Future of Island Line

[SpacePhoenix]

It looks like there is a question mark over the future of the Island Line over on the Isle of Wight:

http://www.iwcp.co.uk/news/news/20k...missioned-by-isle-of-wight-council-86580.aspx

A STUDY by transport consultants into the future of Island Line, costing up to £20,000, has been ordered by the Isle of Wight Council.

The council says it does not have the money to finance the proposed transport task force, so has ordered the study, by Atkins Global Consulting.

This will look into the costs, benefits and risks of the different approaches to the future provision of rail services on the 8.5 mile route...

If the Island Line were to be closed how big an impact would that have on the island. I'd imagine it would have a big impact on the Isle of Wight Steam Railway as at the Smallbrook Junction end the Island Line is the only public access to the line

 

[thenorthern]

I agree that it would affect the Isle of Wight steam railway.

Its difficult to say what the impact on other things is though as many of the large settlements on the island aren't served by rail services.

 

[Quakkerillo]

Would it in that case not be feasible to support parts of the current 'mainline' from the steam line, and have it run all the way to Ryde, where people can get on/off, instead of Smallbrook Junction? Or is the steam train also too large for the tube-size tunnels like other UK trains?

 

[thenorthern]

Would it in that case not be feasible to support parts of the current 'mainline' from the steam line, and have it run all the way to Ryde, where people can get on/off, instead of Smallbrook Junction? Or is the steam train also too large for the tube-size tunnels like other UK trains?

I don't think the tunnels is the main issue I think its the sharpness of the curves although some tunnels are too low for some mainland stock.

 

[Taunton]

I get the feeling that a lot of the justification for keeping the residual line near-50 years ago no longer applies.

Longer term holidaymakers coming by ferry and then rail to Sandown/Shanklin are way down. There has been a significant increase, for those who do still come, in bringing their own cars by car ferry.

School traffic is also well down as the island becomes a major retirement colony out of season.

Whenever I've got the trains (only in summer) they have been notably empty. The number of cars remaining in the active fleet is a small fraction of what the system was set up with in 1967.

 

[yorksrob]

Having read the article, it looks as though the IoW are getting ready to fight their corner. Quite right too. We mustn't let the Government get away with selling the island short.

 

[Rick1984]

Be gutted if it closed. For one you cant take your bike on a normal bus.
Also i get a discount on ferry with railcard
And its still packed with school kids from Sandown.

The service to pierhead would have to be maintained in some form.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

The non car holiday traffic is well down compared to 50 years ago - BR to its credit (step forward Mr A Barter (RIP)who came up with the brilliant plan of cheap electrification and the use of scrap 1920's ex LT stock to reinvigorate and retain the service) - I suspect traffic is well down - and I think the individual subsidy (per journey) is massive , and as in the past , investment will be challenging. I suspect the answer may be keeping the assets going for as long as possible - ......

 

[jopsuk]

If the line was to shut, I'd have thought the Steam Railway would look to take over the route from the junction to Ryde St Johns Road?

 

[Michael.Y]

I get the feeling that a lot of the justification for keeping the residual line near-50 years ago no longer applies.

Longer term holidaymakers coming by ferry and then rail to Sandown/Shanklin are way down. There has been a significant increase, for those who do still come, in bringing their own cars by car ferry.

School traffic is also well down as the island becomes a major retirement colony out of season.

Whenever I've got the trains (only in summer) they have been notably empty. The number of cars remaining in the active fleet is a small fraction of what the system was set up with in 1967.

Your anecdotal evidence isn't backed up by usage figures, not those on Wikipedia anyway. There is little to no difference year on year on passenger usage and certainly no consistent trends one way or another. The route serves about the same amount of passengers as a typical rural branchline on the mainland (The Maritime Line in Cornwall and the Tarka Line in Devon serve about the same amount of people, roughly speaking - 200k-300k per annum). The unique complexity of the Island Line setup is most likely the primary cause for concern but could be alleviated by changes to the PW or infrastructure, or by introduction of 67 or similar stock displaced from LU duties. It certainly would be a sad situation if this wonderfully unique, distinctive railway were to cease existence due to a few council Central Govt red-tape number crunching paperclip stacking zombies.

 

[yorksrob]

It certainly would be a sad situation if this wonderfully unique, distinctive railway were to cease existence due to a few council red-tape number crunching paperclip stacking zombies.

From the article, it sounds as though it's the Central Government red-tape number crunching paperclip stacking zombies that are more to be feared !

 

[Michael.Y]

From the article, it sounds as though it's the Central Government red-tape number crunching paperclip stacking zombies that are more to be feared !

Indeed, to quote a certain Ms Clinton, I mis-typed.

 

[450.emu]

I've been on this railway when I was little, it would be a shame to see it go. Isn't the line ironically the best run in terms of punctuality / service etc?

