Settle & Carlisle for WCML freight

[The Planner]

I had heard it was a local mangerial cost cutting exercise to put them on an 8 hr roster and knock the nightshift off.

Yep

 

[Napier]

Yep

Wonder which local managers got the pat on the back that!!

I had also heard when it filtered up the chain people weren't impressed by it!

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Seems the best hope for a reborn S&C is a Leeds to Glasgow service. Perhaps operated by TPEX. I doubt the OPs plan will work simply because there would be an uproar in putting up clunky catenary along the entire S&C

 

[Neptune]

Seems the best hope for a reborn S&C is a Leeds to Glasgow service.

BINGO!! A forum favourite.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

BINGO!! A forum favourite.

I think forum bingo could come across as a bit rude to some of our more sensitive posters...

I specifically said Leeds to Glasgow, as I recall reading a thread that mentioned there was a significant Leeds to Glasgow flow, perhaps I am mistaken

 

[Neptune]

I think forum bingo could come across as a bit rude to some of our more sensitive posters...

I specifically said Leeds to Glasgow, as I recall reading a thread that mentioned there was a significant Leeds to Glasgow flow, perhaps I am mistaken

I’m sorry but it’s something that comes up over and over again.

Surprise surprise nobody has yet provided the figures for providing such a service whether it be resource, paths (remember this must be patched through some extremely busy areas at either end and the S&C requires very careful pathing), actual year round patronage projection with peak and trough projection, access fees, the list goes on. Would the slim patronage figures (it’s not as significant as people suggest) for such a service to balance the books? I don’t think the end to end market is enough to fill a 3 car 185.

It’s always projected on here as an easy winner and yet if it was then why hasn’t it happened already? Nobody who suggests it ever considers the actual reality and costs of providing this ‘easy winner’.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

I’m sorry but it’s something that comes up over and over again.

Surprise surprise nobody has yet provided the figures for providing such a service whether it be resource, paths (remember this must be patched through some extremely busy areas at either end and the S&C requires very careful pathing), actual year round patronage projection with peak and trough projection, access fees, the list goes on. Would the slim patronage figures (it’s not as significant as people suggest) for such a service to balance the books? I don’t think the end to end market is enough to fill a 3 car 185.

It’s always projected on here as an easy winner and yet if it was then why hasn’t it happened already? Nobody who suggests it ever considers the actual reality and costs of providing this ‘easy winner’.

I don't think its that big a deal that it's a popular forum suggestion.

I'd have a fully fledged St. Pancras to Glasgow service via Leeds and the S&C if I could, simply because "that's how it used to be" and I find it interesting.

 

[The Planner]

I'd have a fully fledged St. Pancras to Glasgow service via Leeds and the S&C if I could, simply because "that's how it used to be" and I find it interesting.

And that is the issue, just because it was there in the 60s doesn't mean its applicable now.

 

[156421]

And that is the issue, just because it was there in the 60s doesn't mean its applicable now.

St. Pancras to Carlisle (via Leeds) would be slightly shorter (in distance) than Euston to Carlisle on the WCML

 

[zwk500]

St. Pancras to Carlisle (via Leeds) would be slightly shorter (in distance) than Euston to Carlisle on the WCML

But significantly longer in time, which is the whole point.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

And that is the issue, just because it was there in the 60s doesn't mean its applicable now.

It's not an issue. I'm a rail enthusiast, not a professional in the industry, nor do I have a strong desire to be one. Sentimentalism is what interests me, not the operations of the modern railway but that goes for I expect a significant proportion of people on here.

I didn't actually suggest a St. Pancras to Glasgow service because I know its (somehow) unfeasible

 

[Neptune]

St. Pancras to Carlisle (via Leeds) would be slightly shorter (in distance) than Euston to Carlisle on the WCML

And take twice as long.

I don't think it’s that big a deal that it's a popular forum suggestion.

Nobody ever gives evidence as to why it would work in reality though and get their backs up when someone drops in a dose of reality.

It's not an issue. I'm a rail enthusiast, not a professional in the industry, nor do I have a strong desire to be one. Sentimentalism is what interests me, not the operations of the modern railway but that goes for I expect a significant proportion of people on here.

This is a case in point. You suggest something which has been done to death, you don’t like the answer from modern industry professionals (the same answer that never changes) and get your back up.

I have sentiments for the railways of my youth (70’s and 80’s) but don’t let it cloud my current day professional judgment. I go to the nostalgia section for that.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

And take twice as long.

