Re-opening of rail routes

[The Planner]

Probably a bit more to do than that but in the grand scheme of things easier than most.

 

[Cowley]

I'm not sure off the top of my head the answer to this, but have any railways been rebuilt in the same way as The Borders railway in any part of the UK other than Scotland?

Edit - Answering my own question slightly, I suppose some of the tram and light rail routes have used parts of abandoned formations, but have any heavy rail routes been put back for passenger railways?

 

[johnnychips]

New Mills to Hazel Grove to let Manchester to Sheffield trains run via Stockport, but this was a while ago.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm not sure off the top of my head the answer to this, but have any railways been rebuilt in the same way as The Borders railway in any part of the UK other than Scotland?

Edit - Answering my own question slightly, I suppose some of the tram and light rail routes have used parts of abandoned formations, but have any heavy rail routes been put back for passenger railways?

If you mean completely rebuilt on the line of a closed railway, with the closure not part of the reopening process (if that makes sense) then quite a few. For example:

Parts of the Robin Hood Line
Birmingham Moor St - Handsworth
Airdrie-Bathgate (OK, that's Scotland too, but was pretty significant)
Ebbw Vale Parkway - Ebbw Vale
Watford High Street - Croxley Green (under construction)

 

[randyrippley]

we've been round this before, but the only way the Fleetwood route would be sensibe would be as an extension of the Blackpool trams along Dock Rd and alongside Amounderness way through the abandoned docklands to the railway, and on to Poulton. That would tie Thornton and Poulton into the tram network

 

[yorksrob]

I'm not sure off the top of my head the answer to this, but have any railways been rebuilt in the same way as The Borders railway in any part of the UK other than Scotland?

Edit - Answering my own question slightly, I suppose some of the tram and light rail routes have used parts of abandoned formations, but have any heavy rail routes been put back for passenger railways?

Ridiculously few in England. Leigh, St Ives and Dunstable had reopening prospects but were replaced with guided busways instead.

 

[edwin_m]

New Mills to Hazel Grove to let Manchester to Sheffield trains run via Stockport, but this was a while ago.

That was (and still is) open as a freight line towards Altrincham. A new curve was built to link it to the Buxton line at Hazel Grove. So none of it was a Borders-style rebuild, but Bicester to Bletchley will be not far off being one of those and Bedford to Sandy definitely one if it happens.

 

[6Gman]

I've just realised the forum favourite isn't there!!
Aberystwyth to Carmarthen!!

Even the CBT isn't that crazy!





(Presumably it would be a matter for the devolved WAG?)

 

[WatcherZero]

And where is the money to come from?

Chancellor will reportedly be putting aside £15bn for infrastructure schemes as an economic stimulus to help combat Brexit. The requirement however is that they be quick wins, shovel ready and with a good economic return on investment. Those requirements will however favour road and mean the majority of rail schemes will be excluded as only ones that are already at an advanced stage of design will be deployable without extensive design/consultation time. The rail schemes likely to benefit therefore will be small and quick things like stations, bottlenecks or mid sized schemes already at GRIP 3 stage (like for example Skelmersdale branch).

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Chancellor will reportedly be putting aside £15bn for infrastructure schemes as an economic stimulus to help combat Brexit. The requirement however is that they be quick wins, shovel ready and with a good economic return on investment. Those requirements will however favour road and mean the majority of rail schemes will be excluded as only ones that are already at an advanced stage of design will be deployable without extensive design/consultation time. The rail schemes likely to benefit therefore will be small and quick things like stations, bottlenecks or mid sized schemes already at GRIP 3 stage (like for example Skelmersdale branch).

I wouldn't be surprised if some flood prevention/alleviation schemes aren't included in the mix.

 

[6Gman]

Chancellor will reportedly be putting aside £15bn for infrastructure schemes as an economic stimulus to help combat Brexit. The requirement however is that they be quick wins, shovel ready and with a good economic return on investment. Those requirements will however favour road and mean the majority of rail schemes will be excluded as only ones that are already at an advanced stage of design will be deployable without extensive design/consultation time. The rail schemes likely to benefit therefore will be small and quick things like stations, bottlenecks or mid sized schemes already at GRIP 3 stage (like for example Skelmersdale branch).

The Middlewich Branch could be rolled out quickly and the work would offer an economic stimulus BUT hard to see how a 153 trundling through small Cheshire towns would be anything other than a net loss-maker.

 

[daodao]

The Middlewich Branch could be rolled out quickly and the work would offer an economic stimulus BUT hard to see how a 153 trundling through small Cheshire towns would be anything other than a net loss-maker.

The line is already open for freight and the towns served are not especially small. Each major settlement between Altrincham and Crewe, i.e. Knutsford/Northwich/Middlewich/Sandbach, has a population in excess of 10k.

The additional hourly train proposed to be introduced between M/c and Northwich from 2018 could easily be extended to Crewe, so only 1 extra train would be needed, assuming the Northwich-Crewe journey time is under 30 minutes (achievable in 1910).

