S&DJR, M&SWJ or DN&S

[yorksrob]

Mentioning that exposes the fact that the S and D closing, plus that of the M and SWJ, plus the DN and S, was, now in hindsight, way over the top when considering north to south traffic. One should have been retained. My vote would have gone to the M and SWJ probably -it's a big subject though.

I thought this was a fascinating question (I was tempted to put it in infrastructure rather than Nostalgia, but sadly, nostalgia is probably the place for it to be).

Supposing the powers that be had taken a more strategic and long term view of links from the Midlands to the South Coast, and decided that we'd needed to retain one or more these North to South routes. Which of these regional railways would have been the best to keep.

We have:

S&DJR linking Bournemouth and Bristol via Bath Green Park
M&SWJ linking Andover and Cheltenham via Swindon
DN&S linking Didcot and Winchester via Newbury.

My choice would be the S&DJR, and that's not just because of the Nostalgia value and it's advocacy by the great Sir John Betjamin.

This is because although the intermediate settlements aren't huge, many of them such as Wincanton and Blandford are isolated from the network enough to have generated a regular passenger traffic that would have perhaps justified the routes existence as a basic railway through the lean times. Additional to this, it has the large conurbations of Bournemouth to the South and Bath and Bristol in the North, which as well as generating a through traffic to keep things ticking over would have led to commuter flows at east end.

With regard to the DN&S, it's main settlements are all on existing routes, and it's hard to see how a reasonable through traffic could be generated. On the face of it, had it survived, it looks as though it might have had some sort of future as a freight route (particularly had the Great Central from Banbury survived), but even though it avoids Reading, I think the sections south of Winchester and North of Oxford would have constituted pinch points negating its value as a freight relief route.

So to the M&SWJ. When taken together with the Southern Railway route from Andover to Southampton, this would have been a better candidate for modern freight route, providing a path from Southampton towards the midlands away from the mainlines of the South East, and it would have provided a passenger link to some important towns such as Marlborough and Cirencester, yet I'm not convinced the route would have generated the right mix of local and through passenger traffic through the lean times. I'm also not sure that Cheltenham would have been enough to generate commuter traffic on the Northern end of the line. Perhaps this is one of those routes that should have been protected.

My vote defenately goes with the S&DJR.

Any other thoughts ?

 

[Taunton]

I (just) remember the S&D when it was open. In winter, the passenger trains were generally deserted and The Pines would be doing well with 50 passengers. outside the summer, the only thing that kept the line going was the Radstock collieries, and those all closed in the 1960s. The reversal at Bath, steep gradients, and some decidedly uncomfortable if not hazardous issues like Combe Down Tunnel, outside Bath, meant it would never be a sensible through route.

The MSWJR didn't really serve anywhere useful at all. Even Swindon station was out in nowhere compared to the main line point.

The DNS likewise had hardly any passengers.

Like it or not, the Birmingham-Banbury-Oxford-Reading-Basingstoke-Southampton axis is the way to go.

 

[yorksrob]

The reversal at Bath, steep gradients, and some decidedly uncomfortable if not hazardous issues like Combe Down Tunnel, outside Bath, meant it would never be a sensible through route.

Those sorts of things might have been an issue in the steam age, but they surely wouldn't cause a problem with modern traction.

Like it or not, the Birmingham-Banbury-Oxford-Reading-Basingstoke-Southampton axis is the way to go.

That's going to be a very busy axis within the next few years.

 

[Muzer]

From a purely selfish point of view - M&SWJR+Sprat & Winkle Line (Andover & Redbridge Railway). No chance of that coming back now though, the line south of Andover has been heavily built on unless there's a possibility of using a completely new alignment until you get out of the surrounding villages - and then you'd have to persuade Test Valley Borough Council that a railway is better use of the rest of the trackbed than a walking/cycle path. And I've no idea north of Andover, but I believe it's probably a similar picture in other bigger towns.

However, from a realistic point of view - S&DJR. Those areas on the South coast do certainly look like they could do with a service from the North. It's a bit of a pain not having a more direct route to Poole/Bournemouth than via Weymouth or via Salisbury/Basingstoke and Southampton, and I'm sure this applies to many places.

 

[euryalus]

Any other thoughts ?

This question is based on the premise that the "powers that be" were trying to create a modern and efficient transport system involving railways, roads and inland water transport, whereas in reality the situation was somewhat different. Led by Marples the great motorway builder - indeed the boss of a major construction firm with a vested interest in road transport - the Ministry of Transport, with the blessing of the Tory government, was trying to shift as much traffic as possible onto the roads. In that context, the deliberate destruction of most rail links between the Midlands and the South Coast made perfect sense. (In recent years we have seen that same political party destroy the coal mining industry).

