New Lines needed

[deltic08]

Apologies - my knowledge of river basins is lacking. I suppose this is more accurately the Craven Valley ?

I knew exactly what you meant. Only the pedants on this forum didn't.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

PS i don't wish to reopen debate on the Harrogate - Northallerton line as my views are clear other than to say:

1) Use as a diversionary route is not a firm foundation for a business case. Whilst beloved by spotters the TOC's view them somewhat differently
2) The use of freight flows as a foundation for this business case is not sound. Coal traffic has fallen off a cliff, Teesside steel is all but gone, Pot Ash mining is falling off and Teesport is quiet.
3) Opening to Ripon is about the only part that even approaches commercial sense and that is shaky and seems to rely on fudging the capital costs which themselves seem ambitious to say the least.

Confused by your reference to "spotters". What are spotters? Please explain.

Reinstating through Ripon does not stand alone on it being a diversion route but it will be used at times of ECML closure. That must be considered in any business case.

There has been no fudging in estimating construction costs. Arup costs are very transparent in their 2006 Report almost yard by yard. Scaling up 2006 costs to to-day would be £50-£60m for Harrogate-Ripon.

An interesting statistic. Taking Beechings claimed annual losses for the whole Ripon line at 1966 costs for each of the last 49 years scaled up for inflation would only have cost a total of £4m in subsidy, much much less than the cost of £172m at 2015 costs for reinstatement.

 

[HSTEd]

It would have to be considered in the business case but it has almost zero value as a diversion route.
Diversion routes generally aren't worth it. Cheaper to bustitute.

 

[DarloRich]

Spotters = Train Spotters

Extending beyond Ripon doesn't stand. Extending to Ripon barely does and only does on the basis of commuting.

Price wise the estimates, even scaled to 2015 prices are low. Very low. The documentation i have seen seems to suggest that the costs would be born by a third party which weighs heavily on the positive BCR. I doubt they would be born by anyone other than central government.

After our last discussion i went back to the source documents to try and find a way to support them. I want to for all kinds of reasons, especially local pride/interest, but i cant.

 

[muddythefish]

Your use of the word "need" is perhaps a little loose.

Just how much subsidy do you think the public should pay through their taxes to fund these "needed" links?

I object to my takes being used to subsidise company car drivers and a host of other things, but there you go.

One man's tax break is another man's tax burden.

Which "new" rail links are needed ? Well, where do you start, but thanks to Beeching travelling east-west in this country is a real problem, particularly in the Midlands, so I would suggest a new line from Bedford to Cambridge and a reopened/newbuild line from Peterborough to Northampton and Oxford.

Both cross areas of huge projected population growth and where there is no alternative to the car.

In the west, whole swathes of Dorset and Somerset were cut adrift by Beeching. A new line that enabled people to get to work in Bournemouth, Bath and Bristol, the main centres of employment, from towns formerly linked by the old S & D would be useful.

 

[JohnB57]

I knew exactly what you meant. Only the pedants on this forum didn't.

..............


Confused by your reference to "spotters". What are spotters? Please explain.

Hmmm...

Pot, kettle, black?

 

[deltic08]

i just don't agree it is worth missing out York or that any proposed time savings are actually worth the cost

I just wish certain posters on this forum would do a little research, as I try to do, before spouting out drivel.

Two Liverpool-Newcastle (now extended to Edinburgh) trains an hour are in the trans-Pennine post electrification draft timetable. As Leeds-Micklefield Junction is almost at capacity and recognised in the 2009 RUS Report as such, diverting one or both away from this route would seem logical as well as necessary if an alternate route is available.

DOR was receptive to extending some KX-Leeds services to Newcastle or Edinburgh via Harrogate if Harrogate-Ripon-Northallerton ever reopened. Not because they wanted to travel this way but because Leeds-York is optimised already.

You can disagree all you like until you are blue, these are the facts why York cannot be used for certain capacity reasons.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Spotters = Train Spotters

Extending beyond Ripon doesn't stand. Extending to Ripon barely does and only does on the basis of commuting.

Price wise the estimates, even scaled to 2015 prices are low. Very low. The documentation i have seen seems to suggest that the costs would be born by a third party which weighs heavily on the positive BCR. I doubt they would be born by anyone other than central government.

After our last discussion i went back to the source documents to try and find a way to support them. I want to for all kinds of reasons, especially local pride/interest, but i cant.

What have trainspotters to do with anything? Certainly not in any way to do with reinstatements I am connected with.

Don't think I will lose any sleep or the campaign will fail because you don't support reinstatement of my line or any other from your tone.

Where is your evidence that Ripon-Northallerton doesn't stand? I haven't any that is does. BCR for Ripon-Harrogate was only 1.3 in 2006 and was not taken forward. BCR for Bedale bypass was 1.7 in 2012 and went ahead costing £43m for less than two miles. I would like to see traffic numbers after opening as the road from Northallerton to upper Wensleydale is a very minor A road. That is why another study for the whole rail route is needed and why I am raising funds for one.

Borders line reinstatement cost £8-£11m/mile according to who you believe. Subtract the cost of 5 intermediate stations, 6 high speed turnouts and 9 miles of double track with full signalling and that puts Ripon-Harrogate between£45m and £55m.

Three recent developments will lift BCR.
1. A change in BC analysis methodology.
2. Introduction of two additional Leeds-Harrogate trains per hour in 2017.
3. Recommendation to electrify Leeds-Harrogate-York in CP6.

