Improving or closing complete Basket Case Stations

[Bartsimho]

I was looking along the Nottingham to Lincoln line and most of the Stations along there are complete basket cases.

Carlton 27,610
Burton Joyce 6,146
Lowdham 30,880
Thurgarton 1,728
Bleasby 3,742
Fiskerton 16,198
Rolleston 2,578
Newark Castle 563,340
Collingham 87,440
Swinderby 10,862
Hykeham 102,206
Lincoln Central 1,500,924

I'd say any station with under 20,000 users in a year is a Complete Basket case even if it is unstaffed with automatic level crossing and the railway wouldn't lose much (actually probably gain more from speeding up Nottingham to Lincoln journeys). So surely there should be a plan to look at these stations and either try to guide more development around them or close them to save money from reduced cleaning and making the Nottingham to Lincoln journey more attractive rather than the current 50 minutes for a journey of 38 miles.

I'd say surely Burton Joyce, Thurgarton, Bleasby, Rolleston and Swinderby have to be looked at as they are just too rural to have any decent traffic. The only way these ever become even potentially useful is if loads of housing is built (which is needed anyway) and they become commuter places for Nottingham, Lincoln and Newark.

 

[The Planner]

If you are using 20000 as a threshold, based on 2018/19 numbers thats over 300 stations.

 

[telstarbox]

That end to end time seems to compare well with a road journey time of an hour from Google Maps.

Those numbers aren't massive but the train is already running betwen Nottingham - Newark - Lincoln, and every passenger is someone who isn't driving and adding to road congestion.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Aug 2023 ==

Out of interest why do these services interwork to Crewe - is it to rationalise movements across Derby station?

 

[SuspectUsual]

There's an element of chicken and egg with the service being pretty sparse for the stations with the lowest numbers

 

[yorksrob]

It seems like a Pandoras box I don't want to open.

 

[Neptune]

I was looking along the Nottingham to Lincoln line and most of the Stations along there are complete basket cases.

Carlton 27,610
Burton Joyce 6,146
Lowdham 30,880
Thurgarton 1,728
Bleasby 3,742
Fiskerton 16,198
Rolleston 2,578
Newark Castle 563,340
Collingham 87,440
Swinderby 10,862
Hykeham 102,206
Lincoln Central 1,500,924

I'd say any station with under 20,000 users in a year is a Complete Basket case even if it is unstaffed with automatic level crossing and the railway wouldn't lose much (actually probably gain more from speeding up Nottingham to Lincoln journeys). So surely there should be a plan to look at these stations and either try to guide more development around them or close them to save money from reduced cleaning and making the Nottingham to Lincoln journey more attractive rather than the current 50 minutes for a journey of 38 miles.

I'd say surely Burton Joyce, Thurgarton, Bleasby, Rolleston and Swinderby have to be looked at as they are just too rural to have any decent traffic. The only way these ever become even potentially useful is if loads of housing is built (which is needed anyway) and they become commuter places for Nottingham, Lincoln and Newark.

So by your reckoning nearly 12% of stations in the UK should close.

Can we see your workings of how much of this ‘not much lost’ to the railway will save or are you waving your finger in the air playing with a random figure?

 

[Bartsimho]

So by your reckoning nearly 12% of stations in the UK should close.

Can we see your workings of how much of this ‘not much lost’ to the railway will save or are you waving your finger in the air playing with a random figure?

I'm partly looking at the population centres they serve and how close the stations are in some places. Thurgarton is only 440 people large and there is only 1.8 miles to Bleasby station which serves 838 people. Fiskerton serves 1,201 people but is connected to Southwell (7,409 people) by bus routes while Rolleston is only 0.6 miles away on a parallel road and serves only 312 people. It would be better to extend buses from Fiskerton station to Rolleston so there is rail travel to Nottingham and Newark as well as the connection to Southwell.

Swinderby is 1 mile from the station which is in the middle of a field and the road connections mean the time on the train is uncompetitive to Lincoln.

