of any kind, is financial capital, which seems to be the principal reason for the current stalling of the project, which is understandable in the present financial climate.

 

[E&W Lucas]

If this was a credible proposal for a commuter railway, then I'd expect to see a business led and backed website, lobbying NR to re open the line to passenger spec, and maybe involvement from Northern as the operator. Commuters don't want 25mph heritage stuff. I've no knowledge of the area - is there a potential market there? Are the locations in Sheffield relevant to where commuters actually want to be? Or could it be integrated into the tram system?

Heritage wise, the situation is VERY different to when the well established lines set up. The remaining steam locos have far less residual life left for a start. There's not a whole raft of industrial railways to scrounge stuff off, including the near serviceable tank locos that got most places started. It's also far harder to get gear off the mainline railway, and there's more and more people after what goodies do come up. Loco hire wise, make a link between the articles that have been appearing in the magazines about many of the major lines being short of motive power, and the likely availability of something for hire.

There seems to be a particular attraction to setting up "another preserved railway". It seems to be a common enthusiast fantasy, not always too well grounded in a grasp of economic reality. I'm not being negative about preservation as a whole. Practical involvement in it has eaten up a huge amount of my spare time and cash since I was a schoolboy, but that experience does make me ask some hard nosed questions when I see a proposal like this.

 

[sprinterguy]

that experience does make me ask some hard nosed questions when I see a proposal like this.

And quite rightly so: If every enthusiast set out to reopen their favourite bit of railway simply because it was lying unused then we’d be seeing a lot of spectacular preservation failures. However I don’t see that this scheme is unfeasible compared to current reopening or past preservation efforts, though you have put together some good points that I must concur with: You are right that there is no longer a ready supply of ex-industrial tank locos that can be snapped up by upcoming preservation societies, I had forgotten that in the late sixties to mid seventies the traditional heavy industries were shedding steam locos at a rapid rate.

I’m not in any way involved with this scheme so cannot vouch for the preservationists’ precise goals, but if they approach the project sensibly, starting as a weekend only heritage operation and then building up to a tentative weekday commuter service, then I see no reason why the future of the railway shouldn’t be secure: I don’t think their intention is to operate a frequent commuter style service at regular intervals throughout the day, more likely a selection of trains timed to meet peak travel flows: I admit that there are a number of flaws in their intentions to operate regular passenger trains during the week, but as a heritage operation first and foremost I can’t see why there should be too many difficulties.

Over half the route (the densely populated bit), is shadowed closely by an existing Supertram route, that is located much more centrally for local population centres than stations on the reopened Deepcar line ever would be, so despite having quite a large potential commuter market to tap into, most of the main populated areas are already well served by public transport. Plus a commuter service would require some form of railcar or DMU to even approach feasibility: First gen DMUs are decidedly thin on the ground (Although the Wensleydale Railway managed to wrangle itself the East Lancs Calder Valley unit when it set up weekday services), and the Don Valley have missed the boat somewhat with grabbing a class 141 Pacer like the Weardale Railway did. I can imagine that by the time the Don Valley got itself established (hypothetically) to the point when it started operating commuter services, it would be wanting to bite the hand off any ROSCO offering redundant class 142 and 144 Pacers when or if the time comes that the Pacers are ever withdrawn.

There are challenges to be faced, but not so much that they seem insurmountable or make the scheme look like an insane pipedream.

 

[YorkshireBear]

And quite rightly so: If every enthusiast set out to reopen their favourite bit of railway simply because it was lying unused then we’d be seeing a lot of spectacular preservation failures. However I don’t see that this scheme is unfeasible compared to current reopening or past preservation efforts, though you have put together some good points that I must concur with: You are right that there is no longer a ready supply of ex-industrial tank locos that can be snapped up by upcoming preservation societies, I had forgotten that in the late sixties to mid seventies the traditional heavy industries were shedding steam locos at a rapid rate.

I’m not in any way involved with this scheme so cannot vouch for the preservationists’ precise goals, but if they approach the project sensibly, starting as a weekend only heritage operation and then building up to a tentative weekday commuter service, then I see no reason why the future of the railway shouldn’t be secure: I don’t think their intention is to operate a frequent commuter style service at regular intervals throughout the day, more likely a selection of trains timed to meet peak travel flows: I admit that there are a number of flaws in their intentions to operate regular passenger trains during the week, but as a heritage operation first and foremost I can’t see why there should be too many difficulties.

Over half the route (the densely populated bit), is shadowed closely by an existing Supertram route, that is located much more centrally for local population centres than stations on the reopened Deepcar line ever would be, so despite having quite a large potential commuter market to tap into, most of the main populated areas are already well served by public transport. Plus a commuter service would require some form of railcar or DMU to even approach feasibility: First gen DMUs are decidedly thin on the ground (Although the Wensleydale Railway managed to wrangle itself the East Lancs Calder Valley unit when it set up weekday services), and the Don Valley have missed the boat somewhat with grabbing a class 141 Pacer like the Weardale Railway did. I can imagine that by the time the Don Valley got itself established (hypothetically) to the point when it started operating commuter services, it would be wanting to bite the hand off any ROSCO offering redundant class 142 and 144 Pacers when or if the time comes that the Pacers are ever withdrawn.

There are challenges to be faced, but not so much that they seem insurmountable or make the scheme look like an insane pipedream.

i agree with you here, yes there are challeneges but none as far as i am aware that are not solveable. They may need finicial backing and one day that may come. Unfortunately to the best of my knowledge the group has no split and no longer in existence. I think it came through too many differences in opinion and a mismanagement.

I was thinking by the time they got ready to start a 142 144 would be best bet so i agree.

It hasnt got a huge market to tap into, but i know many people in sotcksbridge who in a morning would rather do this the roads can be a nightmare. I for one went to sheffield college (one of proposed stops) and if they time trains with the start and finish times there there would be a good market to tap into i feel. (if they could offer competitive fares to students....)

i believe it still handles freight one per week plus RHTT trains in the autumn and railtours (one of which i believe to be early next year with a class 60)