I though there were plans to perhaps use the LUL 92 Tube stock (from Waterloo & City / Central Line) were planned as possible replacement for the 1938 stock?

 

[swt_passenger]

I've been on this railway when I was little, it would be a shame to see it go. Isn't the line ironically the best run in terms of punctuality / service etc?

I though there were plans to perhaps use the LUL 92 Tube stock (from Waterloo & City / Central Line) were planned as possible replacement for the 1938 stock?

SWT have consistently stated that they would take 73 stock when it is released by LU. 73s become available much earlier than 92.

 

[theageofthetra]

You are paying for nice shiny new trains in many EU countries via EU regional development grants so presumably this island community will be able to apply for and receive similar support?

 

[Hadders]

SWT have consistently stated that they would take 73 stock when it is released by LU. 73s become available much earlier than 92.

But hasn't the 73 stock got to soldier on for many more years yet on the Piccadilly Line?

I went on the line last summer and it was very busy. Like a time warp really.

 

[RPI]

One thing I've noticed on numerous trips to the IoW is that there is a lot of ticketless travel just by the guard not being able to get everyone, passenger footfall comes from ticket sales.......

 

[thenorthern]

Given the difficulty with closing a line with the 1844 Act I can't see the Island Line ever closing.

One thing that would be nice is if they extended the line to Newport again as I reckon they could get a fairly large number of passengers traveling from Newport to Ryde.

 

[BestWestern]

SWT have consistently stated that they would take 73 stock when it is released by LU. 73s become available much earlier than 92.

Is there any real advantage in replacing the '38 stock with '72s? Other than "it's newer", of course. If the '38s have been maintained satisfactorily thus far, then surely they can continue to be kept serviceable for the forseeable? Or are there some immediate looming issues with them?

 

[HSTEd]

Have the 38s been fitted with fluorescent lighting and similar?
If nothing else I imagine a newer train with a solid state traction and power package would be helpful.

 

[Chris125]

If the Island Line were to be closed how big an impact would that have on the island. I'd imagine it would have a big impact on the Isle of Wight Steam Railway as at the Smallbrook Junction end the Island Line is the only public access to the line

This has been discussed at length on NatPres, but essentially the local MP suddenly became interested in the future of the railway in the run up to the election, and seemingly inspired by Shanklin Theatre began talking about a 'community railway' - without really defining what that meant - and with the council organised a meeting with the DfT.

Surprise surprise nothing really came of it, the government declining to fund a £500,000 'taskforce', so it seems we started getting all this talk about closure, millions needed to save it etc in the press - rather than increase support it actually led to a major cross-party backlash amongst Island politicians and locals, and now even the Council are saying it should remain in the franchise.

God knows why our MP wanted to give the DfT ideas, but I'm sure keeping it within SWT will be the easiest and cheapest solution for a department with much bigger fish to fry.

I get the feeling that a lot of the justification for keeping the residual line near-50 years ago no longer applies.

It's used by around 1.5m people a year, it might not have those manic Summer Saturdays any more but it is still an important local transport link given the cost, journey time and reliability of the bus service, and its the only alternative to driving or walking up the half-mile pier.

Chris

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What's the current general state of the 3rd rail infrastructure, is it anywhere near to being life expired?

 

[yorksrob]

Is there any real advantage in replacing the '38 stock with '72s? Other than "it's newer", of course. If the '38s have been maintained satisfactorily thus far, then surely they can continue to be kept serviceable for the forseeable? Or are there some immediate looming issues with them?

One could say the same thing about the HST.

 

[wibble]

Is there any real advantage in replacing the '38 stock with '72s? Other than "it's newer", of course. If the '38s have been maintained satisfactorily thus far, then surely they can continue to be kept serviceable for the forseeable? Or are there some immediate looming issues with them?

They're having to canablise parts from units that aren't in service, which is fine until there are no parts left to take!

 

[341o2]

I don't think the tunnels is the main issue I think its the sharpness of the curves although some tunnels are too low for some mainland stock.

Once there was a proposal to modernise the Island line with newer steam locos, but due to the uncertainty of the future of any IOW line (Beeching recommended total closure) the 02's soldiered on

The decision to electrify the portion remaining open led to a six week closure, track was raised through Ryde tunnels to alleviate flooding and at stations so the tube stock is at platform level

Once Ryde pier had a tramway as well as the railway. This has been closed, and the double track of the Island line became two parallel single lines so a seperate unit could shuttle between Pier Head and Esplanade. This service has been withdrawn

The steam railway has expressed interest in extending to Ryde St Johns but no further

I support any campaign to keep the line open. i thought the network now safe from the likes of the next Beeching or Serpell
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Given the difficulty with closing a line with the 1844 Act I can't see the Island Line ever closing.

One thing that would be nice is if they extended the line to Newport again as I reckon they could get a fairly large number of passengers traveling from Newport to Ryde.

