New railway lines and stations for South Yorkshire

[Mat17]

I don't know how old you are Mat, but did you ever use the buses when it was SYT ?
Heavily subsidised I know, but the service was far better, more reliable and more frequent.

I did use the buses with some frequency from about 1988 through to 1999. SYT and Mainline were generally very good from my recollections. They were even supplemented by Sheffield Omnibus route 21 (iirc) for a while in the mid-90s.

It all started going south when Mainline were bought out by First in about 1998. Mostly declining reliability and missing buses became more obvious. The ex-SYT routes were maintained until about 2002/3 when the separate Deepcar services were merged into the 57 service. The Oughtibridge 68 service was dropped at this point and morphed into the 58. This is when the stripping of services started. Then came the floods of 2007 and the protracted closure of Middlewood Road so everything got diverted via Worrall - which meant for very long journeys. These continued until the present service was introduced a few years ago with the abolition of the tramlink buses.

The non-Sheffield routes were mostly lost in about 2011. The hourly Barnsley services dropped down to one bus to Barnsley in a morning and one back in the evening.

Public transport in Stocksbridge is the worst it's ever been. So many passengers have been lost, including myself who fought so long to keep using public transport until it became unusable.

Tram or train, either would be very welcome. The buses are a lost cause.

 

[Killingworth]

I did use the buses with some frequency from about 1988 through to 1999. SYT and Mainline were generally very good from my recollections. They were even supplemented by Sheffield Omnibus route 21 (iirc) for a while in the mid-90s.

It all started going south when Mainline were bought out by First in about 1998. Mostly declining reliability and missing buses became more obvious. The ex-SYT routes were maintained until about 2002/3 when the separate Deepcar services were merged into the 57 service. The Oughtibridge 68 service was dropped at this point and morphed into the 58. This is when the stripping of services started. Then came the floods of 2007 and the protracted closure of Middlewood Road so everything got diverted via Worrall - which meant for very long journeys. These continued until the present service was introduced a few years ago with the abolition of the tramlink buses.

The non-Sheffield routes were mostly lost in about 2011. The hourly Barnsley services dropped down to one bus to Barnsley in a morning and one back in the evening.

Public transport in Stocksbridge is the worst it's ever been. So many passengers have been lost, including myself who fought so long to keep using public transport until it became unusable.

Tram or train, either would be very welcome. The buses are a lost cause.

Bus routes get axed because insufficient people use them to cover costs. It's expensive to subsidise a frequent all day service.

Car owners are very reluctant to use even that unless it stops very near their home and goes near where they want to go. Minds are now well set on that.

SYMCA is very short of funds to subsidise the few buses it supports. Noting a local supported hourly route I see very few passengers. Busier routes run commercially, of course. Bus routes are far more flexible in areas served, size of vehicle and frequency of service than any rail alternative can provide.

Is it realistic to expect massive investment in inflexible heavy rail or tram routes in areas that are not densely populated?

 

[daodao]

Is it realistic to expect massive investment in inflexible heavy rail or tram routes in areas that are not densely populated?

Of course not, so extending any tram/rail service north-west of Middlewood at the edge of the Sheffield built-up area will never be justified, and will never happen.

 

[Justin Smith]

Of course not, so extending any tram/rail service north-west of Middlewood at the edge of the Sheffield built-up area will never be justified, and will never happen.

Bus routes get axed because insufficient people use them to cover costs. It's expensive to subsidise a frequent all day service.

Car owners are very reluctant to use even that unless it stops very near their home and goes near where they want to go. Minds are now well set on that.

SYMCA is very short of funds to subsidise the few buses it supports. Noting a local supported hourly route I see very few passengers. Busier routes run commercially, of course. Bus routes are far more flexible in areas served, size of vehicle and frequency of service than any rail alternative can provide.

Is it realistic to expect massive investment in inflexible heavy rail or tram routes in areas that are not densely populated?

Well there are two points here :

1 - The government is trying to encourage us out of our cars, and, in fact, are slowly trying to force us out of them (and this will go up a notch or 10 once this nett zero thing starts biting). If they are going to do that they are morally obliged to provide usable alternatives.