There's an element of chicken and egg with the service being pretty sparse for the stations with the lowest numbers

I mean the population is also very sparse with the stations being far from the villages they serve.

Out of interest why do these services interwork to Crewe - is it to rationalise movements across Derby station?

The reason is Newark Flat Crossing of the East Coast Mainline so to provide better service between Nottingham and Newark without taking what could be an ECML path they terminate at Newark Castle

 

[zwk500]

I'd say any station with under 20,000 users in a year is a Complete Basket case even if it is unstaffed with automatic level crossing and the railway wouldn't lose much (actually probably gain more from speeding up Nottingham to Lincoln journeys).

The balance of how much you'd gain from speeding up journeys is not equal across all lines.

So surely there should be a plan to look at these stations and either try to guide more development around them or close them to save money from reduced cleaning and making the Nottingham to Lincoln journey more attractive rather than the current 50 minutes for a journey of 38 miles.

The problem is that at the moment the money spent on maintaining them really isn't noticeable, and the money needed to close them officially is high because it's a legal process and so you'd not see your money back for 20 years or more. However investing in them runs into the opposite problem, which is the potential revenue caps out unless there are serious changes to the areas population and travel habits and it's beyond the budget available to the railway to do anything about that.

The only way these ever become even potentially useful is if loads of housing is built (which is needed anyway) and they become commuter places for Nottingham, Lincoln and Newark.

I fully support building new towns around stations currently in the middle of nowhere. However the problem is you will need to give people reasons to live there besides a moderate train service (assuming the stations saw a 1tph all-day service minimum), and that involves much more connected planning and that means the state getting involved. The Tory party is inherently opposed to that level of state intervention unless they believe it is in their electoral interests, and I'm afraid to say that building 3 new towns in Lincolnshire would certainly not be in the Torie's electoral interests at this moment in time.

 

[RobShipway]

I was looking along the Nottingham to Lincoln line and most of the Stations along there are complete basket cases.

Carlton 27,610
Burton Joyce 6,146
Lowdham 30,880
Thurgarton 1,728
Bleasby 3,742
Fiskerton 16,198
Rolleston 2,578
Newark Castle 563,340
Collingham 87,440
Swinderby 10,862
Hykeham 102,206
Lincoln Central 1,500,924

I'd say any station with under 20,000 users in a year is a Complete Basket case even if it is unstaffed with automatic level crossing and the railway wouldn't lose much (actually probably gain more from speeding up Nottingham to Lincoln journeys). So surely there should be a plan to look at these stations and either try to guide more development around them or close them to save money from reduced cleaning and making the Nottingham to Lincoln journey more attractive rather than the current 50 minutes for a journey of 38 miles.

I'd say surely Burton Joyce, Thurgarton, Bleasby, Rolleston and Swinderby have to be looked at as they are just too rural to have any decent traffic. The only way these ever become even potentially useful is if loads of housing is built (which is needed anyway) and they become commuter places for Nottingham, Lincoln and Newark.

If anything more stations should be built, rather than closed to get more people off the roads and we should also have tram systems put back into place in many cities and towns. Unfortunately, given the funds that the tory party says hat we have as a nation in the bank, that is never going to happen, even though we need to cut down on pollution so that the next generations have a world to live in.

If we followed your example, then there would be more station closures than the Beeching cuts of the late 1960's to early 1970's.

I do though find it funny that you have a place like Bleasby that has a population 3,742 or Rolleston with 2,578, yet somewhere like Peacehaven in East Sussex which has a population of 15,707 at the last census, has no station what so ever and certainly pre - covid was seeing regular traffic jams on the A259 into Brighton through Saltdean and Rottingdean. I believe that there is many towns like Peacehaven, many of whom are nearer to the national railway lines, that also do not have a station and are relying on diesel powered bus services. Yes, possible some of those diesel powered buses could be changed over to use hydrotreated vegetable oil as Chiltern has done with the class 68 locomotives that it uses. But I do not see that happening with any of the bus companies, the only changes are with using electric buses in Cities and large towns.