Nobody ever gives evidence as to why it would work in reality though and get their backs up when someone drops in a dose of reality.

This is a case in point. You suggest something which has been done to death, you don’t like the answer from modern industry professionals (the same answer that never changes) and get your back up.

I have sentiments for the railways of my youth (70’s and 80’s) but don’t let it cloud my current day professional judgment. I go to the nostalgia section for that.

Again, I only suggested Leeds to Glasgow because I recall in a previous thread reading about the passenger flows. I'm happy to be wrong.

I didn't actually propose the London to Glasgow service, just that I'd like to see one in theory. I know it wouldn't work for whatever reason, I was merely pointing out that others might find the forum bingo thing dismissive. We don't know the age of the posters on here, some could be very young with 0 industry knowledge at all and may genuinely think its a good suggestion, just don't want to turn people away from posting their ideas and missing out on making connections

 

[zwk500]

It's not an issue. I'm a rail enthusiast, not a professional in the industry, nor do I have a strong desire to be one. Sentimentalism is what interests me, not the operations of the modern railway but that goes for I expect a significant proportion of people on here.

I didn't actually suggest a St. Pancras to Glasgow service because I know its (somehow) unfeasible

And take twice as long.

Nobody ever gives evidence as to why it would work in reality though and get their backs up when someone drops in a dose of reality.

This is a case in point. You suggest something which has been done to death, you don’t like the answer from modern industry professionals (the same answer that never changes) and get your back up.

I have sentiments for the railways of my youth (70’s and 80’s) but don’t let it cloud my current day professional judgment. I go to the nostalgia section for that.

I think the issue here (as with a lot of speculative threads) is that there is a divergence of views among enthusiasts and professionals (and many posters here fall into both camps at points) as to how far the reality can be suspended for the sake of the discussion.
We all know that if you suggested doing something 'because that's how it was done in the 60s' in a professional report, it'd never fly. But we're not in the office here and there is argument for giving slightly more slack to somebody who says 'I'd love to see X service but I know it'll never happen'.

And, FWIW, I've been in the position where nothing is feasible and you have to come up with some pretty outside the box solutions to get the client something to work with. However, these are always based on current or future requirements, not 'that's what we used to do'.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

I think the issue here (as with a lot of speculative threads) is that there is a divergence of views among enthusiasts and professionals (and many posters here fall into both camps at points) as to how far the reality can be suspended for the sake of the discussion.
We all know that if you suggested doing something 'because that's how it was done in the 60s' in a professional report, it'd never fly. But we're not in the office here and there is argument for giving slightly more slack to somebody who says 'I'd love to see X service but I know it'll never happen'.

And, FWIW, I've been in the position where nothing is feasible and you have to come up with some pretty outside the box solutions to get the client something to work with. However, these are always based on current or future requirements, not 'that's what we used to do'.

Yes I would love to see more of the old "Midland" routes re-established. Very interesting bit of history. But I'm also aware nothing much would change on the Midland not least because of the crossing conflicts in Hertfordshire. You could pair-by-direction from Dock Junction to Bedford but good luck with that.

 

[zwk500]

Yes I would love to see more of the old "Midland" routes re-established. Very interesting bit of history. But I'm also aware nothing much would change on the Midland not least because of the crossing conflicts in Hertfordshire. You could pair-by-direction from Dock Junction to Bedford but good luck with that.

To be clear, my post wasn't meant to be an invitation for any fantasy ideas for the MML. This thread is about the use of the Settle & Carlisle for diverting WCML freight.

 

[randyrippley]

To be clear, my post wasn't meant to be an invitation for any fantasy ideas for the MML. This thread is about the use of the Settle & Carlisle for diverting WCML freight.

What freight is there which could be diverted?
From memory all I can think of that would presumably fit the gauge is the timber traffic

 

[zwk500]

What freight is there which could be diverted?
From memory all I can think of that would presumably fit the gauge is the timber traffic

Believe that was kind of the point of the 1st page - the line would require complete reconstruction to allow anything over W6 (maybe W7 at a push) through.

 

[Napier]

Believe that was kind of the point of the 1st page - the line would require complete reconstruction to allow anything over W6 (maybe W7 at a push) through.

Also depending on tonnage increase it may increase the PLPR, NMT and UTU regimes for the route S&C inspection etc, meaning more money to shell out which they won't want to do that ontop of potential upgrades, as we all know NR is skint and Dft won't fund any further worthy works!

