Settle-Carlisle line & low traffic levels

[alastair]

I read in a recent article that traffic on this line is much reduced recently and certainly looking at RealTimeTrains it seems that there are no booked trains at night, presumably to save a signal box shift?

Also Virgin seem to have placed diversions over the line when the WCML is closed in to the "too difficult" category.

This all seems quite strange, given that only 2 or 3 years ago money was spent putting in extra signals to increase capacity!

Can anyone say what the future holds? Do Network Rail have a strategy for the line?

Thanks

 

[thealexweb]

Virgin Trains are out to make a profit. Why would they use (longer) diversionary routes when they can just run cheaper buses? But I agree there should be no subsidy for the running of rail replacement buses at all.

 

[swt_passenger]

This all seems quite strange, given that only 2 or 3 years ago money was spent putting in extra signals to increase capacity!

Didn't the Scottish opencast coal industry sudden and unexpected failure account for much of the lack of freight traffic...

 

[Bantamzen]

I can't help but think that the Settle - Carlisle would be better served by a TPX rather than Northern. Currently there are usually 6tpd across the route between Leeds & Carlisle with long running times using mainly 158s. And although there is usually a decent level of patronage when I've been on them, you can't help feeling that the routes lack of through running at each end, as well as limited stock & no reservations being available hinders the route. Perhaps if TPX or whomever were to take over come the next round of franchises in 2016, they could develop longer services across the line providing a Glasgow - Yorkshire link along it, and maybe taking it beyond Leeds towards Doncaster, Sheffield or Hull? And if the stock were available alternate it with a Lakes – Lancaster – Leeds – (beyond) service?

Once the Trans-Pennine electrification is completed, the freed 185s could be deployed to these routes (as well as York - Leeds - Bradford - Blackpool), as their excess power would come in useful on the long climbs up towards the summits. Northern could then use the freed DMUs from these routes to strengthen other services & maybe offer new routes as well? Or perhaps run the TPX as express services, with a Northern based stoppers running between to serve the smaller stations along the routes?

 

[eastwestdivide]

Are you sure there's no booked trains at night? Maybe you picked a bad night or a bad location?
Here's RTT from last Thursday for Settle:
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...000-2359?stp=WVS&show=non-passenger&order=wtt
showing 8 freights actually running past Settle between midnight and 0600, plus 4 Q paths unused.
Similar story on Friday 2nd.
However, if you put "Settle" in for future dates, nothing shows up, I guess as it's not a timing point. Try "Blea Moor" instead, and I get plenty of overnight paths on future dates, e.g. 28 May

 

[tbtc]

Virgin seem to have placed diversions over the line when the WCML is closed in to the "too difficult" category

Virgin Trains are out to make a profit. Why would they use (longer) diversionary routes when they can just run cheaper buses?

Enthusiasts love diversionary routes, I see many suggestions that a line is electrified for diversionary reasons, or a line should be re-opened because it'd be handy in cases of diversions.

However, the reality is that TOCs seem a lot less bothered by them - whilst passengers may prefer a slower journey on a train (rather than changing onto a bus), it's seemingly too much hassle to deal with drags/ staff knowledge/ scheduling etc.

I can't help but think that the Settle - Carlisle would be better served by a TPX rather than Northern. Currently there are usually 6tpd across the route between Leeds & Carlisle with long running times using mainly 158s. And although there is usually a decent level of patronage when I've been on them, you can't help feeling that the routes lack of through running at each end, as well as limited stock & no reservations being available hinders the route. Perhaps if TPX or whomever were to take over come the next round of franchises in 2016, they could develop longer services across the line providing a Glasgow - Yorkshire link along it, and maybe taking it beyond Leeds towards Doncaster, Sheffield or Hull? And if the stock were available alternate it with a Lakes – Lancaster – Leeds – (beyond) service?

I can see the argument for having seat reservations on the S&C (the old 37s/ mk2s had reservations, which were pretty popular). I can see the argument for powerful 185s freed up from TPE. I can see the argument for some token service from Leeds to Windermere/ Barrow (that doesn't go south to Lancaster).

But the S&C is never going to be a busy main line - the speed will always be restricted by the slow heavy freight - 100mph DMUs won't make the journey much faster than the 90mph DMUs that currently run it (and there are bound to be moans about the 185s "central" doors opening at Dent on a cold winter days...).

