-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Had Spalding-March not closed
- Thread starter deltic08
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
It probably wouldn't have.
It probably was short sighted, but then again the traffic might not have been there.
It highlights the inherant problem of trying to trim the network according to this or that traffic flow, rather than thinking of the network as a stable, immutable thing, like we think of the road network. We can't possibly know what the traffic needs will be in 10 or twenty years time.
The classic example is the Settle Carlisle. At the time it was being fought over, it was needed to keep unfitted freight away from the WCML. Then it became a vital link carrying coal to West Yorkshire. Recently it had a connection installed to a quarry. If it had been closed at the end of the earlier flows, the later ones would have been prevented.
It probably was short sighted, but then again the traffic might not have been there.
It highlights the inherant problem of trying to trim the network according to this or that traffic flow, rather than thinking of the network as a stable, immutable thing, like we think of the road network. We can't possibly know what the traffic needs will be in 10 or twenty years time.
The classic example is the Settle Carlisle. At the time it was being fought over, it was needed to keep unfitted freight away from the WCML. Then it became a vital link carrying coal to West Yorkshire. Recently it had a connection installed to a quarry. If it had been closed at the end of the earlier flows, the later ones would have been prevented.
Aictos
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 10,403
I disagree, we have to consider that at the time there was a general decline in freight traffic in the area which led to the Spalding to March line being closed to all traffic back in 27th November 1982.
And on average there was 3 daily passenger services a day between Spalding and March so I'm not at all surprised the decision to close was taken as it was losing revenue.
However not all bad news as the the existing Cambridge service diverted to start and terminate at Peterborough instead with extra trains also being added to the timetable of the day.
Nowadays with the growth that the industry has encountered then while it would have been nice to reopen the section between March and Spalding, there are many reasons why it is no longer possible with one being HMP Whitemoor being built on the trackbed.
Dr Hoo
Established Member
The March-Spalding Line would be fine for traffic to and from East Anglia but a material amount now flows to or via London. For example London Gateway (rapidly growing, seeming partially at Felixstowe’s expense), steel from Scunthorpe via the Channel Tunnel and the Biggleswade/Bow building blocks.
Frankly no regular long and slow freight trains snaking across all ECML tracks on a single ladder at Peterborough are sustainable if extra fast paths are to be delivered. This is even more the case when the same ladder has to cope with quite a lot of passenger moves for the southbound Nottingham-Norwich service and many Thameslink ECS moves to the sidings.
So I think that Werrington had to be addressed anyway.
Frankly no regular long and slow freight trains snaking across all ECML tracks on a single ladder at Peterborough are sustainable if extra fast paths are to be delivered. This is even more the case when the same ladder has to cope with quite a lot of passenger moves for the southbound Nottingham-Norwich service and many Thameslink ECS moves to the sidings.
So I think that Werrington had to be addressed anyway.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
Freight from the Anglia ports to Yorkshire and the north-east could have used it instead of going via Peterborough and Werrington - but the cost of keeping March-Spalding open for all those years (and on into the future) might be more than that of Werrington.
Would be interesting to see how much capacity on the ECML would be released by March-Spalding reinstatement. I presume thst this was done as part of the options anaylsis thst resulted in the Werrington scheme, however.
Indeed, but if the March -Spalding had sill been here, freight trains from East Anglia would have have relieved pressure on the main line, and it would have taken a lot lngerto have to spend the money on Werrington.
On a quick glance at RTT, maybe 2/3 of the actual current commercial freight traffic also goes via March, but the number of trains involved is small.
The major user of Werrington-Spalding is actually the hourly 153, and getting that out of the way is a big plus.
The major user of Werrington-Spalding is actually the hourly 153, and getting that out of the way is a big plus.
Railwaysceptic
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Nov 2017
- Messages
- 1,736
Closing it was short sighted, Mothballing it but retaining the rights and the formation would not have been.
I have to laugh at the principle of a (possible) mistake being made nearly 4 decades ago as being ‘short sighted’. At what passing of time does something stop being short sighted and start being ‘vision’? Personally I think Brunel’s choice of gauge was terribly short sighted.
Perhaps you would like to predict the needs of the rail network in 2056, and then we can all have a debate then about whether it was right or wrong.
With hindsight It may have been a mistake to close it. It probably wasn’t. But then it may have been correct to build the Shaftholme flyover. It probably wasn’t.
Last edited:
Issue with any reinstatement would be the huge number of level crossings, it won’t come back for this reason as NR would never allow them, and alternatives would be very expensive.