 

[zwk500]

Also depending on tonnage increase it may increase the PLPR, NMT and UTU regimes for the route S&C inspection etc, meaning more money to shell out which they won't want to do that ontop of potential upgrades, as we all know NR is skint and Dft won't fund any further worthy works!

Yep, and bridges may possibly need remedial work if the RA needs to increase, although given it handles stone on a regular basis I would have thought the RA shouldn't be too bad.

 

[D6130]

A rumour has been bandied about saying the Settle Carlisle is going back 24/7.

When I retired as a driver on the line just over ten years ago, it was operating 24/7 with two twelve hour shifts in the boxes....06 00 to 18 00 and 18 00 to 06 00.

From memory all I can think of that would presumably fit the gauge is the timber traffic

There's also the Cltheroe-Mossend cement traffic....plus the Carlisle Kingmoor Yard-Crewe Basford Hall infrastructure service, which mainly carries empty ballast or long-welded rail wagons....plus the occasional (non-self-propelled) track maintenance machine. Also, the Drax Power station-Kirkby Thore gypsum workings.

 

[Napier]

Yep, and bridges may possibly need remedial work if the RA needs to increase, although given it handles stone on a regular basis I would have thought the RA shouldn't be too bad.

It may be based on accumlated tonnage and traffic rather than, specifc weights and passages of freight I've not seen a tonnage viewer for almost 20 years so can't remeber the make up now.

 

[D6130]

Yep, and bridges may possibly need remedial work if the RA needs to increase, although given it handles stone on a regular basis I would have thought the RA shouldn't be too bad.

At present, the only stone traffic - albeit fairly regular - is from Arcow Quarry, just South of Horton, to various terminals in the Manchester area....which sets off by heading North to Blea Moor to run-round. The only tunnel that it passes through on the S&C is the very short one at Stainforth, although I guess the bogie stone hoppers are built to W6 loading gauge anyway.


There is also the gypsum flow from Drax Power Station to Kirkby Thore (Newbiggin). I think that is nowadays mainly conveyed in open wagons with tarpaulin covers, rather than the closed containers used previously.

 

[randyrippley]

There's also the Cltheroe-Mossend cement traffic....plus the Carlisle Kingmoor Yard-Crewe Basford Hall infrastructure service, which mainly carries empty ballast or long-welded rail wagons....plus the occasional (non-self-propelled) track maintenance machine. Also, the Drax Power station-Kirkby Thore gypsum workings.

Is that what could be moved to the S&C or what is already on the S&C?

 

[D6130]

Is that what could be moved to the S&C or what is already on the S&C?

Sorry, that's what's already on it - so, technically-speaking, off-topic - but it gives an idea of the type of freight rolling stock that could run on the line if diverted from the WCML.

 

[Napier]

Is that what could be moved to the S&C or what is already on the S&C?

I did here that a lot of upgrade work was planned for the WCML so it could well be a reality.

 

[zwk500]

Sorry, that's what's already on it - so, technically-speaking, off-topic - but it gives an idea of the type of freight rolling stock that could run on the line if diverted from the WCML.

Sectional Appendix shows the S&C as W7 throughout and RA8, I think. So no containers, but weight wouldn't be a problem.

 

[Napier]

When I retired as a driver on the line just over ten years ago, it was operating 24/7 with two twelve hour shifts in the boxes....06 00 to 18 00 and 18 00 to 06 00.

There's also the Cltheroe-Mossend cement traffic....plus the Carlisle Kingmoor Yard-Crewe Basford Hall infrastructure service, which mainly carries empty ballast or long-welded rail wagons....plus the occasional (non-self-propelled) track maintenance machine. Also, the Drax Power station-Kirkby Thore gypsum workings.

The current S&C roster I believe it's still in, not really family friendly like NR's platitude promotes itself as.

 

[randyrippley]

Sorry, that's what's already on it - so, technically-speaking, off-topic - but it gives an idea of the type of freight rolling stock that could run on the line if diverted from the WCML.

But that's my point: AFAIK all the current WCML freight is timber or containers. The containers can't be moved, so there's not much else to argue about. A couple of timber trains each day aren't going to make any difference

 

[The Planner]

But that's my point: AFAIK all the current WCML freight is timber or containers. The containers can't be moved, so there's not much else to argue about. A couple of timber trains each day aren't going to make any difference

If its a standard class 6 path that replicates every hour then it would, just because it isn't used every hour doesn't mean it won't make a difference.