2 - The line to Stocksbridge is already there. In fact it's a pity they cut down all the OHL structures isn't it ? ! ?

 

[Killingworth]

Well there are two points here :

1 - The government is trying to encourage us out of our cars, and, in fact, are slowly trying to force us out of them (and this will go up a notch or 10 once this nett zero thing starts biting). If they are going to do that they are morally obliged to provide usable alternatives.

2 - The line to Stocksbridge is already there. In fact it's a pity they cut down all the OHL structures isn't it ? ! ?

Fair points, in support of more flexible and usable bus services - but not rail enthusiasts full sized train sets!

 

[dosxuk]

In fact it's a pity they cut down all the OHL structures isn't it ? ! ?

Not in the slightest. With over 40 years already of zero maintenance they would be unusable for any new electrification works - if they hadn't self-disassembled anyway. And even if they had been maintained, the chances of any of them being in the right place for a modern re-electrification is basically non-existent.

 

[zwk500]

they are morally obliged to provide usable alternatives.

The key question here is whether or not the Stocksbridge line would be a usable alternative (in either mode) were it to reopen.

 

[Justin Smith]

Fair points, in support of more flexible and usable bus services - but not rail enthusiasts full sized train sets!

I agree, which is why even I, as a train enthusiast, admit that extending the tram along the redundant track would make more sense !
Additionally I think we should remember that trams have been proven to be much more effective than buses at getting car drivers out of their cars...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Oct 2024 ==

the chances of any of them being in the right place for a modern re-electrification is basically non-existent.

Did they not say something similar when it was suggested changing over the voltage on the route from Glossop to Piccadilly ? ! ?
Just out of interest, what maintenance is done on the WCML portal structures ? I mean the ones put up in the early 60s ? And were they painted or galvanised ?

 

[Mat17]

I can't speak for the WCML overheads, but the Hadfield route overheads look very rusty in places.

 

[dosxuk]

Did they not say something similar when it was suggested changing over the voltage on the route from Glossop to Piccadilly ? ! ?

That was a like-for-like change done to an existing system with a limited time available for the work, and even then bits of it were torn down and replaced.

Re-electrifying to Stocksbridge today, be that for heavy rail or light rail, and regardless of any masts still existed, would be a full new installation. For starters, the track layout today is different to when it was electrified, and any sort of conversion to a passenger operation would likely require a different layout again.

Even if a full complement of structures existed, I would go as far as to say, that if you were setting it up as a tram extension, it would probably be cheaper to re-electrify from scratch - scrapping the existing masts - than it would be to try and work what's there into a usable scheme.

 

[Justin Smith]

I can't speak for the WCML overheads, but the Hadfield route overheads look very rusty in places.

I can tell you what's worse..... The footbridge at Swinton. In fact they've shut part of it for what looks like corrosion. A classic example of money is available for building something but not for maintaining it. A few thousand every few years on some paint would have saved a lot of time and money now.....
Can they not use galavanised parst to make a bridge? I assume the sections size would be limited by the size of the tank into which it has to be submersed ? That said, the structures of the GW electrification look galvanised to me.

 

[GardenRail]

I can tell you what's worse..... The footbridge at Swinton. In fact they've shut part of it for what looks like corrosion. A classic example of money is available for building something but not for maintaining it. A few thousand every few years on some paint would have saved a lot of time and money now.....
Can they not use galavanised parst to make a bridge? I assume the sections size would be limited by the size of the tank into which it has to be submersed ? That said, the structures of the GW electrification look galvanised to me.

Yep, Meadowhall from 3 to 4 is going the same way with the footbridge.

 

[TheGuy77]

Time for a rail revolution

We ask transport expert Gareth Dennis to design a new rail network for South Yorkshire

www.sheffieldtribune.co.uk

Today, we asked Gareth Dennis, rail engineer, expert, and host of the #RailNatter podcast to explain how he’d rework Sheffield’s rail network to solve some of our biggest problems. Starting with the existing lines, adding some stations and introducing new types of trains, he’s knocked together a plan to make our rail a lot more useful — putting it in the service of ordinary Sheffielders. The total bill — £3.2bn — is just a fraction of what London spent on Crossrail.