Before any asks, no I am not a member of the Green Party, but I do think that the Government should be providing money a.s.a.p for conversion of both diesel or petrol engine vehicles, to help to be making the pollution a lot less.

 

[yorksrob]

If anything more stations should be built, rather than closed to get more people off the roads and we should also have tram systems put back into place in many cities and towns. Unfortunately, given the funds that the tory party says hat we have as a nation in the bank, that is never going to happen, even though we need to cut down on pollution so that the next generations have a world to live in.

If we followed your example, then there would be more station closures than the Beeching cuts of the late 1960's to early 1970's.

I do though find it funny that you have a place like Bleasby that has a population 3,742 or Rolleston with 2,578, yet somewhere like Peacehaven in East Sussex which has a population of 15,707 at the last census, has no station what so ever and certainly pre - covid was seeing regular traffic jams on the A259 into Brighton through Saltdean and Rottingdean. I believe that there is many towns like Peacehaven, many of whom are nearer to the national railway lines, that also do not have a station and are relying on diesel powered bus services. Yes, possible some of those diesel powered buses could be changed over to use hydrotreated vegetable oil as Chiltern has done with the class 68 locomotives that it uses. But I do not see that happening with any of the bus companies, the only changes are with using electric buses in Cities and large towns.

Before any asks, no I am not a member of the Green Party, but I do think that the Government should be providing money a.s.a.p for conversion of both diesel or petrol engine vehicles, to help to be making the pollution a lot less.

The Johnson Government's new stations fund was a good attempt at addressing this problem. Ideally what was needed as well was an ongoing fund together with a concerted effort to bring the cost of such stations down (for example, does every new station really need a car park the size of two football pitches ?).

 

[stuu]

Never been there but Burton Joyce looks oddly low, it seems to be a fair sized village just outside a major city, so only getting ~20 people per day is surprising. Is it part of a Nottingham stations ticket area or something else, so not all users are counted?

 

[mike57]

I dont regard a station with 20000 users a year on an existing line which is unstaffed as a basket case. Closing them would save very little money, and cut a few more people off from access to the railway. Yes each of these stations on their own makes a very small contribution to rail useage, but the drip drip drip over time means more people abandon railways for other transport, and in rural areas this is likely to be private cars.

In general these station are served by local services, so saving one stop isn't going to make a huge difference to end to end time.

By setting the bar at 20000 complete routes would be closed e.g. most of the far North line.

Politically no government would allow a policy such as this to proceed, it would be (quite rightly) presented in the press as Beeching Mk2.

Maybe a different approach would be to identify how many private car journeys start from the area of the station, and how many of those would be practical by rail, and then look at what is stopping people from using rail on journeys where its practical.

50 minutes for 38 miles is ~45mph average speed. That is typical of 'branch line' rail routes in rural areas. Road journeys will not be much if any quicker. Averaging 45mph on typical A & B roads away from trunk routes is pretty good. Max speed on the road is 60mph in most cases, with streches considerably lower, and slower vehicles impedeing progress.

In terms of improving the stations it would be interesting to find out why people dont use rail for journeys by rail where they could. I suspect the station would be low down the list, as long as there is a dry waiting area and a working PIS then I dont think any further improvements would get people out of cars and onto trains. I live in the village with a station which would be culled by the OPs cut, our village is about 700, with another 300 in the almost adjoining village. Based on local conversations the overly complex ticketing puts new users off, we now have an hourly service each way which for our sort of route is as good as its ever going to get. Our route has seen steadily increasing usage of the smaller stations apart from the covid dip. The Yorkshire Coast Community Rail Partnership have done a lot to promote the use.

 

[Neptune]

I dont regard a station with 20000 users a year on an existing line which is unstaffed as a basket case. Closing them would save very little money, and cut a few more people off from access to the railway. Yes each of these stations on their own makes a very small contribution to rail useage, but the drip drip drip over time means more people abandon railways for other transport, and in rural areas this is likely to be private cars.

In general these station are served by local services, so saving one stop isn't going to make a huge difference to end to end time.

By setting the bar at 20000 complete routes would be closed e.g. most of the far North line.