I don't know what you have been reading but there has never been any third party involvement in funding construction in my campaign and Arup report. Please enlighten me.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It would have to be considered in the business case but it has almost zero value as a diversion route.
Diversion routes generally aren't worth it. Cheaper to bustitute.

Bustitution is not cheaper in an emergency situation. A 2 hour delay on the ECML between York and Northallerton costs Network Rail £1m and assuming buses can be procured at short notice of an hour and in sufficient quantities including drivers.

Would you accept emergency bustitution between York and Darlington early morning/late at night adding say 3 hours to your journey when your train could be diverted another way adding only 30 minutes to your journey? I certainly wouldn't.

Freight cannot be bustituted at short notice in an emergency.

 

[The Planner]

But HSTEd is correct, it has minimal impact to a business case as you cannot put a value on it as the best you can assume is x amounts of disruption.

 

[deltic08]

I'm scratching my head as to why any TOC with a keen eye on their revenue flows (which means all of them) would be interested in bypassing such an important location as York. As well as being a popular destination in its' own right for both residents, with a population of around 200,000 and a notable university, and visitors, the station itself is also an important interchange.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I agree entirely. I can actually see a good deal of merit in reconnecting Ripon to the national network as the terminus of a commuter service from Leeds, but as a through route to the ECML it makes no sense to me.

As far as I know, the majority of freight traffic on the Darlington - York stretch of the ECML is coal and biomass mainly between Tyne Dock and Drax power station. Attempting to funnel this, and any other, traffic through the congested Whitehall Junction and possibly Leeds itself, and quite possibly increasing the length of journey that the trains travel, would seem to help no-one. Also isn't York's Holgate sidings and North Yard used as a regular staging and crew changeover point for Freightliner Heavy Haul coal trains?

Be careful not to get splinters in your fingers!! See my reply to Darlorich on diverting away from York and there are two Universities in York.

Again do your research. Your assumption of freight traffic travelling via Whitehall Junction is incorrect. Nobody connected with me is planning to route freight this way. Freight will be diverted from Harrogate via Wetherby, Tadcaster to Church Fenton and then to Doncaster via Gasgoigne Wood (coal and biomass MGR), Pontefract and a reinstated chord at South Elmsall onto the Leeds-Doncaster line then Lincoln to Peterborough.

25 ECML daytime freights will have to divert between Northallerton and Doncaster to allow for expected passenger growth post introduction of class 800 according to Network Rail

 

[HSTEd]

Bustitution is not cheaper in an emergency situation. A 2 hour delay on the ECML between York and Northallerton costs Network Rail £1m and assuming buses can be procured at short notice of an hour and in sufficient quantities including drivers.

Blockages that last 2 hours between York and Northallerton are rather rare however - especially considering you would have to block all four lines for it to be a major issue.

Would you accept emergency bustitution between York and Darlington early morning/late at night adding say 3 hours to your journey when your train could be diverted another way adding only 30 minutes to your journey? I certainly wouldn't.

Would you accept your fares being higher all the time to pay for all the route knowledge and the like that has to be maintained in perpetuity for this very rare blockage situation? (I wouldn't know - as I haven't actually travelled a significant distance on a ticket in a long time, I never use my pass allotment completely).

Freight cannot be bustituted at short notice in an emergency.

But most rail freight doesn't really care if it arrives 3 or 4 hours late.

 

[Daz28]

HS1 - HS2 connection as we knew it has been binned.

I think they would be better constructing one from Old Oak to Stratford International anyway.

I would like to see a junction from HS1 near Ebbsfleet, a new line from there to Gatwick, on to Heathrow, then optionally a link up to HS2. This would open up a number of possible routes including Kent to Heathrow, Kent to the North avoiding London, And a much needed Gatwick to Heathrow link. This could significantly reduce demand on the M25, plus with some strategically placed interchanges with existing lines open up a wealth of possible journeys.

 

[deltic]

I am surprised the Isle of Wight tunnel has not surfaced on this thread - given tlhe relatively low cost and the high volume of traffic

 

[Rational Plan]

Hmm long term, assuming that population figures continue on trend then we will be seeing another 5 million plus in London and the SE in the next twenty plus years.

It kind of suggests that the easy options to expand will be running out.

Assuming the money can be found (ha ha), then at least crossrail 2 and 3. Then new express lines/tunnels running for 30 to 60 miles out of London along the main lines.

For example for the Great Western from Old Oak common to just east of Reading (mostly following the M4).

With the SW mainline from at least Clapham Junction to Woking or Basingstoke.

These sorts of lines not only provide more capacity into London but if built to high enough speed could push london's commuter belt further out. In such cases the figures may stack up for a new line to extend further out for example a new high speed line for the SW could extend as far as Winchester or Southampton with a Spur to Salisbury. The effects of knocking half an hour off commute times from marginal commuter towns could transform them.

The trade off would be the acceptance of massive house building programmes to absorb the new commuters and to provide justification for the new high speed routes.

The potential for large new housing areas are mainly to North and the West of London.

Away from London I'd suggest any scheme that would reduce travel times to major metropolitan areas or make new connections between lines.

For example a new line between Northampton and some where South of Leicester would allow a new express service between all the M1 towns and connect to HS2 at Totton.