Another idea, made by Gareth Dennis for Sheffield Tribune. Seems like there are too many stations but it looks feasible.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Time for a rail revolution

We ask transport expert Gareth Dennis to design a new rail network for South Yorkshire

www.sheffieldtribune.co.uk

Another idea, made by Gareth Dennis for Sheffield Tribune. Seems like there are too many stations but it looks feasible.

Agreed. Too many stations. As a Sheffield lad growing up, my two pence worth's on space feasibility.

Blue line looks relatively easy to achieve. Other than the interchange with green and purple at Cutler's Gate more later. I'd also extend the Renishaw branch to Chesterfield.

Green looks relatively feasible, again ignoring Cutler's gate. I'd be worried about capacity to turn back regular services at Hope. The Midland to Dore section would have to be quadrupled but there is room. You'd also want platforms on the mains at Dore but not for the other intermediate stations. You'd need to resignal Hallam line and electrify it I think to fit the fast and slows with extra stops. That would be hard work.

Purple. He seems to have got the area around Swinton wrong, Swinton is on the junction, so don't know why there is another station between junction and Mexborough. Other than that north of Meadowhall seems sensible. Meadowhall to Midland. I think you'd have to four track it, which you could buy the land as it's all fairly low grade industrial and much of it used to be four tracks but it would be expensive. And the interchange station at Cutler's Gate would have to be four track otherwise all the fast services are just decimated, looks like land is available shockingly. Same applies for dronfield to chesterfield, not enough capacity for those services to stop an extra few times between the expresses and four track is out of the question.

Chesterfield station as a terminus to one or possibly two of the lines would need a big upgrade too...

Interesting proposal. Overall feasible I would say, the £3.2bn price tags seems optimistic at best. But take out a load of unnecessary stations and it could work. My concern is around the Dore to Meadowhall corridor, Sheffield Midland station itself and the Cutlers Gate interchange, as well as Chesterfield Station. I've always felt Sheffield could support something like this but would need some serious political capital to make it move.

 

[Killingworth]

Time for a rail revolution

We ask transport expert Gareth Dennis to design a new rail network for South Yorkshire

www.sheffieldtribune.co.uk

Another idea, made by Gareth Dennis for Sheffield Tribune. Seems like there are too many stations but it looks feasible.

I'm afraid feasible is a long way from practical and financially sustainable.

Sheffield MPs, including Louise Haigh MP for Sheffild Heeley, promoted a bid to the Restoring your Railway Fund for the Sheaf Valley stations incliding Heeley, Millhouses, Beauchief, 4 platform Dore and new station at Totley. Never got off the ground - for reasons a quick cab ride video would have revealed without looking at cost/benefits.

A 2015 feasibility report into restoring 4 platforms at Dore gave 3 options. If done 15-20 years earlier before the recently completed scheme had effectively started maybe the conclusions might have been different. All 3 options were feasible but none considered viable. An earlier feasibility report into reopening a station at Millhouses was also completed too late - after Tesco were already developing their new store that partially obstructs the former trackbed!

Walking the area would greatly help some of those producing hypothetical plans like this and save a lot of time and fruitless expense.

Adding in lack of track and platform capacity through Sheffield and most of this is immediately dead in the water.

A new station at Waverley is the only part of the several South Yorkshire Restoration submissions that seemingly remains alive, but only just. It's chances are low in the current national financial climate but might get through due to South Yorkshire pressures for something new with local budgeting support.

 

[TheGuy77]

Other than the interchange with green and purple at Cutler's Gate more later. I'd also extend the Renishaw branch to Chesterfield.

I was also thinking both of those too. I think Cutler's Gate would be better as two separate stations: the central (blue) line could have a station at Sheffield Victoria, and the Midland and Valley lines (magenta and green) can serve a reopened Attercliffe Road station, with potential to redevelop the surrounding area. Since the RYR plan (before Rachel Reeves cancelled the project) had a plan for the Barrow Hill line to go to Chesterfield, you might as well serve it.

Chesterfield station as a terminus to one or possibly two of the lines would need a big upgrade too...