It does seem to be a very British thing to pull up lines quickly and sell off the formation, almost that it seems a political act rather than a practical one. I know land values are high in cities but there are some incredibly daft planning decisions that have scuppered future reinstatements, some local authorities being worse than others for this.
It does seem to be a very British thing to pull up lines quickly and sell off the formation, almost that it seems a political act rather than a practical one. I know land values are high in cities but there are some incredibly daft planning decisions that have scuppered future reinstatements, some local authorities being worse than others for this.
It was obvious to those of us who used the line at the time that 2-track sections of the ECML, with a freight stopped in nearly every loop, and HSTs encouraging ever more passengers, would eventually become overloaded and would need quadrifying from Stoke tunnel to Doncaster or divert slower moving traffic somewhere. It was made even worse by taking out some of the Slow lines from Huntington to Peterborough during electrification.
Via Lincoln, Spalding and March would be one route for East Anglian bound freight traffic which has happened but cannot avoid the ECML completely now Spalding-March is closed. Very sad that management could not see beyond the £ signs yet railwaymen on the ground could see it.
By 2056 the earth will have overheated so much because those in power are so resistant to climate change needs that there will be more to worry about just existing than transport. Just thankful I won't be here, unless I live to be 110 years old, but my children and grandchildren will be unfortunately.
Last edited by a moderator:
ChiefPlanner
Established Member
Mentioned before , back in the late 1970's , early 1980's , BR was under considerable pressure to reduce costs , the 19thC coal flows from the Midlands / Yorkshire to feed the gas works , domestic grates etc of London - routed via Whitemoor and Temple Mills were in terminal decline , Felixstowe was a modest port .....not too difficult to re-route increasingly air braked trains via Peterborough and Ely.
Having said that , I had an enjoyable day not so long ago in examining the route - we surmised it was not capable of re-opening , but a new alignement from Kings Dyke , round the back of Peterborough and joining the "Joint Line" at Peakirk was sketched out and put up for consideration. Turned down in favour of the present plans.
Having said that , I had an enjoyable day not so long ago in examining the route - we surmised it was not capable of re-opening , but a new alignement from Kings Dyke , round the back of Peterborough and joining the "Joint Line" at Peakirk was sketched out and put up for consideration. Turned down in favour of the present plans.
How much extra traffic via the new alignment would be needed to justify reinstatement?
ChiefPlanner
Established Member
The concept was not costed - merely "considered" - all academic now anyway. (not difficult though , bar some adjacent wetlands) - had the attraction of being capable of built alone as a stand alone project, subject to TWA applications , and then joined up to the working railway.
Fascinating, very many thanks.
ChiefPlanner
Established Member
Part of the enjoyable work stream on the ATOC "Connecting Communties" report , we did a fair bit of field work with qualified engineers. We went back several times for certain projects , like Stratford - Honeybourne.
Skipton- Colne also , which we did not support !. Others do to this day.
Very interesting, many thanks. What's your view of the overall quality of the recommendations in Connecting Communities?
ChiefPlanner
Established Member
Put it this way , I assisted in the drafting of the report. (ATOC employee then) , we had a pretty rigorous assessment process , and as non "emotional" as possible. It was well received ,and created a large post bag to reply to - almost 100% positive.
Fascinating - I thought at the time it was a sound piece of work, and that it should have provided a useful shopping list of reopenings. Not too far dowb the list yet, sadly.
ChiefPlanner
Established Member
It certainly raised awareness , sadly not much delivered. There was a fair bit of follow up detailed meetings with local "interested" parties who wanted clarification on the detail. My particular favourite was Bramley - an extension of a London - Guildford service , but on 3d rail , and we know how the ORR loves that ..
I doubt if it will be revisited , maybe someone can have another go at it in future years. The key point is that it was "demand led"
Very interesting. I was idly looking at a map snd applying @Altnabreac 's famous guidelines, and Devizes popped up as one, and Street/Glastonbury from Yatton as another. I'm not from the west country and don't know the area, so this may all be bollocks, but the two seemed worthy of consideration and weren't in Connecting Communities.
ChiefPlanner
Established Member
We used special geographical mapping software to identify non rail connected communities above a population threshold. Those 2 communites clearly did not make the cut.
Another similar tool was to work out ,by political boundaries , rail journey rates (for interest almost) , unsurprisingly the lowest were the Cambrian Coast , Galloway and much of the Highlands......a reflection of low service levels and low population.
Very interesting, @ChiefPlanner - but why use data when you can use a 1947 rail atlas and some crayons....?
It just goes to show, that for all those prospective Governments who bang on about opening/reopening local railway lines at election time - they have a ready made blue print to get on and do it. The fact that they don't shows them to be talking out the side of their hats.