 

[HSTEd]

If we are going to get that many more people we need a second city of ten million built somewhere cheap.

Say around King's Lynn where there aren't many NIMBYs around.

 

[najaB]

If we are going to get that many more people we need a second city of ten million built somewhere cheap.

Could we have two million of them somewhere around Stirling, please?

 

[muddythefish]

Hmm long term, assuming that population figures continue on trend then we will be seeing another 5 million plus in London and the SE in the next twenty plus years.

Sooner than that. The UK population is forecast to hit 70 million by 2027.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34666382

So how are all these people going to get around? Road congestion is going to get worse but national and local govt at last seems to understand that widespread road building is no longer acceptable environmentally and solves nothing.

The answer is new and reopened railway lines. People on here denigrating some of the ideas put forward may have to think again.

 

[HSTEd]

That sort of population growth is only practical with a newbuild city.

Which can be built to be British Manhattan.

 

[A0]

I object to my takes being used to subsidise company car drivers and a host of other things, but there you go.

One man's tax break is another man's tax burden.

Will you stop peddling that lie - I've pointed out to you on several previous occasions that for 'perk' company car users (i.e. for those who do not need a car to do their job) the costs are pretty much break even, if not slightly more for having a company car - it's simply a case of whether the employee or employer holds the risk.

For people who have a car because their job dictates it i.e. travelling sales reps - the position is a bit different as the car is a tool needed to undertake the job.

Which "new" rail links are needed ? Well, where do you start, but thanks to Beeching travelling east-west in this country is a real problem, particularly in the Midlands, so I would suggest a new line from Bedford to Cambridge and a reopened/newbuild line from Peterborough to Northampton and Oxford.

Both cross areas of huge projected population growth and where there is no alternative to the car.

Bedford - Cambridge is being considered as part of EWR as well you know, however the BCR on that part is looking weaker than the Oxford - Bletchley element.

And once Bletchley - Oxford is in place, you don't need Northampton - Oxford, since that will be achieved by a single change at MKC or Bletchley. The only place of any size that was on the 'old' Northampton - Banbury (note, not Oxford) route of any size was Towcester and that's still a small place - certainly not big enough to justify a rail reinstatement.

You also continue to ignore the level of use that the current East-West links receive - both Bedford - Bletchley and Peterborough - Leicester are pretty much hourly services using 2 car DMUs - rarely if ever are these full to capacity aside the odd peak hour journey - to pretend or believe there is demand for more East West links in parallel to these is ignoring the reality of what is used now.

In the west, whole swathes of Dorset and Somerset were cut adrift by Beeching. A new line that enabled people to get to work in Bournemouth, Bath and Bristol, the main centres of employment, from towns formerly linked by the old S & D would be useful.

As for the S&D and its supposed "usefulness" - the only places of any size on the Bath - Bournemouth line which no longer has a rail service are - Blandford, which has a population of 11,000 and Shepton Mallet - also about 11,000 people.

To rebuild the S&D would result in a line almost 100 miles long - to put that in context, the Borders railway (which had a much, much better case) was only 35 miles and that cost about £ 350m to rebuild - to rebuild the S&D would probably cost £ 1,000m on that basis - hardly a sensible investment to put a couple of towns back on the rail network with a total population of about 40,000 people.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Once East West Railway (western) is open it would be possible to travel between MK and Gatwick via Oxford and Reading by going around fairly easily (number of changes depends on how the timetables works, but is likely to be one or two).

Though you'd have to be nuts to consider making that journey using EWR.

There's already an hourly MKC - East Croydon service which means just one change to get to Gatwick. Or Bedford's less than 30 mins away (by coach) and will potentially be that quick once EWR has modernised the Bedford - Bletchley line, so change there onto Thameslink for Gatwick.

MK - Reading alone will be about 60 mins (on the basis they're quoting MK - Oxford as 40 mins).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I would like to see a junction from HS1 near Ebbsfleet, a new line from there to Gatwick, on to Heathrow, then optionally a link up to HS2. This would open up a number of possible routes including Kent to Heathrow, Kent to the North avoiding London, And a much needed Gatwick to Heathrow link. This could significantly reduce demand on the M25, plus with some strategically placed interchanges with existing lines open up a wealth of possible journeys.

What demand is there for a Heathrow - Gatwick link?

People tend not to travel between airports.

As for linking HS1 to Gatwick - why? The whole purpose of HS1 was to provide a high speed link from London via the Channel Tunnel to Northern Europe (Paris, Brussels et al).

I think you fundamentally misunderstand who uses the M25 and why - many of the journeys undertaken are short hop (1 or 2 junctions) because the parallel A roads (particularly on the southern side) are poor to non-existent. A high speed rail line from Ashford to Gatwick and Heathrow will do absolutely nothing to alleviate that kind of traffic.

The other 'pull' the M25 has is for traffic travelling to the cross-channel ferry ports or Channel Tunnel - again, these suggested lines will do nothing to alleviate that because once on French soil, people are heading in many directions, not just to Paris.

 

[muddythefish]

Will you stop peddling that lie - I've pointed out to you on several previous occasions that for 'perk' company car users (i.e. for those who do not need a car to do their job) the costs are pretty much break even, if not slightly more for having a company car - it's simply a case of whether the employee or employer holds the risk.

If it's that bad hand it back, but you won't of course because it's a nice tax perk.