The same plan did mention a new platform at Chesterfield, which would make turnarounds easier.

He seems to have got the area around Swinton wrong, Swinton is on the junction, so don't know why there is another station between junction and Mexborough.

I think that's more bad map-making than genuine error. But yes, Swinton and Mexborough certainly don't need another station between them.

I think you'd have to four track it, which you could buy the land as it's all fairly low grade industrial and much of it used to be four tracks but it would be expensive. And the interchange station at Cutler's Gate would have to be four track otherwise all the fast services are just decimated, looks like land is available shockingly. Same applies for dronfield to chesterfield, not enough capacity for those services to stop an extra few times between the expresses and four track is out of the question.

Agreed. Four-tracking Meadowhall-Sheffield is quite easy - some of the section is four-tracked already. Sheffield-Chesterfield is harder though - you might have to replace the existing Leeds-Nottingham service to fit it in.

Too many stations. As a Sheffield lad growing up, my two pence worth's on space feasibility.

Maybe some new stations can be built - like Waverley, Heeley and Millhouses. But others, such as Bitholmes and Wales are completely unnecessary.

 

[Bob figgis]

I think the purple line is probably going to use the old road between Mexborough and Aldwark Junction and cutting out the newer route of via Swinton. It proposes a new station at Kilnhurst on the old road.

A proposed station at Wales? Not a lot there to justify a Station, maybe better calling it Swallownest or even Waleswood for Gullivers Kingdom. It'll need to have a big carpark and and bus interchange.

The bigger concern for any redevelopment and increase of train services into and out of Sheffield is the Don Valley viaduct between Nunnery Junction and Mill Race Junction. Adding capacity to this stretch of line will more than likely swallow up this £3.2 billion itself. It’s a two track viaduct. Solve that issue and the world is your oyster. Very deep pockets will be needed.

 

[Grimsby town]

A new station at Waverley is the only part of the several South Yorkshire Restoration submissions that seemingly remains alive, but only just. It's chances are low in the current national financial climate but might get through due to South Yorkshire pressures for something new with local budgeting support.

While I agree Gareth Dennis' plan is not feasible, I think this overly pessimistic. I've said on other threads. There will still be £billions a year for rail upgrades and a new station can very easily be funded locally through the City Regional Sustainable Transport Settlement (CRSTS). I think Labour will actually refocus spending on more local tranport projects and devolve further funding.

The Chesterfield - Sheffield - Swinton corridor is just too important for long distance services to have a large number of new stations but it might be possible to add one or two with additional tracks. A mainline Rotherham central station would be one. Any station on the 2 tracks to the north of Sheffield station is an absolute non-stater. Once TRU starts winding down in the early 2030s, Dore-Sheffield-Swinton should see a similar upgrade with electrification, additional tracks and speed upgrades.

Elsewhere Stocksbridge to Chesterfield makes sense especially if it's coupled with house building. It'd be a fairly cheap reopening. I'd look at running those services through to Nottingham to allow the current Sheffield to Nottingham services to be limited stop. I'd also extend the tram train to Doncaster to free up paths into Sheffield. I think that's a realistic plan for Sheffield over the next 10 years. A full S-bahn is never going to happen unfortunately.

 

[Killingworth]

While I agree Gareth Dennis' plan is not feasible, I think this overly pessimistic. I've said on other threads. There will still be £billions a year for rail upgrades and a new station can very easily be funded locally through the City Regional Sustainable Transport Settlement (CRSTS). I think Labour will actually refocus spending on more local tranport projects and devolve further funding.

The Chesterfield - Sheffield - Swinton corridor is just too important for long distance services to have a large number of new stations but it might be possible to add one or two with additional tracks. A mainline Rotherham central station would be one. Any station on the 2 tracks to the north of Sheffield station is an absolute non-stater. Once TRU starts winding down in the early 2030s, Dore-Sheffield-Swinton should see a similar upgrade with electrification, additional tracks and speed upgrades.

