If Ripon reopened should it be single or double track ?

[Halifaxlad]

For those who don't know Harrogate - Ripon - Northallerton was submitted to the DFT's 'Restoring your railway fund' previously my thoughts were that if it was reinstated it should be single track although my opinion is now swaying towards double track.

What do you think, should it be single or double if it is reopened (either on the old alignment/new/mixture) ?

 

[HSTEd]

Well the only real traffic loading I can think of for a railway to Ripon is in the direction of Leeds.

So I would propose a single long siding from Harrogate.

 

[steamybrian]

Well the only real traffic loading I can think of for a railway to Ripon is in the direction of Leeds.

So I would propose a single long siding from Harrogate.

Initially single track (with passing loops) but built with space to add the second track later if traffic level increases to require second track.

 

[HSTEd]

Initially single track (with passing loops) but built with space to add the second track later if traffic level increases to require second track.

It's only 15km [via the old alignment], its unlikely to need a passing loop any time soon after reopening, and if it ever does need one, it is probably only ever going to need one.

It's extremely unlikely traffic density to Ripon will ever require a fully double track railway, especially as there are no freight loads and it would be a railway with entirely homogenous, relatively high performance, rolling stock.

 

[Halifaxlad]

That reminds me: also what do people think of it as a diversionary route ?

 

[steamybrian]

It's only 15km [via the old alignment], its unlikely to need a passing loop any time soon after reopening, and if it ever does need one, it is probably only ever going to need one.

It's extremely unlikely traffic density to Ripon will ever require a fully double track railway, especially as there are no freight loads and it would be a railway with entirely homogenous, relatively high performance, rolling stock.

In the past the route was used as a diversionary route so maybe (just maybe) a consideration for allowing for such capacity. The distance of 15km or 10 miles is a long single line section.

 

[zwk500]

That reminds me: also what do people think of it as a diversionary route ?

Pretty useless, as it requires pathing additional trains hambleton jns - Garforth-Leeds-Harrogate or York-Harrogate (Reverse)-Ripon.

There's a massive issue at Ripon about where the station goes to be useful to anybody, and how that matches up with running a through route. Is the RYR money for actually doing anything or just 'developing' the business case?

IF (big IF) it were to be built, I'd have single track Harrogate-Ripon-Thirsk Station (new route, not Northallerton), with double-lead junction and 1-train standage at the junctions to the existing network and a passing loop at Ripon. All structures would be built for double track eventually, should it need it.

 

[HST43257]

I know it’s not what is wanted on this thread, but I’m extremely sceptical about this proposal anyway. Can it really serve Ripon better than the high quality frequent no.36 bus to Harrogate and Leeds?

Build a line from Colton to Wetherby via Tadcaster and Boston Spa and a route from Micklefield and up towards Boston Spa and Wetherby. Then run next to the A1(M) via a HGT line interchange near Hopperton and also via Boroughbridge. Then a Ripon branch goes off and also a route to Northallerton. Also perhaps a route linking Leeds and Tadcaster, not sure. All double tracks, as freight could also use it.

2tph York to Ripon
2tph Leeds to Northallerton (part of an NPR service to Middlesbrough)
(Maybe) 2tph Leeds to York via Tadcaster

 

[HSTEd]

In the past the route was used as a diversionary route so maybe (just maybe) a consideration for allowing for such capacity.

Diversionary capability would be purchased at extreme cost, and be of marginal usefulness

The distance of 15km or 10 miles is a long single line section.

Trains also have far higher performance than they have ever had historically.

The world we live in now can tolerate 10 mile section lengths without dramatic issue, in this era of 100mph high perforamnce multiple units.

The real question, is what is our objective?
Is the objective to serve Ripon or complete some lofty "alternative routing"

 

[zwk500]

The real question, is what is our objective?
Is the objective to serve Ripon or complete some lofty "alternative routing"

I think, as with most of these suggestions, the objective is to build what once was, and so "right the wrong" of Beeching...

 

[Neptune]

I think, as with most of these suggestions, the objective is to build what once was, and so "right the wrong" of Beeching...

Quite.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Some interesting comments.

Pretty useless, as it requires pathing additional trains hambleton jns - Garforth-Leeds-Harrogate or York-Harrogate (Reverse)-Ripon.

You're assuming it would be from Leeds, but it could be from York if the rest of the line between Knaresborough and Cattal and Kirk Hammerton to Poppleton was doubled!

I think, as with most of these suggestions, the objective is to build what once was, and so "right the wrong" of Beeching...

They're always one and its certainly not true in the slightest!

I know some people are like that but I'm certainly more crayonista for new lines!

Just a pragmatist really!

 

[zwk500]

You're assuming it would be from Leeds, but it could be from York if the rest of the line between Knaresborough and Cattal and Kirk Hammerton to Poppleton was doubled!

I explicitly mentioned a York routing, but unless you build the third side of the triangle (which will ruin the business case as it's 2 junctions nobody will want to use on a regular basis) you have to reverse at Harrogate.

TOCs and FOCs aren't going to use it on a regular basis as it's a massive time penalty however you do it, and freight operators have plenty of room on the Slows of the Racing stretch. If it's during a planned block then LNER might run 1tph just to keep something in the timetable, but TPE will just cut short at York. Freight will either just not run or divert via Carlisle, as all the diversionary capacity will be snaffled by the addtiional LNER. The only time it would be used by FOCs or other TOCs would be in an emergency such as dewirement at Thirsk to clear the line, but I bet it will be no more than trains already departed and with crew who need to be the far side of the obstruction. All others will be cancelled.

They're always one and its certainly not true in the slightest!

I know some people are like that but I'm certainly more crayonista for new lines!

I didn't necessarily mean only your goal, but more the goal of the project generally.

Just a pragmatist really!

A pragmatist would not be suggesting going any further than Ripon. Extending a single line as far as Ripon, and building a station in a location accessible to the town without a car would be a reasonable project in the context of decarbonisation, etc. Give a clean, quick journey to Leeds with 1 change to York - very reasonable service for a relatively small town. Bus links would be a pragmatic response to connecting Ripon to Thirsk & Nothallerton. Far from ideal, but given the additional cost a reasonable spend of taxpayers money.

To go further North involves either demolition or a parkway-type station, and a much more complicated interaction with the ECML at either Thirsk or Northallerton. Not to mention trying to come up with services that can be operated without a total recast of the timetable and stuffing the new HS2 Edinburgh/Newcastle paths when they come along. All of these add a ridiculous amount of cost in comparison to the fairly simple extending existing services.