Bedford - Cambridge is being considered as part of EWR as well you know, however the BCR on that part is looking weaker than the Oxford - Bletchley element.

And once Bletchley - Oxford is in place, you don't need Northampton - Oxford, since that will be achieved by a single change at MKC or Bletchley. The only place of any size that was on the 'old' Northampton - Banbury (note, not Oxford) route of any size was Towcester and that's still a small place - certainly not big enough to justify a rail reinstatement.

Bedford - Cambridge will be built - and most of it will be new railway. BCRs are being made to look increasingly useless in view of the sensational success of the reopenings in Scotland and Wales. Towcester is a classic example of a town that needs a railway; most people there work in Northampton or Oxford and have to use the dreadful A43- for which there is no alternative.

You also continue to ignore the level of use that the current East-West links receive - both Bedford - Bletchley and Peterborough - Leicester are pretty much hourly services using 2 car DMUs - rarely if ever are these full to capacity aside the odd peak hour journey - to pretend or believe there is demand for more East West links in parallel to these is ignoring the reality of what is used now.

Bedford - Bletchley will take off when it is opened as a full through route. Peterborough - Leicester is no use to anyway who lives further south in the Nene valley.

As for the S&D and its supposed "usefulness" - the only places of any size on the Bath - Bournemouth line which no longer has a rail service are - Blandford, which has a population of 11,000 and Shepton Mallet - also about 11,000 people.

To rebuild the S&D would result in a line almost 100 miles long - to put that in context, the Borders railway (which had a much, much better case) was only 35 miles and that cost about £ 350m to rebuild - to rebuild the S&D would probably cost £ 1,000m on that basis - hardly a sensible investment to put a couple of towns back on the rail network with a total population of about 40,000 people.

They are just the sort of places that need better public transport provision. There are towns like that all over the country that are cut off from their most immediate big places of employment. You're also ignoring its possibilities as a through route. I'm not talking about a reopened S and D here but a new railway.

 

[Philip C]

I just wish certain posters on this forum would do a little research, as I try to do, before spouting out drivel.

I know little about the Ripon area but have, carefully I believe, read the relevant parts of this thread. It would be very nice if a railway, of some form, could be restored, but find some of the arguments raised by Deltic08 rather fanciful.

1. There appears to be substantial loss of right of way. A quick check on Google Maps reveals many buildings on the old trackbed, loss of bridges and land returned to agriculture including critically much on the section between Ripon and Harrogate.

2. The A61 by-pass at Ripon occupies the trackbed for a mile. The crossing of the River Ure appears to have been removed and the area given over roadways and a residential area/industrial area appears to block the way further north. Here I refer to the distinctly non-central site of the old Ripon Station. Perhaps that was a factor in Deltic08's inability to steer fellow-committee members away from the idea of tram-train access to the city centre?

3. Any extension to the north requires the A1(M) to be crossed and I doubt that passive provision has been made for rail reinstatement. There are further significant instances of track bed loss, development on the right of way and bridge removal.

4. Deltic08, on this thread, references reopening not only of Harrogate to Ripon but also Ripon to Northallerton (or Thirsk?), "Ripon-York could become 40 minutes with direct trains from Ripon to Starbeck and Knareborough in the peaks without calling at Harrogate", "If the campaign to reinstate Arthington-Otley-Menston is successful, Ripon-Bradford via Guiseley would become 48 minutes" and "Freight will be diverted from Harrogate via Wetherby, Tadcaster to Church Fenton". There is even reference to "or if Harrogate-Wetherby-Cross Gates is included" but I'm not sure whether this is a serious proposal as elsewhere it is stated that "Leeds-Micklefield Junction is almost at capacity" despite carrying only 8tph (off-peak) and with another 2tph in prospect; and of course Wetherby-Cross Gates would feed onto that section.

5. It is implied that the full Arup survey was being done for £30k and yet "a feasibility study done by ATOC was not as thorough as the one done for my committee". Either I've misunderstood something, consultancy rates have fallen dramatically or someone is playing at report writing. Be assured that £30k buys very little consultancy.

6. "Reinstating a station in Ripon would remove 144,000 driver only cars from the A61 Ripon-Harrogate road annually with 78% of these commuting to Harrogate only." This I suspect is 144,000 car journeys per annum or approx. 288 car trips in each direction per working day. Not totally insignificant, but only a single four-car load if ALL of them could be persuaded to use the train.

7. "I wonder if extension from Newcastle to Edinburgh will result in trains returning to Liverpool or Manchester via Carlisle and Preston and vice versa? Through trains from Harrogate to Manchester, Preston, Carlisle or Glasgow would be very attractive in addition to through trains to Edinburgh via the ECML." Surely Deltic08 is joking? Through trains from Ripon to Carlisle, let alone Manchester, via Edinburgh being held up as 'very attractive'!

I have greatly enjoyed this part of the thread and would be delighted to wake up tomorrow morning to find that a railway ran between Ripon and the outside world. Cold reality is that the quoted costs for reinstatement are ludicrously understated and the proposals (if they were not a joke throughout) are born from a misapprehension about the realities of resource allocation in the world today. Were it not different!

 

[A0]

If it's that bad hand it back, but you won't of course because it's a nice tax perk.