Elsewhere Stocksbridge to Chesterfield makes sense especially if it's coupled with house building. It'd be a fairly cheap reopening. I'd look at running those services through to Nottingham to allow the current Sheffield to Nottingham services to be limited stop. I'd also extend the tram train to Doncaster to free up paths into Sheffield. I think that's a realistic plan for Sheffield over the next 10 years. A full S-bahn is never going to happen unfortunately.

I'd say it's a reasonably pragmatic view.

Sorry, "fairly cheap" is a very vague pronouncement and that applies equally to both a line between Chesterfield and Stocksbridge and extending tram train to Doncaster - as it does to almost every other proposal of this kind.

10 years to complete any railway project was possible in the early days of railways but today's planning and financial constraints make that rather optimistic.

I'd warn that planning and implementing such schemes takes a very long time and much effort by many parties. The Transpennine Route Upgrade (TRU) is not expected to be complete before 2036-2041 and may cost well over £10 billion before it's all done. When did that start in inception and planning? I've seen at close hand how the far more limited work has proceeded on the Hope Valley Scheme since inception in the late 1990s until completion this month. It almost certainly probably cost well over the announced £150 million.

I'd be very happy to see effort put into resolving congestion around Sheffield. That would start with road traffic congestion to get into the station, concourse circulation space, pedestrian bridge across the station, platform numbers and lengths - and most important of all tracks into the station from all directions. Electrification should be taking place over the next 10-15 years. That lot won't be cheap.

Potentially passenger numbers could well double over the next 10 years on the current routes, with relatively minor changes but quite major investment - including more rolling stock to operate them. Adding in these extras complicates and delays the urgently needed core improvements necessary to improve all services. Passive provision for any further expansion is a reasonable consideration when doing this essential core work.

 

[Grimsby town]

I'd say it's a reasonably pragmatic view.

Sorry, "fairly cheap" is a very vague pronouncement and that applies equally to both a line between Chesterfield and Stocksbridge and extending tram train to Doncaster - as it does to almost every other proposal of this kind.

10 years to complete any railway project was possible in the early days of railways but today's planning and financial constraints make that rather optimistic.

I'd warn that planning and implementing such schemes takes a very long time and much effort by many parties. The Transpennine Route Upgrade (TRU) is not expected to be complete before 2036-2041 and may cost well over £10 billion before it's all done. When did that start in inception and planning? I've seen at close hand how the far more limited work has proceeded on the Hope Valley Scheme since inception in the late 1990s until completion this month. It almost certainly probably cost well over the announced £150 million.

I'd be very happy to see effort put into resolving congestion around Sheffield. That would start with road traffic congestion to get into the station, concourse circulation space, pedestrian bridge across the station, platform numbers and lengths - and most important of all tracks into the station from all directions. Electrification should be taking place over the next 10-15 years. That lot won't be cheap.

Potentially passenger numbers could well double over the next 10 years on the current routes, with relatively minor changes but quite major investment - including more rolling stock to operate them. Adding in these extras complicates and delays the urgently needed core improvements necessary to improve all services. Passive provision for any further expansion is a reasonable consideration when doing this essential core work.

A more specific number would be a couple of £100 million each. Similar to the Northumberland. Like the Northumberland they are possible because the lines already exist and simply need upgrading.

A good friend of mine was involved in the business case for TRU. I think it was submitted around 2018/19. 5-7 years is definitely doable for an upgrade of Sheffield considering there's already being thought about through HS2, MML electrification, and NPR. A Dore-Sheffield-Swinton upgrade should be less complex than TRU because it will need less land purchase as linespeeds are generally sufficient apart from the odd area such as Rotherham Masborough. I think the political will is there too. Sheffield to Leeds seems a higher priority for upgrade than Sheffield to Manchester. That doesn't mean it'll definitely happen but it's certainly possible that it could be done in the next 10-12 years. Most of TRUs most complex works will be finished by the early 2030s so it'd be the perfect time to move onto Sheffield to Leeds.

 

[Killingworth]

A more specific number would be a couple of £100 million each. Similar to the Northumberland. Like the Northumberland they are possible because the lines already exist and simply need upgrading.

