Northallerton Slow Lines

[Legolash2o]

Northallerton currently has three/four level crossings which causes a lot of traffic issues.

What your solutions be in regards to the slow lines and the level crossings?

One thought I've had is to convert the slow lines into cuttings so that the railway goes under the roads where the crossings are. No idea how feasible that is though and would of course require lifting the current track in order to dig them out!

 

[A0]

Northallerton currently has three/four level crossings which causes a lot of traffic issues.

What your solutions be in regards to the slow lines and the level crossings?

One thought I've had is to convert the slow lines into cuttings so that the railway goes under the roads where the crossings are. No idea how feasible that is though and would of course require lifting the current track in order to dig them out!

Are the slow lines that heavily used given they don't serve the station and aren't wired?

The one which from a look on Google Maps / Earth may be worth looking at is the Yarm line one on the A167 - which could be bridged but would probably need the road to be diverted to achieve.

 

[swt_passenger]

Northallerton currently has three/four level crossings which causes a lot of traffic issues.

What your solutions be in regards to the slow lines and the level crossings?

One thought I've had is to convert the slow lines into cuttings so that the railway goes under the roads where the crossings are. No idea how feasible that is though and would of course require lifting the current track in order to dig them out!

Have you seen this NR proposal? AIUI the slows would effectively become a diversionary option only, all flows to/from Teeside would normally pass through the station on the new slow lines, down trains using a new flyover route. The NR source suggested keeping the low level lines would enable freights to be overtaken, implying they wouldn‘t be lifted but might be used less than the new slows.

Newcastle-York rail investment options: what are your thoughts?

I think there is some truth in this - both a strength and weakness of the Leamside is that it could do so many things (additional express capacity, freight, local stoppers, T+W Metro extension) that no one stakeholder group has gone for it (apart from the aborted attempt to re-open it c2000)...

www.railforums.co.uk

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Jun 2022 ==

 

[mike57]

The crossing gates at the north of the town seem to be the ones that cause most disruption, and as well as freight flows they also carry passenger services towards Yarm. Would a simple overbridge solution for the road solve the problem? Northallerton would probably benefit from a 4 track solution through the station so that trains stopping there dont block the ECML. There used to be platforms on the low level route I think, maybe it would have been better to retain those platforms for stopping services and only used the current 'main line' platforms in times of disruption.

 

[Legolash2o]

Have you seen this NR proposal? AIUI the slows would effectively become a diversionary option only, all flows to/from Teeside would normally pass through the station on the new slow lines, down trains using a new flyover route. The NR source suggested keeping the low level lines would enable freights to be overtaken, implying they wouldn‘t be lifted but might be used less than the new slows.

Newcastle-York rail investment options: what are your thoughts?

I think there is some truth in this - both a strength and weakness of the Leamside is that it could do so many things (additional express capacity, freight, local stoppers, T+W Metro extension) that no one stakeholder group has gone for it (apart from the aborted attempt to re-open it c2000)...

www.railforums.co.uk

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Jun 2022 ==

I didn't see that. I suspect there isn't a timeframe for that if they decide to implement the plans?

The crossing gates at the north of the town seem to be the ones that cause most disruption, and as well as freight flows they also carry passenger services towards Yarm. Would a simple overbridge solution for the road solve the problem? Northallerton would probably benefit from a 4 track solution through the station so that trains stopping there dont block the ECML. There used to be platforms on the low level route I think, maybe it would have been better to retain those platforms for stopping services and only used the current 'main line' platforms in times of disruption.

I don't think there's enough room for a road bridge at that location unless the rail track is also lowered

 

[zwk500]

Northallerton currently has three/four level crossings which causes a lot of traffic issues.

What your solutions be in regards to the slow lines and the level crossings?

One thought I've had is to convert the slow lines into cuttings so that the railway goes under the roads where the crossings are. No idea how feasible that is though and would of course require lifting the current track in order to dig them out!

There's no way there's the room to lower the slow lines another c.6m for any reasonable price. Best option is a Hitchin-type flyover north of the current station with 4-tracking through the platform area, as suggested by NR. A more price-sensitive option would be to add in the up slow through Northallerton and lift the Up Low-level line so the level crossings see less use, with a new platform on the remaining Down Low-level line to avoid conflicting moves at Northallerton Main Line station if there's still any York-Eaglescliffe direct passenger traffic (Manchester-Redcars?). A new Down Fast -> Down Slow crossover at Longlands Jn would allow regulation of freight between Thirsk and Longlands.

 

[mike57]

York-Eaglescliffe direct passenger traffic

TPE are roughly hourly each way and then you have Grand Central services to Sunderland (6 services each way each day I think)

I don't think there's enough room for a road bridge at that location unless the rail track is also lowered

I did wonder, its a few years since I have been there, used to visit regularly before we moved east 15 years ago. From memory you have the roundabout near Wickes to the North and a supermarket and some other retail stuff to the South. How long do road approach ramps have to be to clear a railway track with a bridge? I have seen some pretty steep ones but I suspect these date from the Victorian era, and no doubt now there is a maximum gradient.

 

[D6130]

TPE are roughly hourly each way and then you have Grand Central services to Sunderland (6 services each way each day I think)

....plus the one LNER Kings Cross-Middlesbrough in each direction, which use the avoiding lines.

 

[billio]

There's no way there's the room to lower the slow lines another c.6m for any reasonable price. Best option is a Hitchin-type flyover north of the current station with 4-tracking through the platform area, as suggested by NR. A more price-sensitive option would be to add in the up slow through Northallerton and lift the Up Low-level line so the level crossings see less use, with a new platform on the remaining Down Low-level line to avoid conflicting moves at Northallerton Main Line station if there's still any York-Eaglescliffe direct passenger traffic (Manchester-Redcars?). A new Down Fast -> Down Slow crossover at Longlands Jn would allow regulation of freight between Thirsk and Longlands.

I agree 4-tracking well beyond the station, at the station move the down platform west to accommodate the extra tracks. About 1.5 miles further north, a flyover from the down slow line to a new two track line towards Yarm which would curve round to the north of the town joining the original formation near Brompton. This not only removes the level crossings but also releases some land from the old line running through the town but makes operartion of the station easier as stopping trains do not block the fast lines.
It would however be a hell of a mess for several years.

 

[MarkyT]

I agree 4-tracking well beyond the station, at the station move the down platform west to accommodate the extra tracks. About 1.5 miles further north, a flyover from the down slow line to a new two track line towards Yarm which would curve round to the north of the town joining the original formation near Brompton. This not only removes the level crossings but also releases some land from the old line running through the town but makes operartion of the station easier as stopping trains do not block the fast lines.
It would however be a hell of a mess for several years.

Something like this perhaps:

Yellow - new NR track
Red - new road on old trackbed - inner bypass and improved station access
Blue - Wensleydale Railway rerouted to new Northallerton station site next to old low level lines.

 

[zwk500]

Something like this perhaps:
[PIC]
Yellow - new NR track
Red - new road on old trackbed - inner bypass and improved station access
Blue - Wensleydale Railway rerouted to new Northallerton station site next to old low level lines.

Pretty much, although I'd expect the Wensleydale railway to be left still needing the headshunt move to access the mainline (I'd expect a new flyover to start north of the road bridge), and I'd expect the existing Up line to Northallerton Station to remain. The down line may even remain as a glorified freight loop.

 

[swt_passenger]

....plus the one LNER Kings Cross-Middlesbrough in each direction, which use the avoiding lines.

They’re intended to become 6 or 7 per day as well. All adds up to more crossing down time…