No - I won't because I'm happy for someone else (i.e. my employer) to carry the risk of running a car on a day to day basis. I've done both as it happens over the last 20 years. But I don't need to justify my actions to you, though as I've pointed out, I'm happy to take the additional tax charge for now.

I think you're just jealous. And envy really isn't attractive.

Bedford - Cambridge will be built - and most of it will be new railway. BCRs are being made to look increasingly useless in view of the sensational success of the reopenings in Scotland and Wales.

Don't bet on it - people I know in the rail industry are highly sceptical that it will. As for the "sensational successes" in Scotland or Wales, let's see in 10 years time how much those have cost to run as to whether they've yielded any benefit. The heavy use in the first 3 months is no indicator of the long term trend and certainly shouldn't be used to predict.

Towcester is a classic example of a town that needs a railway; most people there work in Northampton or Oxford and have to use the dreadful A43- for which there is no alternative.

Apart from the junction where the A43 meets the A5 (which the highways agency have botched again by not making it grade separated) there is nothing wrong with the A43. It is rarely busy to capacity, it flows freely and allows for quick, reliable journeys from Northampton to the M40 and beyond.

Towcester's rail link was lost long BEFORE Beeching in 1951. The line had never generated any significant traffic - it wouldn't now. Towcester has a population of 9,000 - it's tiny.

Bedford - Bletchley will take off when it is opened as a full through route. Peterborough - Leicester is no use to anyway who lives further south in the Nene valley.

Yawn - you keep peddling the same old pony. There simply isn't the demand you keep prattling on about. Yes, the A45 is very busy - the reason for that is that there has been pretty much no investment in it since about 1995. A few, cheap enhancements there would make all the difference and cost far, far less than the at least £ 500m which would be needed to rebuild Northampton - Peterborough.

They are just the sort of places that need better public transport provision. There are towns like that all over the country that are cut off from their most immediate big places of employment. You're also ignoring its possibilities as a through route. I'm not talking about a reopened S and D here but a new railway.

But you're talking about linking Bournemouth with Bath - so enlighten us, what route would this mythical line for which there is so much pent up demand take? How many people travel from Bournemouth to Bath even on a weekly basis? As I've pointed out - Bournemouth - Bath is circa 100 miles as the crow flies - on the basis of how much Borders rail cost that means a new line would easily be £ 1,000m - which is more than electrifying the MML is estimated as...... and that's got a genuine benefits case.

 

[deltic08]

Blockages that last 2 hours between York and Northallerton are rather rare however - especially considering you would have to block all four lines for it to be a major issue.

Would you accept your fares being higher all the time to pay for all the route knowledge and the like that has to be maintained in perpetuity for this very rare blockage situation? (I wouldn't know - as I haven't actually travelled a significant distance on a ticket in a long time, I never use my pass allotment completely).

But most rail freight doesn't really care if it arrives 3 or 4 hours late.

In the 12 months to February 2013, York-Northallerton was totally closed on 7 occasions due to fatalities. Each time the route was closed for at least 2 hours in each direction until BT police had investigated and sanitised the site.

On 24th February 2013, everything was at a standstill from 1845 until 2100 and every platform at York was occupied by northbound trains. Both passenger and freight trains were backed up as far south as Colton Jnc on Leeds and Doncaster routes. The last train in the queue was the 1800 KX-Edinburgh arriving Edinburgh well after midnight. TOCs involved were East Coast, Cross Country, TPEx, Grand Central and Heavy Haul and EWS.

Even Manchester-Scarborough was in the logjam and couldn't platform.

Headspans are always a source of complete closure up to 24 hours after dewirement and flooding has also closed the route recently.

If the system hadn't been fragmented by privatisation there wouldn't be a problem with route knowledge and diversions and ticket prices would be a third cheaper. Yes, I am that also.

I wouldn't spread that around that railfreight operators are happy to deliver consignments 3 or 4 hours late. Road freight deliveries try not to be more than 30 minutes late. Biomass deliveries have to be delivered "just in time" and can't afford to be late. Railfreight is also compensated by Network Rail for late running caused by blockages or other train failures.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I know little about the Ripon area but have, carefully I believe, read the relevant parts of this thread. It would be very nice if a railway, of some form, could be restored, but find some of the arguments raised by Deltic08 rather fanciful.

1. There appears to be substantial loss of right of way. A quick check on Google Maps reveals many buildings on the old trackbed, loss of bridges and land returned to agriculture including critically much on the section between Ripon and Harrogate.

2. The A61 by-pass at Ripon occupies the trackbed for a mile. The crossing of the River Ure appears to have been removed and the area given over roadways and a residential area/industrial area appears to block the way further north. Here I refer to the distinctly non-central site of the old Ripon Station. Perhaps that was a factor in Deltic08's inability to steer fellow-committee members away from the idea of tram-train access to the city centre?

3. Any extension to the north requires the A1(M) to be crossed and I doubt that passive provision has been made for rail reinstatement. There are further significant instances of track bed loss, development on the right of way and bridge removal.

4. Deltic08, on this thread, references reopening not only of Harrogate to Ripon but also Ripon to Northallerton (or Thirsk?), "Ripon-York could become 40 minutes with direct trains from Ripon to Starbeck and Knareborough in the peaks without calling at Harrogate", "If the campaign to reinstate Arthington-Otley-Menston is successful, Ripon-Bradford via Guiseley would become 48 minutes" and "Freight will be diverted from Harrogate via Wetherby, Tadcaster to Church Fenton". There is even reference to "or if Harrogate-Wetherby-Cross Gates is included" but I'm not sure whether this is a serious proposal as elsewhere it is stated that "Leeds-Micklefield Junction is almost at capacity" despite carrying only 8tph (off-peak) and with another 2tph in prospect; and of course Wetherby-Cross Gates would feed onto that section.

