pappleby
Member
just wondering as you do on a sunday morning,why are the good people of Ripley,opposed very strongley it seems,on re-opening ,Derby-Ripley 'greenway' dis-used rail line.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Ripley Rail Link
- Thread starter pappleby
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Wyvern
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 1,573
See Ambervalley Regeneration
Apart from the fact that part of the trackbed has been built upon, it will need umpteen level crossing and the promoters dont seem to to have much idea (like the suggestion of a triangular junction with the main line)
Apart from the fact that part of the trackbed has been built upon, it will need umpteen level crossing and the promoters dont seem to to have much idea (like the suggestion of a triangular junction with the main line)
pappleby
Member
ah!-i'm a bit wiser now,thanks for the reply.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
From what I read from the link that was posted, tempers were becoming heated to say the least, with a mention of a post being deleted stating libel as a danger. What was the reason for bringing this back to the forum? There is no shortage of existing public transport between Ripley and Derby.
Wyvern has stated many of the problems as at the present time.
Wyvern has stated many of the problems as at the present time.
tbtc
Veteran Member
Similarly there are public transport opportunities between Leigh and Manchester. Or Lancaster University and Lancaster. Or East Didsbury and Manchester. Or Colne and Skipton...
Personally I'm not convinced by reopening old lines/ creating brand new ones whilst we don't have enough trains to meet existing demand on existing lines, but that's just me (and I appreciate it goes against what most people on here think).
Where is the stock going to come from for any of these proposed new lines when we are needing to spend money on lengthening existing trains/ replacing Pacers etc
It seems bizarre to me that these people don't want a rail link back.
However, that is their choice and I feel that we'd be better off rebuilding some of the lines which have local support.
As for the rolling stock issue, yes, it is an issue, but I don't think that we should let a temporary problem (temporary in the sense that all rolling stock is more or less temporary) get in the way of long term infrastructure investment.
Yes, there are other transport opportunities between Leigh and Manchester, however they are inadequate and I see little point in spending money on a busway when it is the railway network and not the bus network from which Leigh is excluded.
However, that is their choice and I feel that we'd be better off rebuilding some of the lines which have local support.
As for the rolling stock issue, yes, it is an issue, but I don't think that we should let a temporary problem (temporary in the sense that all rolling stock is more or less temporary) get in the way of long term infrastructure investment.
Yes, there are other transport opportunities between Leigh and Manchester, however they are inadequate and I see little point in spending money on a busway when it is the railway network and not the bus network from which Leigh is excluded.
RichmondCommu
Established Member
The line to Ripley closed way before Beeching (in the1930's i think) because there simply wasn't the demand. If there wasn't any demand way back then why do you think there would be any now? Ripley is simply not big enough to warrant that kind of investment; the A38 by national standards isn't too bad in that neck of the woods and the bus service is operated by Trent who generally make a good job of things.
The plans to reopen the line were to put it kindly highly unrealistic and there are far more deserving cases in the local area. A station in Ilkeston would be a start.
Last edited:
I didn't suggest that they should. Re-open lines where the locals want them re-opened I say.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
You pick a fine time on a Sunday night (after 2300) to test my knowledge of these four routes that you have stated, but I will try my best:-
LEIGH AND MANCHESTER
26...............Leigh-Boothstown- Manchester (First Manchester)
X34.............Leigh-Astley-Manchester (First Manchester)
LANCASTER UNIVERSITY AND LANCASTER
2.............University-Lancaster-Morecambe-Heysham (Stagecoach)
2A...........(as above)
4.............University- Lancaster- Bare- Morecambe -Heysham (Stagecoach)
There is also service 40 - Morecambe-Lancaster-University-Garstang-Preston (Stagecoach)
EAST DIDSBURY AND MANCHESTER
42.............Stockport-East Didsbury-Manchester (Stagecoach)
50.............East Didsbury - Manchester (Stagecoach)
130...........Macclesfield- Alderley Edge-Wilmslow-East Didsbury -Manchester (Arriva)
There are also train services from East Didsbury to Manchester.
COLNE AND SKIPTON
28...........Burnley-Nelson- Colne-Barnoldswick-Skipton (Transdev Group)
215..........Burnley-Nelson- Colne-Skipton (Pennine Motors)
Last edited:
tbtc
Veteran Member
The majority of lines which closed in the 1930's succumbed to competition from early bus services and motor cars later. The whole demographic has changed since then, and as we all know rail travel has experienced a revival despite privatisation.Reopened lines such as Alloa and Ebbw Vale tend to produce twice as many passengers as forecast.
I suspect that the people raising their voices against this idea may live next to the line and be worried about their property prices. Also it needs to be remembered that just because they are vocal that they are in the majority.
Having said that I've looked at the scheme and it seems very impractical and a waste of money - reopening Matlock - Buxton would be more useful and produce a better financial return IMHO.
tbtc
Veteran Member
These two are always mentioned, since they were two schemes which went better than expectation. People never mention the unspectacular reopenings/ new lines (Airdrie - Bathgate, East Midlands Parkway, Anniesland line...)
Now normally I agree with you wholeheartedly but in the case of the A to B I'm not going to. Instead I'm going to say give it a chance, it's only been open properly since when March(?) and even then it took a while for the whole timetable to come into operation. If in 18 months or so passenger numbers are still uninspiring then you can add it to that list until then give it time to bed in.
You can't really compare a Parkway opening though. Parkways are usually there either to serve another transport mode such as an airport, or as a new way of serving an existing market such as a large City. This is different from a re-opening to an established town which has been marooned from the network.
I would say that lines on the Regional network such as Settle - Carlisle, which, although never quite closed, were brought back from near death, would be a more meaningful comparison.
tbtc
Veteran Member
I hope it works, I really do, because one "underperforming" new line is going to make it harder to justify more ones.
Early days, especially given the well documented problems, but I've heard the "Alloa and Ebbw Vale worked better than expected, so this justifies any new reopening" argument a few times, so just have to add a note of caution (being a cynical bugger!)
In the case of Alloa-Stirling it actually carried in it's first year something like 2.5 times the numbers predicted by the feasibility study which either suggests that feasibility studies don't work or that the company which did the study shouldn't be given any more work.
Incidentally I just did a search for "Airdrie to Bathgate not busy" and "Airdrie to Bathgate underperforming" and turned up nothing. Is this official or just an opinion?
Last edited:
- Status