Politically no government would allow a policy such as this to proceed, it would be (quite rightly) presented in the press as Beeching Mk2.

Maybe a different approach would be to identify how many private car journeys start from the area of the station, and how many of those would be practical by rail, and then look at what is stopping people from using rail on journeys where its practical.

50 minutes for 38 miles is ~45mph average speed. That is typical of 'branch line' rail routes in rural areas. Road journeys will not be much if any quicker. Averaging 45mph on typical A & B roads away from trunk routes is pretty good. Max speed on the road is 60mph in most cases, with streches considerably lower, and slower vehicles impedeing progress.

In terms of improving the stations it would be interesting to find out why people dont use rail for journeys by rail where they could. I suspect the station would be low down the list, as long as there is a dry waiting area and a working PIS then I dont think any further improvements would get people out of cars and onto trains. I live in the village with a station which would be culled by the OPs cut, our village is about 700, with another 300 in the almost adjoining village. Based on local conversations the overly complex ticketing puts new users off, we now have an hourly service each way which for our sort of route is as good as its ever going to get. Our route has seen steadily increasing usage of the smaller stations apart from the covid dip. The Yorkshire Coast Community Rail Partnership have done a lot to promote the use.

I don’t think the OP really understands the impact closing stations with footfall of less than 20000 would have. They haven’t acknowledged the impact of closing 12% of the stations in the UK.

It’s 55 passengers a day on average for a footfall of 20000 but that’s still 55 pax per day most likely being lost to road transport. Yes that’s the top end of what the OP is suggesting but the complete effect of this is far reaching and for costs saved (minimal against farebox lost to other transport) is it worth it? The costs of these station closures and the cost of the legal challenges alone will take a lifetime to claw back for a start.

Would the OP please address this with their costings that I’m hopeful they’ve obtained justifies this desire to close so many stations? This desire reaches far further than the small East Midlands area that the OP is focussing on and am intrigued to see how this idea is justified.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There certainly are some basket case stations, but what can change this is building around them. Any such basket case stations near major built up areas where there's decent employment should be considered for an "eco village" centred on the station. Kempston Hardwick would be perfect for this (if they'd just decide what the East West Rail station plan is), though unrelated housing development nearby now means it's not quite the basket case it was anyway.

The Marston Vale as a whole could be a series of ecovillages of the sort of size of Woburn Sands, serving employment in Milton Keynes and Bedford.

 

[zwk500]

There are some stations that are in very close proximity to each other or on routes with major intercity traffic or large volumes of mixed traffic that are a barrier to the wider network, but tbh anything off the large quad-track networks and more than about 5 minutes ride from the next station should just be earmarked for a 10K town.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There are some stations that are in very close proximity to each other or on routes with major intercity traffic or large volumes of mixed traffic that are a barrier to the wider network, but tbh anything off the large quad-track networks and more than about 5 minutes ride from the next station should just be earmarked for a 10K town.

I remain astonished that Cheddington hasn't been the centre of an eco-town given the massive housing demand in the South East. 2tph to London on a mainline is very attractive, they'd sell like hotcakes. Arguably makes more sense than bolting onto Aylesbury.

 

[zwk500]

I remain astonished that Cheddington hasn't been the centre of an eco-town given the massive housing demand in the South East. 2tph to London on a mainline is very attractive, they'd sell like hotcakes.

Yes, Cheddington is one of those 'either close it properly or build a town around it' stations. I guess the neighbours of the few farm cottages around there may be quite vocal in the planning permission stage?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, Cheddington is one of those 'either close it properly or build a town around it' stations. I guess the neighbours of the few farm cottages around there may be quite vocal in the planning permission stage?

Interestingly it's just had its service increased from 1 to 2tph, presumably to make the clockface timetable and associated pathing neater (the stoppers are perfectly every half hour).

Expanding Tring might be another option, but the station is well used as a parkway type station anyway, and the area around it is both awkward in terms of how hilly it is and I think an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, whereas Cheddington is just in the middle of not particularly interesting flat fields, no different to the areas being developed to the south of Bletchley.