I have thought that too. originally the steam railway was based at Newport but the station site was aquired for road improvements.

 

[Carlisle]

Gk

Is there any real advantage in replacing the '38 stock with '72s? Other than "it's newer", of course. If the '38s have been maintained satisfactorily thus far, then surely they can continue to be kept serviceable for the forseeable? Or are there some immediate looming issues with them?

The 38 stock must by now more or less have had its day, it. seems crazy they didn't grab a few of the 83 tube trains a few years back when they were all withdrawn from the Jubilee line

 

[jon0844]

Since it became cheaper to buy a Gold Card between two stations in Birmingham, I wonder if there has been a noticeable drop in ticket sales?!

Perhaps those phantom commuters paid for the ticketless locals?

 

[Chris125]

The decision to electrify the portion remaining open led to a six week closure, track was raised through Ryde tunnels to alleviate flooding and at stations so the tube stock is at platform level

As Island Line normally provokes much discussion about Ryde Tunnel, I hope Mark Brinton won't mind me quoting a post from the SEMG Yahoo Group:


"A quick look at my papers show that the current height of the peak of the arch is about 13ft4in above rail level at the tunnel entrance on both the up and down lines at both ends.

I have looked at the building drawings (hence the delay in replying), when built the tunnel had an arch peak 14ft above rail level, so it looks as if BR only raised it about 8 inches. There was, when built, an arced brick invert that was a maximum of 2ft and a minimum of 6 inches below rail level. The main issues with getting stock through the tunnel is the arch shape and width combined with 9-10 chain reverse curves within the tunnel.

The tunnel is a mixture of brick/concrete single track arch (at each end), a twin track brick/concrete arch in the centre section and a wrought iron on cast columns covered way section under the East Street-Dover Street road junction"


This should help explain the mid 80's plan to use ex-Merseyrail 503s and this photo of a gauging test

As for platforms, it seems only Ryde Esplanade received any major modifications, presumably due to clearances through the very sharp curve - most were little changed since they were built in low pre-grouping style, ideal for tube stock but would pose a problem if conventional stock was reintroduced.

 

[MarkyT]

As Island Line normally provokes much discussion about Ryde Tunnel, I hope Mark Brinton won't mind me quoting a post from the SEMG Yahoo Group:


"A quick look at my papers show that the current height of the peak of the arch is about 13ft4in above rail level at the tunnel entrance on both the up and down lines at both ends.

I have looked at the building drawings (hence the delay in replying), when built the tunnel had an arch peak 14ft above rail level, so it looks as if BR only raised it about 8 inches. There was, when built, an arced brick invert that was a maximum of 2ft and a minimum of 6 inches below rail level. The main issues with getting stock through the tunnel is the arch shape and width combined with 9-10 chain reverse curves within the tunnel.

The tunnel is a mixture of brick/concrete single track arch (at each end), a twin track brick/concrete arch in the centre section and a wrought iron on cast columns covered way section under the East Street-Dover Street road junction"


This should help explain the mid 80's plan to use ex-Merseyrail 503s and this photo of a gauging test

As for platforms, it seems only Ryde Esplanade received any major modifications, presumably due to clearances through the very sharp curve - most were little changed since they were built in low pre-grouping style, ideal for tube stock but would pose a problem if conventional stock was reintroduced.

Vivarail D-Train perhaps? D78s are 11' 11'' tall apparently, but with larger sub-surface rather than tube standard platform height though. Either a D-Train electric variant (E-Train?) with DC pickup retained (still fully refurbished with new traction package though), or a standard D-Train with electrification abandoned and 3rd rail removed.

New passing loop at Brading (perhaps 'Penryn style' to achieve DDA compliance without a large ramped footbridge or lifts). This would allow a regular interval half hourly service to operate. A simple single line would remain either side of the new loop to Ryde Pierhead and Shanklin, allowing track and signalling simplification through Ryde (with depot access retained) and at Sandown loop. Handover second track from Smallbrook Junction to steam railway for their services to run into Ryde St Johns station. Close Smallbrook Junction station, as interchange now possible at St Johns.

 

[Chris125]

New passing loop at Brading (perhaps 'Penryn style' to achieve DDA compliance without a large ramped footbridge or lifts). This would allow a regular interval half hourly service to operate. A simple single line would remain either side of the new loop to Ryde Pierhead and Shanklin, allowing track and signalling simplification through Ryde (with depot access retained) and at Sandown loop. Handover second track from Smallbrook Junction to steam railway for their services to run into Ryde St Johns station. Close Smallbrook Junction station, as interchange now possible at St Johns.

I'd agree those are the likeliest changes to the infrastructure by far - I'm a lot less convinced that they will move away from deep tube stock given the need to modify the depot, platform heights, and possibly track and structures if they weigh more. With the service still operating at or near 100% reliability replacing the fleet doesn't seem an urgent requirement anyway.