 

[yorksrob]

From a purely selfish point of view - M&SWJR+Sprat & Winkle Line (Andover & Redbridge Railway). No chance of that coming back now though, the line south of Andover has been heavily built on unless there's a possibility of using a completely new alignment until you get out of the surrounding villages - and then you'd have to persuade Test Valley Borough Council that a railway is better use of the rest of the trackbed than a walking/cycle path. And I've no idea north of Andover, but I believe it's probably a similar picture in other bigger towns.

Perhaps if there had been a couple of major freight generators along the way, it might have survived with minimal signalling and a 153 going back and forth. I understand that this was a contributory factor in the survival of the heart of Wales line.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

This question is based on the premise that the "powers that be" were trying to create a modern and efficient transport system involving railways, roads and inland water transport, whereas in reality the situation was somewhat different. Led by Marples the great motorway builder - indeed the boss of a major construction firm with a vested interest in road transport - the Ministry of Transport, with the blessing of the Tory government, was trying to shift as much traffic as possible onto the roads. In that context, the deliberate destruction of most rail links between the Midlands and the South Coast made perfect sense. (In recent years we have seen that same political party destroy the coal mining industry).

Fair point - which would be your choice then ?

 

[ChiefPlanner]

The DN+S did a good job in WW2 , but was expendable. The S+D has a cult following but was frightfully expensive to operate (9F on a 3 car local) , - it might have survived as a basic rly. Older ex railwaymen I know , said no.

 

[yorksrob]

it might have survived as a basic rly. Older ex railwaymen I know , said no.

I wonder if they would have said that about the East Suffolk or the Heart of Wales

 

[edwin_m]

As I've no doubt already posted somewhere on this forum, today's service via Salisbury beats the S&D on journey time despite being less direct and Bournemouth requiring a change at Southampton. It also manages to serve the major population centres of Bristol, Salisbury and Southampton, contributing to an hourly frequency of well-filled three-car units.

The DN&S and the M&SWJ would probably have served the north-south freight market about equally, though there is probably capacity to handle extra Southampton traffic via Trowbridge if necessary. As suggested both avoided any major intermediate population centres. It might be argued that one of these two could be justified on the same grounds as East West Rail - an orbital route in an areas where the rail network is totally radial - but that's not quite true as orbital routes exist through Reading and Salisbury.

So I think I'm with "none of the above". Far more useful would have been the retention of a route from Oxford northwards to the East Midlands.

 

[yorksrob]

So I think I'm with "none of the above".

My thread, my rules - you've got to pick one

Far more useful would have been the retention of a route from Oxford northwards to the East Midlands.

The Great Central ?

 

[Bevan Price]

All the routes had problems. Low intermdiate populations, several steep gradients and curves that made them unsuitable for high speed running. Didcot, Newbury & Southampton might have been a north-south alternative freight route, but had little potential for more than a token passenger service.

For the Somerset & Dorset to have more passenger potential, I think partial closure plus new connections with other lines might have been one answer. For example, services to run from Bristol Temple Meads. Retain the GWR line from Yatton to Wells & Shepton Mallet. New (south-facing) connection near here to the S&D line. New connection south of Evercreech Junction to GW main line (facing towards Castle Cary) - Bristol to Yeovil & Weymouth to be routed this way. Bristol to Poole & Bournemouth services to use southern part of S&DJR line.

Line improvements and closure of smaller intermediate stations required in order to increase line speeds and enable faster services.

Bath to Shepton Mallet section either closed or reduced to very basic railway. I don't see much prospect for freight on any part of these lines now that the Radstock area coal mines have shut.

 

[yorksrob]

Retain the GWR line from Yatton to Wells & Shepton Mallet. New (south-facing) connection near here to the S&D line. New connection south of Evercreech Junction to GW main line (facing towards Castle Cary) - Bristol to Yeovil & Weymouth to be routed this way. Bristol to Poole & Bournemouth services to use southern part of S&DJR line.

Interesting point. Wells could potentially have been a good generator of passenger traffic.

 

[jamesr]

I've always felt that what's missing is an easy way to run westwards from East Dorset, esp. Bournemouth & Poole, and an interesting option would have been to keep Bournemouth - Poole - Templecombe and then along the existing route to Yeovil, into Yeovil Town and to Taunton.

This offers a few local services which together link up to provide a moderately useful regional service, whilst avoiding the difficulties of the missing links at Bath Green Park (although, admittedly, some of the bigger S&D northern populations too).

Today, you'd have a busy local service into Bournemouth and Poole from as far out as Blandford, a useful connection into Yeovil Town, and I reckon the route from Yeovil to Taunton would be pretty busy with local transport if it was used today. Services could have run into Taunton and then onto Temple Meads, and would likely be no slower than the service via Westbury.

Bournemouth and Poole passengers could travel to the rest of the south west, and there'd also have been a useful extra diversionary option for several routes.

It is, however, difficult to see how the route between Blandford and Sherborne would ever have been busy, and difficult to see where freight would have come into it, but it seems a stronger option for pure "passenger options" than the others to me.