 

[zwk500]

Interestingly it's just had its service increased from 1 to 2tph, presumably to make the clockface timetable and associated pathing neater (the stoppers are perfectly every half hour).

Expanding Tring might be another option, but the station is well used as a parkway type station anyway, and the area around it is both awkward in terms of how hilly it is and I think an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, whereas Cheddington is just in the middle of not particularly interesting flat fields, no different to the areas being developed to the south of Bletchley.

Tring I'd do infill development, but it wouldn't necessarily need to be a 'new town' in the way the Cheddington would. But you can easily build a 10k sustainable town around Cheddington station.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Tring I'd do infill development, but it wouldn't necessarily need to be a 'new town' in the way the Cheddington would. But you can easily build a 10k sustainable town around Cheddington station.

Agreed. A proper eco town with excellent cycling facilities and a town centre around the station would be best, with the car second (though you couldn't really go car free due to the poor non-London public transport). I might even consider moving there!

 

[Bartsimho]

I'd used 20,000 as a benchmark to look at a station to then consider it's characteristics and whether it needs increased service patterns, new development, if it's too close to another station or if it needs to be closed. Of course many you would say are instantly not in a place to close. I just set 20,000 as a benchmark to start looking at them.

On Nottingham to Lincoln I would do this:
Carlton - Leave alone, lots of passengers and housing already built
Burton Joyce - Build more housing as it's just outside Nottingham
Lowdham - Build more housing as it's the same as Burton Joyce, also have a large car park as it's on the A6097
Thurgarton - Close and direct traffic to Bleasby as it's very close and Bleasby already has more passengers
Bleasby - Build housing and create a parallel road from Thurgarton to make the new transfer easy
Fiskerton - Build Housing as it's already the rail station for Southwell due to the busses
Rolleston - Close as it's less than a mile from Fiskerton which already has the busses from Southwell but also build houses to extend those busses to Fiskerton to serve
Newark Castle - Keep Obviously, Look to potentially Build housing to the North West but it is on an island in the Trent so there might be too much of a flood risk.
Collingham - Build housing to the South and East as the entire village is to the North West of the Station.
Swinderby - Close, It's too far from the village itself and not used as a railhead as it's quicker to drive to Lincoln, Hykeham or Collingham from the other small villages
Hykeham - Continue it's current development program but look to add housing to the immediate station area.

I probably worded by original post poorly but I was more in the idea of look at the individual situation for stations but 20,000 people and see what can be done to increase this or decide that the station is not worth it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think one key thing you need if you are going to close them is coordination of bus services so a replacement is actually provided. Leaving it to commercial bus operators is unlikely to end well unless an established service already exists.

Thus this sort of thing could be considered in London (but is unlikely to be sensible), Merseyside (same) or Greater Manchester*, all three having or being about to have bus regulation, but less so random rural areas with no co-ordination between rail and bus.

* There are some in GM that might make sense, I'm thinking here of the quieter stations on the Liverpool-Manchester CLC line which really do get in the way, but if the line is to long-term be dedicated to local services, with Northern Powerhouse Rail on the Fiddlers Ferry route providing the fast Liverpool-Warrington-Manchester service, we may want to keep them and develop immediately around them. Chassen Road for instance is a near copy of Aughton Park demographically, and while the latter isn't busy it's hardly a basket case - but if the line is to remain primarily a long distance route then closure may be sensible as it's not that far from other stations. Similarly one could envisage the area around Trafford/Humphrey Park being redeveloped to high density flats in the manner of much of Salford, Ardwick etc, but otherwise they're very much in the way and poorly used.

 

[RobShipway]

I'd used 20,000 as a benchmark to look at a station to then consider it's characteristics and whether it needs increased service patterns, new development, if it's too close to another station or if it needs to be closed. Of course many you would say are instantly not in a place to close. I just set 20,000 as a benchmark to start looking at them.