5. It is implied that the full Arup survey was being done for £30k and yet "a feasibility study done by ATOC was not as thorough as the one done for my committee". Either I've misunderstood something, consultancy rates have fallen dramatically or someone is playing at report writing. Be assured that £30k buys very little consultancy.

6. "Reinstating a station in Ripon would remove 144,000 driver only cars from the A61 Ripon-Harrogate road annually with 78% of these commuting to Harrogate only." This I suspect is 144,000 car journeys per annum or approx. 288 car trips in each direction per working day. Not totally insignificant, but only a single four-car load if ALL of them could be persuaded to use the train.

7. "I wonder if extension from Newcastle to Edinburgh will result in trains returning to Liverpool or Manchester via Carlisle and Preston and vice versa? Through trains from Harrogate to Manchester, Preston, Carlisle or Glasgow would be very attractive in addition to through trains to Edinburgh via the ECML." Surely Deltic08 is joking? Through trains from Ripon to Carlisle, let alone Manchester, via Edinburgh being held up as 'very attractive'!

I have greatly enjoyed this part of the thread and would be delighted to wake up tomorrow morning to find that a railway ran between Ripon and the outside world. Cold reality is that the quoted costs for reinstatement are ludicrously understated and the proposals (if they were not a joke throughout) are born from a misapprehension about the realities of resource allocation in the world today. Were it not different!

Why do you participate on this forum when your attitude is so anti-rail?

Don't rely on Google earth. South of Ripon only 200 yards of trackbed lost to development. Less than 0.25 miles of trackbed lost to Ripon bypass and not a mile as you state and station will be only 8 minute walk to centre of Ripon.

The Arup Environmental Impact Analysis and Engineering Study was done in 2005 for £33k not being done in the future.

After reading 6. I can't be bothered to explain anymore to anyone. I don't need you or your support.

I quote 144,000 cars annually would convert to rail and you correct me by saying you suspect I mean 144,000 per annum. Had I written anally would you have understood? Give me strength.

 

[HSTEd]

In the 12 months to February 2013, York-Northallerton was totally closed on 7 occasions due to fatalities. Each time the route was closed for at least 2 hours in each direction until BT police had investigated and sanitised the site.

On 24th February 2013, everything was at a standstill from 1845 until 2100 and every platform at York was occupied by northbound trains. Both passenger and freight trains were backed up as far south as Colton Jnc on Leeds and Doncaster routes. The last train in the queue was the 1800 KX-Edinburgh arriving Edinburgh well after midnight. TOCs involved were East Coast, Cross Country, TPEx, Grand Central and Heavy Haul and EWS.

And yet you somehow plan to route a significant fraction of this massed traffic over a minimum cost line via Ripon?
Any train north of Doncaster will be trapped because it won't be able to get to Leeds to get onto your diversion. Unless you plan to reverse south out of York to reach Leeds, which will play havoc with your journey times.

You would need a fully signalled twin track line throughout to do anything but be a psychological release valve of questionable overall usefulness.

Borders rail bought a single half hourly service.
And you are pulling most of the kit out of that project to reduce your costs.
And since you don't want to use buses you can't suspend the Ripon trains to make room for your planned diverted services.

If the system hadn't been fragmented by privatisation there wouldn't be a problem with route knowledge and diversions and ticket prices would be a third cheaper. Yes, I am that also.

But the railways are not going to be renationalised any time soon. Nigel Farage is more likely to be the next prime minister than Jeremy Corbyn.

 

[Rational Plan]

It will be impossible to build and plan a new large city in this country. It will be new towns and suburbs hopefully served by new stations on existing lines or short spurs.

New lines will need to connect major cities or be able to attract major commuter flows.

The network faces a future of severe congestion all money will be directed at increasing capacity in the core areas or improving access to them.

I suggest there will be little money for opening old rural routes, especially if they were slow and did not connect major population centres.

 

[The Ham]

Though you'd have to be nuts to consider making that journey using EWR.

There's already an hourly MKC - East Croydon service which means just one change to get to Gatwick. Or Bedford's less than 30 mins away (by coach) and will potentially be that quick once EWR has modernised the Bedford - Bletchley line, so change there onto Thameslink for Gatwick.

MK - Reading alone will be about 60 mins (on the basis they're quoting MK - Oxford as 40 mins).

I didn't say that you would do that journey I said that it was possible. There comes a point where (depending on connection times and rail ticket prices) people would travel around. It is unlikely to be from MK, but probably not that far west from there, especially during the morning peak.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
...also the main point about MK to Gatwick wasn't that it would be the used route, rather that that route exists and interchanges with key long-distance services rather than a rail M25 which people would have to change to a slower service to then go around. That would make journey times even worse.

 

[DarloRich]

I just wish certain posters on this forum would do a little research, as I try to do, before spouting out drivel.

Thanks – nothing like a nice attack when you don’t like a point. I notice you do that on a regular basis. Shall we try to debate in a mature fashion or would you prefer childish name calling?