A good friend of mine was involved in the business case for TRU. I think it was submitted around 2018/19. 5-7 years is definitely doable for an upgrade of Sheffield considering there's already being thought about through HS2, MML electrification, and NPR. A Dore-Sheffield-Swinton upgrade should be less complex than TRU because it will need less land purchase as linespeeds are generally sufficient apart from the odd area such as Rotherham Masborough. I think the political will is there too. Sheffield to Leeds seems a higher priority for upgrade than Sheffield to Manchester. That doesn't mean it'll definitely happen but it's certainly possible that it could be done in the next 10-12 years. Most of TRUs most complex works will be finished by the early 2030s so it'd be the perfect time to move onto Sheffield to Leeds.

I struggle to see how we can squeeze more paths reliably through the 2 track bottleneck out of Sheffield to the north and east. Part of that problem is the sheer variety of operators, traction types and routes concerned. But the disruption to get the necessary work done would/will be massive and that costs many millions. Planning alone would likely take 10 years, then finding a financial window of opportunity, tendering and then construction - 15-20 years at least. I hope to live long enough for the industry to prove I was too pessimistic - or lacked faith and optimism.

It took very many years of planning to get that TRU business case prepared.

Incidentally the top 11 journeys from Sheffield during 2023/2024 were:

Manchester 443,018
London 383,253
Leeds 320,722
Doncaster 276,460
Chesterfield 207,912
Nottingham 190,858
Barnsley 186,525
Meadowhall 180,289
Derby 157,787
York 120,065
M/c Airport 94,085
I'd say Sheffield needs upgrades in all directions! By other large city standards these are not very high passenger numbers.

There must be much more unsatisfied demand restrained by the poor services - and poor provision of attractive stations. Swinton was modernised in fairly recent times but look at that rusting away footbridge. Quality it was not, or the between Platforms 3 and 4 at Meadowhall!

 

[Meerkat]

Wow! This Gareth Dennis is like me as a kid - just drawing in a station wherever the railway is near a place, with no consideration of line capacity nor demand.
How is he proposing to fit in services frequent enough to be better than getting the bus without removing the fast services?
The costs for creating the extra line capacity needed would probably pay for a huge amount of tram and bus improvement that would have higher benefits.
If there is any money knocking about I would look at the Sheffield throats including quadrupling to Nunnery (as part of a bigger redevelopment I really dont think its that difficult) and look at whether the Barnsley line could be kept separate down to a flyover in the Brightside area - it looks like there is room on railway land though possibly need to move the Attercliffe terminals to somewhere off the freight lines)

 

[YorksLad12]

Wow! This Gareth Dennis is like me as a kid - just drawing in a station wherever the railway is near a place, with no consideration of line capacity nor demand.
How is he proposing to fit in services frequent enough to be better than getting the bus without removing the fast services?
The costs for creating the extra line capacity needed would probably pay for a huge amount of tram and bus improvement that would have higher benefits.
If there is any money knocking about I would look at the Sheffield throats including quadrupling to Nunnery (as part of a bigger redevelopment I really dont think its that difficult) and look at whether the Barnsley line could be kept separate down to a flyover in the Brightside area - it looks like there is room on railway land though possibly need to move the Attercliffe terminals to somewhere off the freight lines)

Now: there is a bidi line between Meadowhall and the old Brightside Station site, just to the north. And it has been used for passengers; I've twice been on a train that used it when heading north. The first time it allowed us at the stopper via Rotherham to call at Meadowhall at the same time, the second time was to allow us to overtake the stopper which was waiting to enter Meadowhall while the TPE service cleared. I have in the past wondered if the two routes could be merged at Brightside (you'd have to demolish the platforms, I guess) rather than outside Meadowhall. It would be costly, and you'd only be moving things back less than half a mile. But it would help keep things moving on the Barnsley route when the TPE service is inevitably delayed.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Wow! This Gareth Dennis is like me as a kid - just drawing in a station wherever the railway is near a place, with no consideration of line capacity nor demand.

You make it sound like Gareth Dennis works for WYCA.

 

[fishwomp]

Now: there is a bidi line between Meadowhall and the old Brightside Station site, just to the north.

Similarly there is a line on the south side (up) between Brightside and Attercliffe.