On Nottingham to Lincoln I would do this:
Carlton - Leave alone, lots of passengers and housing already built
Burton Joyce - Build more housing as it's just outside Nottingham
Lowdham - Build more housing as it's the same as Burton Joyce, also have a large car park as it's on the A6097
Thurgarton - Close and direct traffic to Bleasby as it's very close and Bleasby already has more passengers
Bleasby - Build housing and create a parallel road from Thurgarton to make the new transfer easy
Fiskerton - Build Housing as it's already the rail station for Southwell due to the busses
Rolleston - Close as it's less than a mile from Fiskerton which already has the busses from Southwell but also build houses to extend those busses to Fiskerton to serve
Newark Castle - Keep Obviously, Look to potentially Build housing to the North West but it is on an island in the Trent so there might be too much of a flood risk.
Collingham - Build housing to the South and East as the entire village is to the North West of the Station.
Swinderby - Close, It's too far from the village itself and not used as a railhead as it's quicker to drive to Lincoln, Hykeham or Collingham from the other small villages
Hykeham - Continue it's current development program but look to add housing to the immediate station area.

I probably worded by original post poorly but I was more in the idea of look at the individual situation for stations but 20,000 people and see what can be done to increase this or decide that the station is not worth it.

But using that benchmark, would actually as stated before close over 300 stations and closing many railway lines around the UK, which would end up being Beeching Mk2.

I believe that it would certainly end up closing a line such as Seaford to Brighton which is a line close to where I live in East Sussex. Yes, there is bus services that can take people into Brighton, but there is no local bus services from Seaford that can take people to Lewes and station afterwards to Brighton. Using your examples, you certainly probably would be closing Bishopstone, even though it has houses built around and even more houses over the over side of the A259. Yet, if the station is closed then those that live in Bishopstone that say work in Lewes, would have to travel by bus into Brighton and then get a bus to Lewes, which would mean that they have at least twice the journey time to work. Otherwise, they would probably if their place of work has parking just travel to Lewes by car.

I think one key thing you need if you are going to close them is coordination of bus services so a replacement is actually provided. Leaving it to commercial bus operators is unlikely to end well unless an established service already exists.

Thus this sort of thing could be considered in London (but is unlikely to be sensible), Merseyside (same) or Greater Manchester*, all three having or being about to have bus regulation, but less so random rural areas with no co-ordination between rail and bus.

* There are some in GM that might make sense, I'm thinking here of the quieter stations on the Liverpool-Manchester CLC line which really do get in the way, but if the line is to long-term be dedicated to local services, with Northern Powerhouse Rail on the Fiddlers Ferry route providing the fast Liverpool-Warrington-Manchester service, we may want to keep them and develop immediately around them. Chassen Road for instance is a near copy of Aughton Park demographically, and while the latter isn't busy it's hardly a basket case - but if the line is to remain primarily a long distance route then closure may be sensible as it's not that far from other stations. Similarly one could envisage the area around Trafford/Humphrey Park being redeveloped to high density flats in the manner of much of Salford, Ardwick etc, but otherwise they're very much in the way and poorly used.

If some places around Manchester you have buses, trains and trams travelling to the same places then it makes sense. But if you have a large amount of people that travel on a regular basis from those areas to say Liverpool without having to make any change or very few changes of transport, then all you would be doing is making their journey longer and places more cars on the road.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If some places around Manchester you have buses, trains and trams travelling to the same places then it makes sense. But if you have a large amount of people that travel on a regular basis from those areas to say Liverpool without having to make any change or very few changes of transport, then all you would be doing is making their journey longer and places more cars on the road.

With the CLC we just need to decide what it is - is it a mainline, in which case Sankey for Penketh, Padgate, Glazebrook*, Chassen Road, Humphrey Park and Trafford Park stations should probably close, or is it a local line which should be electrified and run like Merseyrail with 4 EMUs an hour all calling all stations primarily providing for local needs. If Northern Powerhouse Rail is to be built on the Fiddlers Ferry line the latter seems of more favour, but if it isn't it's probably needed as a mainline.