 

[Chester1]

In England Borders Rail style reopenings have been rejected in favour of other solutions and I don't think that is a bad thing. There is a tendancy of heavy rail fans to think that reopening as heavy rail is always the best solution. Leigh guided busway was built because the business cases for heavy or light rail didn't stack up. East Didsbury Metrolink line was a much more sensible option than trying to rebuild a railway to Stockport, Deansgate or both. If add up reusing freight lines for pasenger use, light rail and guided busways there have been a large number of reopenings in England.

 

[47802]

I think the East - West rail link is enough to be going on with, and particularly when comes to lines that are long since closed and expensive to reopen.

Some of those schemes described as high priority I think are laughable quite frankly, and I personally wouldn't look at reopening any more lines unless its directly related to congestion and overcrowding in our major cities until the last Railbus has gone, in other word the priority should be investment in the existing network at the moment.

 

[edwin_m]

The additional hourly train proposed to be introduced between M/c and Northwich from 2018 could easily be extended to Crewe, so only 1 extra train would be needed, assuming the Northwich-Crewe journey time is under 30 minutes (achievable in 1910).

Part of the problem is that all but two of the platforms at Crewe are only accessible from the Sandbach direction by crossing the fast lines. Hopefully Crewe Hub will sort that out at some point.

 

[swt_passenger]

... as only ones that are already at an advanced stage of design will be deployable without extensive design/consultation time. The rail schemes likely to benefit therefore will be small and quick things like stations, bottlenecks or mid sized schemes already at GRIP 3 stage (like for example Skelmersdale branch).

I'm not disagreeing with the basic point about a particular GRIP Stage being reached, but wouldn't 'shovel ready' be more like GRIP 5, "detailed design"?

 

[Dr_Intoxicated]

Chancellor will reportedly be putting aside £15bn for infrastructure schemes as an economic stimulus to help combat Brexit. The requirement however is that they be quick wins, shovel ready and with a good economic return on investment. Those requirements will however favour road and mean the majority of rail schemes will be excluded as only ones that are already at an advanced stage of design will be deployable without extensive design/consultation time. The rail schemes likely to benefit therefore will be small and quick things like stations, bottlenecks or mid sized schemes already at GRIP 3 stage (like for example Skelmersdale branch).

I heard on the news this morning that one of the proposed projects was a new motorway link between Oxford and Cambridge.

That really made me chuckle thinking of the Yes Minister episode where they talk about some of the first Motorways that were built were between London and Oxford and Cambridge so that ministers could visit their old collages.

On a more serious point would such a motorway have any implications for the East West rail link.

 

[Kettledrum]

If you mean completely rebuilt on the line of a closed railway, with the closure not part of the reopening process (if that makes sense) then quite a few. For example:

Parts of the Robin Hood Line
Birmingham Moor St - Handsworth
Airdrie-Bathgate (OK, that's Scotland too, but was pretty significant)
Ebbw Vale Parkway - Ebbw Vale
Watford High Street - Croxley Green (under construction)

I wonder if extending the Robin Hood line North might be one such scheme that could be done in the short term. I'm sure there is at least one other open freight line in Nottinghamshire than could be re-opened to passenger traffic. How close to "shovel ready" they are I am not quite sure, but they are already open to freight traffic.

 

[brompton rail]

I wonder if extending the Robin Hood line North might be one such scheme that could be done in the short term. I'm sure there is at least one other open freight line in Nottinghamshire than could be re-opened to passenger traffic. How close to "shovel ready" they are I am not quite sure, but they are already open to freight traffic.

Extending Robin Hood line north....... where to?

 

[ac6000cw]

I heard on the news this morning that one of the proposed projects was a new motorway link between Oxford and Cambridge.

See http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=99892&page=62

The £27m announced is to fund a detailed study into the project, so it's at an earlier stage than the Bedford-Cambridge part of the E-W rail project. In any case it's not a new motorway being suggested, it's upgrading existing roads to sub-motorway standard.

 

[Kettledrum]

Extending Robin Hood line north....... where to?

Sorry - I meant East:

"Besides the six mile-plus extension from Warsop to Ollerton, the plan would involve re-opening existing stations in Warsop, and Edwinstowe and building a new station in Ollerton.

The Leader of Nottinghamshire County Council, Alan Rhodes, met Rail Minster Claire Perry to discuss the plan.

David Ralph, the Chief Executive D2N2 Local Enterprise Partnership, also attended the meeting.

Cllr Rhodes said: “It was a very positive meeting and we were well received by the minister."