Two Liverpool-Newcastle (now extended to Edinburgh) trains an hour are in the trans-Pennine post electrification draft timetable. As Leeds-Micklefield Junction is almost at capacity and recognised in the 2009 RUS Report as such, diverting one or both away from this route would seem logical as well as necessary if an alternate route is available.

Odd, don’t you think, that the pressing need to bypass this bottleneck has not led to the adoption of this scheme by either Network Rail, their LNE route ( who will hold the power in future) the TOC’s or the FOC’s. Odd also that NR planners feel able to fit more trains through such a congested route after electrification and re signalling.

As it stands your diverted train would have to make a reversal at Leeds which may well eat up even more capacity in the station area and increase journey times. You must also be assuming that the line will be double tracked and electrified to support both the new trains and their means of propulsion. That certainly won’t happen within your quoted figures. Furthermore you cannot assume that any other lines (Wetherby) will open at around the same time as your own to support your proposal.

DOR was receptive to extending some KX-Leeds services to Newcastle or Edinburgh via Harrogate if Harrogate-Ripon-Northallerton ever reopened. Not because they wanted to travel this way but because Leeds-York is optimised already.

I am sure the TOC representatives were very pleased with a presentation offering them a new line. Why would you not be when someone offers you free stuff. Odd, though, that they haven’t come out, publically in support of such a project. Especially in light of the horrific capacity constraints and market saturation between Leeds and York. Why is that? Why are they not demanding NR undertake this work forthwith?

What have trainspotters to do with anything? Certainly not in any way to do with reinstatements I am connected with.

Perhaps not, and that is good to know, although this board is aimed at railway enthusiasts, spotters if you will, many of whom love nothing more than to draw nice red lines on their maps and dream up new routes offering little in return.

Where is your evidence that Ripon-Northallerton doesn't stand? I haven't any that is does. BCR for Ripon-Harrogate was only 1.3 in 2006 and was not taken forward. BCR for Bedale bypass was 1.7 in 2012 and went ahead costing £43m for less than two miles. I would like to see traffic numbers after opening as the road from Northallerton to upper Wensleydale is a very minor A road. That is why another study for the whole rail route is needed and why I am raising funds for one.

Common sense for one! What does it serve? Which population centres? Which markets? Which industry?

Your obsession with road building also offers little help, especially in the case of this scheme which is needed to alleviate several local issues. In the case of Bedale, which I assume you are familiar with, I would suggest the road is needed to alleviate the congestion through both Bedale and Aiskew and remove the unhelpful cross roads in the centre of the town. I assume you have, as I have on many occasions, taken an age to travel from Leeming to any location beyond Bedale due to both this cross roads and the level of tourist traffic in the “season”. The two level crossings don’t help either!

Borders line reinstatement cost £8-£11m/mile according to who you believe. Subtract the cost of 5 intermediate stations, 6 high speed turnouts and 9 miles of double track with full signalling and that puts Ripon-Harrogate between£45m and £55m.

Three recent developments will lift BCR.
1. A change in BC analysis methodology.
2. Introduction of two additional Leeds-Harrogate trains per hour in 2017.
3. Recommendation to electrify Leeds-Harrogate-York in CP6.

If you say so. I disagree , especially if you want to electrify and signal any part of the line.

I don't know what you have been reading but there has never been any third party involvement in funding construction in my campaign and Arup report. Please enlighten me.

This is the most recent link I can find to the document: http://web.archive.org/web/20070928...port & streets/Contents and Pages 1 - 67 .pdf

I am happy to be corrected on the funding source. From memory (I can’t find my hard copy version as it is filled away for my house move) I assumed the document referred to funding for construction being via third party rather than central government sources. This is not correct. A lessons there! Please accept my apologies.

Again do your research. Your assumption of freight traffic travelling via Whitehall Junction is incorrect. Nobody connected with me is planning to route freight this way. Freight will be diverted from Harrogate via Wetherby, Tadcaster to Church Fenton and then to Doncaster via Gasgoigne Wood (coal and biomass MGR), Pontefract and a reinstated chord at South Elmsall onto the Leeds-Doncaster line then Lincoln to Peterborough.

Harrogate via Wetherby, Tadcaster to Church Fenton does not exist . Do you propose to open it at the same time as Harrogate – Northallerton?

25 ECML daytime freights will have to divert between Northallerton and Doncaster to allow for expected passenger growth post introduction of class 800 according to Network Rail

Based upon figures as of the date of the last route study? Was that 2009? How many of the freight paths are now occupied on a normal day? 12? 15? That is old information.

Finally, to question or challenge proposals does not make one anti rail.

 

[yorksrob]

And yet you somehow plan to route a significant fraction of this massed traffic over a minimum cost line via Ripon?
Any train north of Doncaster will be trapped because it won't be able to get to Leeds to get onto your diversion. Unless you plan to reverse south out of York to reach Leeds, which will play havoc with your journey times.

You would need a fully signalled twin track line throughout to do anything but be a psychological release valve of questionable overall usefulness.

Borders rail bought a single half hourly service.
And you are pulling most of the kit out of that project to reduce your costs.
And since you don't want to use buses you can't suspend the Ripon trains to make room for your planned diverted services.

Why would you need a double track mainline for diversions? The route through Honiton is single track, yet has been vital for diversions for years. You wouldn't even need to bustitute Ripon passengers, just insert an additional stop on the diverted service.