[...] I have in the past wondered if the two routes could be merged at Brightside (you'd have to demolish the platforms, I guess) rather than outside Meadowhall. It would be costly, and you'd only be moving things back less than half a mile. But it would help keep things moving on the Barnsley route when the TPE service is inevitably delayed.

The existing two options of where to merge the Barnsley and Rotherham routes, already gives some flexibility - of the northbound as you described happening, but also a southbound can carry on further if it otherwise has to wait for a Rotherham-bound to clear.

The cumulative hours I have spent waiting for a platform in the Nunnery tunnel coming into Sheffield makes me wonder if they could use the up-side Brightside loop to regulate. Eg. let through services overtake whilst the local waiting on its platform holds back in the loop until its platform is almost free and then is able to just go straight in... I've never experienced that, don't know if it's already doable.

 

[studio_two]

I had a wander on the Upper Don Trail a few weeks ago. This is the disused railway line as it currently stands at Fox Valley. It’s quite close to the houses.

 

[daodao]

Another idea, made by Gareth Dennis for Sheffield Tribune. Seems like there are too many stations but it looks feasible.

The vision of crayonista Gareth Dennis for Sheffield's local rail network is "pie in the sky", especially as services are currently significantly worse than they were in 2019. In particular, the service from Sheffield to Doncaster via Rotherham has deteriorated, with Rotherham now having only 2 tph, irregularly spaced, and Mexborough and Conisbrough only having 1 tph.

A sensible realistic vision would be to improve services along existing routes by operating local all station stopping services calling at existing stations only at least every 30 minutes (or as close to it as feasible) on the following routes:

• Sheffield to Barnsley
• Sheffield to Doncaster via Rotherham
• Sheffield to Worksop (calling also at Waverley if the station is opened)
• Sheffield to Chesterfield calling at Dronfield only (with both services extending to Nottingham calling at all existing stations via Ilkeston)
• Sheffield to Dore (existing 1 tph Hope Valley stopper plus 1 tph EM fast service)

This should not overload the congested entry to Sheffield Midland station from either direction, particularly if some of the enhancements are achieved by adding stops to existing train services. The only additional train would be to Worksop.

There is no sensible case for opening passenger stations on:

• the "Old Road" - places like Killamarsh are fairly close to the Supertram blue route; or
• the disused ex GC main line to Stocksbridge - it is poorly sited for what little population there is along the upper Don valley

 

[YorkshireBear]

I struggle to see how we can squeeze more paths reliably through the 2 track bottleneck out of Sheffield to the north and east. Part of that problem is the sheer variety of operators, traction types and routes concerned. But the disruption to get the necessary work done would/will be massive and that costs many millions. Planning alone would likely take 10 years, then finding a financial window of opportunity, tendering and then construction - 15-20 years at least. I hope to live long enough for the industry to prove I was too pessimistic - or lacked faith and optimism.

It took very many years of planning to get that TRU business case prepared.

Incidentally the top 11 journeys from Sheffield during 2023/2024 were:

Manchester 443,018
London 383,253
Leeds 320,722
Doncaster 276,460
Chesterfield 207,912
Nottingham 190,858
Barnsley 186,525
Meadowhall 180,289
Derby 157,787
York 120,065
M/c Airport 94,085
I'd say Sheffield needs upgrades in all directions! By other large city standards these are not very high passenger numbers.

There must be much more unsatisfied demand restrained by the poor services - and poor provision of attractive stations. Swinton was modernised in fairly recent times but look at that rusting away footbridge. Quality it was not, or the between Platforms 3 and 4 at Meadowhall!

Where do you find station data like that? My searches in the ORR data are either bad or it isn't there.

 

[Killingworth]

The vision of crayonista Gareth Dennis for Sheffield's local rail network is "pie in the sky". Services are currently significantly worse than they were in 2019. In particular, the service from Sheffield to Doncaster via Rotherham has deteriorated, with Rotherham now having only 2 tph, irregularly spaced, and Mexborough and Conisbrough only having 1 tph.