See:

http://nottstv.com/talks-begin-extend-robin-hood-rail-line-build-new-stations/


The other existing freight only line I was thinking of goes South West and this links the Erewash Valley route to the Robin Hood line. A new service here

could provide the opportunity to upgrade the current freight only railway line that links the Erewash Valley railway line to the Robin Hood railway line between Pye Bridge and Kirkby in Ashfield to provide a passenger service utilising both the Erewash Valley and Robin Hood railway lines as well as a link to the proposed HS2 Hub Station at Toton.. An example of the proposed passenger service would call at the following stations:

Nottingham – Beeston – Attenborough – East Midlands Hub Interchange Station – Ilkeston – Langley Mill – Pye Bridge – Kirkby In Ashfield – Sutton In Ashfield – Mansfield – Mansfield Woodhouse – Worksop

Return route would be the same as above but in reverse and after East Midlands Hub Interchange Station the passenger service would call at:

Long Eaton – Spondon – Derby – Spondon – Long Eaton – Attenborough – Beeston – Nottingham

This would provide a circular route that could be operated by one train per hour going clockwise and one train per hour going anti clockwise giving stations along the route a half hour frequency of service and a choice of either Derby or Nottingham for the final destination.

See: http://railwaymaniac.com/2016/04/hs2-colliery-line-2/

 

[bluenoxid]

The latter proposal is also being looked at by the council. I understand that they are thinking light rail or tram train to maximise connectivity.

 

[didcotdean]

The £27m announced is to fund a detailed study into the project, so it's at an earlier stage than the Bedford-Cambridge part of the E-W rail project. In any case it's not a new motorway being suggested, it's upgrading existing roads to sub-motorway standard.

There could potentially be a significant amount of new route build, depending on the option(s) chosen. Some potential sharing of the same corridor as rail too.

 

[ac6000cw]

There could potentially be a significant amount of new route build, depending on the option(s) chosen. Some potential sharing of the same corridor as rail too.

Yes, but far more likely at the western end - most of the route between the M1 and Cambridge is already at the suggested standard (Cambourne to the A1 is the only part east of the M1 that isn't, and that is mostly 'open-country' except in the vicinity of St. Neots, so shouldn't be too difficult to dual). So I don't see that much scope for sharing a corridor on that stretch since there is not likely to be much new road route to share (and most of the recently suggested eastern section E-W rail routes take a more southerly path than the A421/A428 anyway).

 

[Kettledrum]

The latter proposal is also being looked at by the council. I understand that they are thinking light rail or tram train to maximise connectivity.

Tram train might work on a lightly used freight line....but if parts of the route are also on main lines with existing express passenger trains such as HSTs running into Nottingham or occasionally also on the Erewash Valley line through Ilkeston, would tram trains work?

I'm not sure which rail schemes in the whole country are "shovel ready" but I can't help wondering whether the conversion of an existing freight line for 6 miles or so might be the next best thing.

Of course, then there's the problem that there is no existing rolling stock to run on it!

 

[furnessvale]

Tram train might work on a lightly used freight line....but if parts of the route are also on main lines with existing express passenger trains such as HSTs running into Nottingham or occasionally also on the Erewash Valley line through Ilkeston, would tram trains work?

I'm not sure which rail schemes in the whole country are "shovel ready" but I can't help wondering whether the conversion of an existing freight line for 6 miles or so might be the next best thing.

Of course, then there's the problem that there is no existing rolling stock to run on it!

I believe increased capacity on the Felixstowe branch is shovel ready.

An increase from 33 to 46 freight trains each way a day, all of which can be filled by waiting customers, must surely rank as worthwhile.

 

[DarloRich]

The Campaign for Better Transport have prduced this lobby document, your thoughts all.

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.c...-rail-improvements-in-autumn-statement/156965


[/LIST]

just crayonista silliness. Few if, any, will happen unless local councils and business pony up. Money is short and so we need to see cast iron, gold dipped and platinum coated business cases for any such proposals backed by serious local authority, community and commons level support.

 

[HowardGWR]

I heard on the news this morning that one of the proposed projects was a new motorway link between Oxford and Cambridge.

That really made me chuckle thinking of the Yes Minister episode where they talk about some of the first Motorways that were built were between London and Oxford and Cambridge so that ministers could visit their old collages.

On a more serious point would such a motorway have any implications for the East West rail link.

See my emboldened word. Do you mean their old pin-up collections?

 

[PHILIPE]

The process before building can even start is so long winded by the time funding has been explored, planning issues, contracts dealt with and which take time. Plus all the dithering that comes into any decision making taking up more time and all this time the costs just keep on rising.

 

[didcotdean]

Yes, but far more likely at the western end - most of the route between the M1 and Cambridge is already at the suggested standard (Cambourne to the A1 is the only part east of the M1 that isn't, and that is mostly 'open-country' except in the vicinity of St. Neots, so shouldn't be too difficult to dual). So I don't see that much scope for sharing a corridor on that stretch since there is not likely to be much new road route to share (and most of the recently suggested eastern section E-W rail routes take a more southerly path than the A421/A428 anyway).

It is the Bicester to the M1 Option B route for the Expressway that mostly parallels the rail corridor but since they have been careful to only publish schematic diagrams rather than anything more detailed, exactly how closely is not defined. M1-Cambridge is stated to be largely an improvement to the current route, with some offline upgrades.