The reason I mentioned regulated buses was that this makes it more economic to have e.g. an Urmston local circular bus service which doesn't need to wash its own face but can be considered to be paid for from the train fares it might generate by way of quality connections. That concept (see also Skelmersdale) doesn't work well in a commercial environment.

* Though I've long thought Glazebrook could viably be the centre of an eco-village. Would need the green belt rules to change though.

 

[cactustwirly]

I was looking along the Nottingham to Lincoln line and most of the Stations along there are complete basket cases.

Carlton 27,610
Burton Joyce 6,146
Lowdham 30,880
Thurgarton 1,728
Bleasby 3,742
Fiskerton 16,198
Rolleston 2,578
Newark Castle 563,340
Collingham 87,440
Swinderby 10,862
Hykeham 102,206
Lincoln Central 1,500,924

I'd say any station with under 20,000 users in a year is a Complete Basket case even if it is unstaffed with automatic level crossing and the railway wouldn't lose much (actually probably gain more from speeding up Nottingham to Lincoln journeys). So surely there should be a plan to look at these stations and either try to guide more development around them or close them to save money from reduced cleaning and making the Nottingham to Lincoln journey more attractive rather than the current 50 minutes for a journey of 38 miles.

I'd say surely Burton Joyce, Thurgarton, Bleasby, Rolleston and Swinderby have to be looked at as they are just too rural to have any decent traffic. The only way these ever become even potentially useful is if loads of housing is built (which is needed anyway) and they become commuter places for Nottingham, Lincoln and Newark.

The Lincoln train is semi fast anyway, the Newark Castle stopper stops at the smaller stations

 

[BJames]

The Lincoln train is semi fast anyway, the Newark Castle stopper stops at the smaller stations

Indeed - can be pretty fast as it is sometimes first stop Newark.

Never been there but Burton Joyce looks oddly low, it seems to be a fair sized village just outside a major city, so only getting ~20 people per day is surprising. Is it part of a Nottingham stations ticket area or something else, so not all users are counted?

Agreed although NCT Route 26 runs right to the city centre from Burton Joyce (as well as from Lowdham) - perhaps this is the route people using public transport take instead?

 

[yorksrob]

With the CLC we just need to decide what it is - is it a mainline, in which case Sankey for Penketh, Padgate, Glazebrook*, Chassen Road, Humphrey Park and Trafford Park stations should probably close, or is it a local line which should be electrified and run like Merseyrail with 4 EMUs an hour all calling all stations primarily providing for local needs. If Northern Powerhouse Rail is to be built on the Fiddlers Ferry line the latter seems of more favour, but if it isn't it's probably needed as a mainline.

Ideally it would be classed as a regional main line with two stoppers and two fast/semi fasts, although this would require some investment in loops.

 

[zwk500]

Ideally it would be classed as a regional main line with two stoppers and two fast/semi fasts, although this would require some investment in loops.

And at Castlefield...

 

[yorksrob]

And at Castlefield...

Yes, although you could have a "budget" solution for Castlefield by widening to the bay platform at Oxford Road, if need be.

 

[RobShipway]

With the CLC we just need to decide what it is - is it a mainline, in which case Sankey for Penketh, Padgate, Glazebrook*, Chassen Road, Humphrey Park and Trafford Park stations should probably close, or is it a local line which should be electrified and run like Merseyrail with 4 EMUs an hour all calling all stations primarily providing for local needs. If Northern Powerhouse Rail is to be built on the Fiddlers Ferry line the latter seems of more favour, but if it isn't it's probably needed as a mainline.

The reason I mentioned regulated buses was that this makes it more economic to have e.g. an Urmston local circular bus service which doesn't need to wash its own face but can be considered to be paid for from the train fares it might generate by way of quality connections. That concept (see also Skelmersdale) doesn't work well in a commercial environment.

* Though I've long thought Glazebrook could viably be the centre of an eco-village. Would need the green belt rules to change though.

Ideally it would be classed as a regional main line with two stoppers and two fast/semi fasts, although this would require some investment in loops.

And at Castlefield...

Could it not be added as a Metrolink service working as a Tram-Train service, such as going to be done with using the TFW Class 398's?