I don't buy all the arguments of "this line can't be re-opened because some of it has been built upon".
Some people seem to assume that a re-opened line has to follow the old alignment for 100% of the route.
Any re-opening would follow the original formation as far as possible, then follow a diversionary route(s) to get it to the destination required.
In the case of March to Spalding, a new line would skirt past the perimeter of HMP Whitemoor - not go through it on the original formation.
Some people seem to assume that a re-opened line has to follow the old alignment for 100% of the route.
Any re-opening would follow the original formation as far as possible, then follow a diversionary route(s) to get it to the destination required.
In the case of March to Spalding, a new line would skirt past the perimeter of HMP Whitemoor - not go through it on the original formation.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
The diversionary route in this case is through Peterborough and via the new diveunder to avoid conflict with the ECML.
tbtc
Veteran Member
Had Spalding - March survived... I'm not sure what passenger market there'd have been - Peterborough to Spalding/ Lincoln has gaps in its supposedly hourly service (and the DMUs aren't particularly long)... and Peterborough is clearly the big market in that neck of the woods... are there many people travelling from Lincolnshire to Norfolk?
Googling it, I found an option to change buses at Long Sutton, but looks like no direct bus link (which doesn't suggest there's a huge demand that rail is missing out on).
And would it be much faster for Spalding - March passengers (than a well timed connection at Peterborough)?
Is there really huge amounts of freight that go that way? I've had a look on RTT without much success (and, I mean "actual freight" not just "empty paths in the system just in case freight runs").
So it'd be a twenty mile line kept open for the sake of... a handful of freight trains and probably no viable passenger service?
If there are spare DMUs to run such a service then presumably these could be used on something like a regular Peterborough - Spalding - Boston (Skegness) service?
Unsurprisingly the two I've highlighted are also two of the most frequent suggestions for lines to re-open on here
True - that 1947 atlas has a lot to answer for on this Forum!
Googling it, I found an option to change buses at Long Sutton, but looks like no direct bus link (which doesn't suggest there's a huge demand that rail is missing out on).
And would it be much faster for Spalding - March passengers (than a well timed connection at Peterborough)?
Is there really huge amounts of freight that go that way? I've had a look on RTT without much success (and, I mean "actual freight" not just "empty paths in the system just in case freight runs").
So it'd be a twenty mile line kept open for the sake of... a handful of freight trains and probably no viable passenger service?
If there are spare DMUs to run such a service then presumably these could be used on something like a regular Peterborough - Spalding - Boston (Skegness) service?
Unsurprisingly the two I've highlighted are also two of the most frequent suggestions for lines to re-open on here
Very interesting, @ChiefPlanner - but why use data when you can use a 1947 rail atlas and some crayons....?
True - that 1947 atlas has a lot to answer for on this Forum!
ChiefPlanner
Established Member
Had Spalding - March survived... I'm not sure what passenger market there'd have been - Peterborough to Spalding/ Lincoln has gaps in its supposedly hourly service (and the DMUs aren't particularly long)... and Peterborough is clearly the big market in that neck of the woods... are there many people travelling from Lincolnshire to Norfolk?
Googling it, I found an option to change buses at Long Sutton, but looks like no direct bus link (which doesn't suggest there's a huge demand that rail is missing out on).
And would it be much faster for Spalding - March passengers (than a well timed connection at Peterborough)?
Is there really huge amounts of freight that go that way? I've had a look on RTT without much success (and, I mean "actual freight" not just "empty paths in the system just in case freight runs").
So it'd be a twenty mile line kept open for the sake of... a handful of freight trains and probably no viable passenger service?
If there are spare DMUs to run such a service then presumably these could be used on something like a regular Peterborough - Spalding - Boston (Skegness) service?
Unsurprisingly the two I've highlighted are also two of the most frequent suggestions for lines to re-open on here
True - that 1947 atlas has a lot to answer for on this Forum!
As I said , we had an objective view on a "new line" avoiding PBO , which skirted some "scabby" areas and only needed to demolish one "not high value" retail site. Of course , it was not taken further at the time. I think the loss of the original line (as previously mentioned) was inevitable , as there was no long term traffic basis.
Frankly most of the container traffic that is now on rail from Felixstowe , tends to be for the West Midlands /North West and Scotland , - which is really not ECML ideal for all sorts of reasons.
(though as a young manager , possibly on "orders" from interested controllers , when requesting additional Felixstowe to Trafford Park liners - they went via March / Aslockton and Woodhead ! - I did as I was told and despatched them as such. Kept them off the North London line , which was not that busy at that time of night. Anyway , all history now.
- Status