A sensible vision would be to improve services along existing routes by operating local all station stopping services calling at existing stations only at least every 30 minutes (or as close to it as feasible) on the following routes:

• Sheffield to Barnsley
• Sheffield to Doncaster via Rotherham
• Sheffield to Worksop (calling also at Waverley if the station is opened)
• Sheffield to Chesterfield calling at Dronfield only (with both services extending to Nottingham calling at all existing stations via Ilkeston)
• Sheffield to Dore (existing 1 tph Hope Valley stopper plus 1 tph EM fast service)

This should not overload the congested entry to Sheffield Midland station from either direction, particularly if some of the enhancements are achieved by adding stops to existing train services.

There is no sensible case for opening passenger stations on:

• the "Old Road" - places like Killamarsh are fairly close to the Supertram blue route; or
• the disused ex GC main line to Stocksbridge - it is poorly sited for what little population there is along the upper Don valley

Hear hear.

Even this modest proposal will be hard enough to achieve but builds on existing traffic flows that are constrained due to infrquency of services.

Where do you find station data like that? My searches in the ORR data are either bad or it isn't there.

The excellent Railway Data website at; https://www.railwaydata.co.uk/

Many hours worth of very useful data on there.

 

[YorkshireBear]

The vision of crayonista Gareth Dennis for Sheffield's local rail network is "pie in the sky", especially as services are currently significantly worse than they were in 2019. In particular, the service from Sheffield to Doncaster via Rotherham has deteriorated, with Rotherham now having only 2 tph, irregularly spaced, and Mexborough and Conisbrough only having 1 tph.

A sensible realistic vision would be to improve services along existing routes by operating local all station stopping services calling at existing stations only at least every 30 minutes (or as close to it as feasible) on the following routes:

• Sheffield to Barnsley
• Sheffield to Doncaster via Rotherham
• Sheffield to Worksop (calling also at Waverley if the station is opened)
• Sheffield to Chesterfield calling at Dronfield only (with both services extending to Nottingham calling at all existing stations via Ilkeston)
• Sheffield to Dore (existing 1 tph Hope Valley stopper plus 1 tph EM fast service)

This should not overload the congested entry to Sheffield Midland station from either direction, particularly if some of the enhancements are achieved by adding stops to existing train services. The only additional train would be to Worksop.

There is no sensible case for opening passenger stations on:

• the "Old Road" - places like Killamarsh are fairly close to the Supertram blue route; or
• the disused ex GC main line to Stocksbridge - it is poorly sited for what little population there is along the upper Don valley

The vision of crayonista Gareth Dennis for Sheffield's local rail network is "pie in the sky", especially as services are currently significantly worse than they were in 2019. In particular, the service from Sheffield to Doncaster via Rotherham has deteriorated, with Rotherham now having only 2 tph, irregularly spaced, and Mexborough and Conisbrough only having 1 tph.

A sensible realistic vision would be to improve services along existing routes by operating local all station stopping services calling at existing stations only at least every 30 minutes (or as close to it as feasible) on the following routes:

• Sheffield to Barnsley
• Sheffield to Doncaster via Rotherham
• Sheffield to Worksop (calling also at Waverley if the station is opened)
• Sheffield to Chesterfield calling at Dronfield only (with both services extending to Nottingham calling at all existing stations via Ilkeston)
• Sheffield to Dore (existing 1 tph Hope Valley stopper plus 1 tph EM fast service)

This should not overload the congested entry to Sheffield Midland station from either direction, particularly if some of the enhancements are achieved by adding stops to existing train services. The only additional train would be to Worksop.

There is no sensible case for opening passenger stations on:

• the "Old Road" - places like Killamarsh are fairly close to the Supertram blue route; or
• the disused ex GC main line to Stocksbridge - it is poorly sited for what little population there is along the upper Don valley

Agreed, and having thought more about it and done some looking on aerial imagery agreed it is way too much. Although I never thought the timescales and costs were realistic.

Although my only comment, a long term vision is nothing to be shy about. Using improved existing services to justify it, but not 10 years. More 50.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Jan 2025 ==

Hear hear.

Even this modest proposal will be hard enough to achieve but builds on existing traffic flows that are constrained due to infrquency of services.

The excellent Railway Data website at; https://www.railwaydata.co.uk/

Many hours worth of very useful data on there.

Many thanks.