 

[QueensCurve]

I would say there is little that can be done to repair the immense damage done to Britain's rail network by one Conservative Minister of Transport, Ernest Marples. While strongly promoting the idea of closing railway lines, he was at the same time playing a very active role in road construction.

That understates Marples' conflict of interest. He owned a road construction company. This was raised at the time and he agreed to give up his directorship - he passed it to his wife.

 

[Philip C]

Why do you participate on this forum when your attitude is so anti-rail?

Don't rely on Google earth. South of Ripon only 200 yards of trackbed lost to development. Less than 0.25 miles of trackbed lost to Ripon bypass and not a mile as you state and station will be only 8 minute walk to centre of Ripon.

The Arup Environmental Impact Analysis and Engineering Study was done in 2005 for £33k not being done in the future.

After reading 6. I can't be bothered to explain anymore to anyone. I don't need you or your support.

I quote 144,000 cars annually would convert to rail and you correct me by saying you suspect I mean 144,000 per annum. Had I written anally would you have understood? Give me strength.

I am very disappointed with your attitude. You have been remarkably rude and immoderate in many of your postings on this thread and I, for one, am not prepared to engage in debate with you.

 

[A0]

Finally, to question or challenge proposals does not make one anti rail.

That statement should be put in a large, bold font at the top of every single thread.

It's something which a number of posters around here need to understand.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I didn't say that you would do that journey I said that it was possible. There comes a point where (depending on connection times and rail ticket prices) people would travel around. It is unlikely to be from MK, but probably not that far west from there, especially during the morning peak.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
...also the main point about MK to Gatwick wasn't that it would be the used route, rather that that route exists and interchanges with key long-distance services rather than a rail M25 which people would have to change to a slower service to then go around. That would make journey times even worse.

Well the next place 'west' of MK is logically Aylesbury and I can't see people travelling 'away' from London to get to Gatwick. Far quicker to go via Marylebone.

As for the EWR route - you've then got Winslow (very small) or Bicester - and again I suspect Bicester residents will have a quicker journey via London.

As for Oxford, anyone currently travelling by train to Gatwick will almost certainly go via Reading in some capacity - either because they are changing at Reading or they are on a Paddington train which goes via Reading - yes, I'm aware that Oxford also has a service to Marylebone, but from a connectivity point of view, Paddington makes more sense.

 

[muddythefish]

No - I won't because I'm happy for someone else (i.e. my employer) to carry the risk of running a car on a day to day basis. I've done both as it happens over the last 20 years. But I don't need to justify my actions to you, though as I've pointed out, I'm happy to take the additional tax charge for now.

I think you're just jealous. And envy really isn't attractive.

Not jealous at all. I just don't like my taxes being used so people can help pollute the planet and help fill up the roads - and then call for more taxpayers' money to be spent on roads but not on railways.

Don't bet on it - people I know in the rail industry are highly sceptical that it will. As for the "sensational successes" in Scotland or Wales, let's see in 10 years time how much those have cost to run as to whether they've yielded any benefit. The heavy use in the first 3 months is no indicator of the long term trend and certainly shouldn't be used to predict.

Bedford-Cam will go ahead. This isn't about the Borders railway (which I have no doubt will be long term sucess despite the cheapskate nature of its reconstruction) - this is about the others that have been reoopened for years and have exceeded all forecasts and expectations and continue to do so.

Apart from the junction where the A43 meets the A5 (which the highways agency have botched again by not making it grade separated) there is nothing wrong with the A43. It is rarely busy to capacity, it flows freely and allows for quick, reliable journeys from Northampton to the M40 and beyond.

Towcester's rail link was lost long BEFORE Beeching in 1951. The line had never generated any significant traffic - it wouldn't now. Towcester has a population of 9,000 - it's tiny.

There's no justification for a flyover at Towcester, either in terms of the exorbitant costs and the damage to the environment. Towcester's role as a town has changed since 1951 - there's no doubt the rail link would be extremely busy if it were open today because of its position between major centres of employment in Northampton and Oxford

Yawn - you keep peddling the same old pony. There simply isn't the demand you keep prattling on about. Yes, the A45 is very busy - the reason for that is that there has been pretty much no investment in it since about 1995. A few, cheap enhancements there would make all the difference and cost far, far less than the at least £ 500m which would be needed to rebuild Northampton - Peterborough.

Yawn - you keep peddling the same old solutions - spend money on roads so you can drive even more faster and freely in your expense account company car. As always you also ignore the major towns along the route adding up to more than 400,000 people and the possibility of through trains beyond the region. T

But you're talking about linking Bournemouth with Bath - so enlighten us, what route would this mythical line for which there is so much pent up demand take? How many people travel from Bournemouth to Bath even on a weekly basis? As I've pointed out - Bournemouth - Bath is circa 100 miles as the crow flies - on the basis of how much Borders rail cost that means a new line would easily be £ 1,000m - which is more than electrifying the MML is estimated as...... and that's got a genuine benefits case.

Beyond building more and more roads, enlighten me on how the people of Dorset, Somerset and Hampshire (and the rest of the country) get to and from the major centres of work when the population of this country is 70m by 2027 and climbing towards 80m by 2050? As ever, you cannot see past the end of your own nose and see the bigger picture - that this country needs to correct decades of under investment and invest significantly in better public transport.