As well as the speed problems, there's not much population between Skipton and Carlisle - even Carlisle isn't that big a place (and there aren't many people living in the southern Borders to tap in to). Maybe some 153 shuttles from Settle to Skipton (to connect to regular 333s to Leeds) could be justified, but north of Skipton there aren't huge numbers.

Looking at NRE, it can be as fast to go Leeds - Carlisle by changing at Manchester (than sitting on a 158 on the S&C) - presumably this'll get faster with electrification of the Transpennine route. Leeds - Glasgow can already be done every couple of hours on XC (via Newcastle and Edinburgh), so if you want to improve Leeds - Glasgow links then you could always extend the bi-hourly XC services that currently terminate in Edinburgh through to Glasgow Central.

The S&C was used as an example of what other rural lines could aspire to on
one of the Dawlish threads. Looking at the stations north of Settle you have...

• Horton-in-Ribblesdale 26.0 passengers per day
• Ribblehead 28.6 passengers per day
• Dent 14.9 passengers per day
• Garsdale 20.3 passengers per day
• Kirkby Stephen 43.9 passengers per day
• Appleby 94.4 passengers per day
• Langwathby 36.5 passengers per day
• Lazonby and Kirkoswald 25.5 passengers per day
• Armathwaite 13.1 passengers per day

...not in the "Breich" / "Tees Valley Airport" / "Golf Street" league of passenger numbers, certainly, but not amazing - I'd suggest that there are bigger priorities.

 

[Ships]

I read in a recent article that traffic on this line is much reduced recently and certainly looking at RealTimeTrains it seems that there are no booked trains at night, presumably to save a signal box shift?

Also Virgin seem to have placed diversions over the line when the WCML is closed in to the "too difficult" category.

This all seems quite strange, given that only 2 or 3 years ago money was spent putting in extra signals to increase capacity!

Can anyone say what the future holds? Do Network Rail have a strategy for the line?

Thanks

From an engineering perspective the SAC is an interesting beast, it's still suffering from it run down and near closure in the 80s and despite what your saying the massive upturn in freight that happened has battered the stuffing out of it. Saying that though there are a lot of renewals planned in cp5 and it's definitely on NRs radar.

 

[Anvil1984]

I can't help but think that the Settle - Carlisle would be better served by a TPX rather than Northern. Currently there are usually 6tpd across the route between Leeds & Carlisle with long running times using mainly 158s. And although there is usually a decent level of patronage when I've been on them, you can't help feeling that the routes lack of through running at each end, as well as limited stock & no reservations being available hinders the route. Perhaps if TPX or whomever were to take over come the next round of franchises in 2016, they could develop longer services across the line providing a Glasgow - Yorkshire link along it, and maybe taking it beyond Leeds towards Doncaster, Sheffield or Hull? And if the stock were available alternate it with a Lakes – Lancaster – Leeds – (beyond) service?

Once the Trans-Pennine electrification is completed, the freed 185s could be deployed to these routes (as well as York - Leeds - Bradford - Blackpool), as their excess power would come in useful on the long climbs up towards the summits. Northern could then use the freed DMUs from these routes to strengthen other services & maybe offer new routes as well? Or perhaps run the TPX as express services, with a Northern based stoppers running between to serve the smaller stations along the routes?

I don't think it need to go further than Leeds to be honest at least at Leeds the units get a good looking after (tanked and I've even seen windows washed on the platform and if something goes wrong it can be set swapped quickly.

The problem is a lot of the services run 2x158 or 158+153, ( there are a couple of sole 158s but that seems to be in the minority) a 185 would be a vast decrease in capacity on these services. If you can't use a 185 then sadly it's hard to get a service to Glasgow going because with a 158+153 you can't go over 75mph you'd need a consist of all 158s

Reservations are tricky as I say the service is well used and there are of tens walkers groups who book out a whole coach. I'm not sure that individual reservations on top of these is a great idea also
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Enthusiasts love diversionary routes, I see many suggestions that a line is electrified for diversionary reasons, or a line should be re-opened because it'd be handy in cases of diversions.

However, the reality is that TOCs seem a lot less bothered by them - whilst passengers may prefer a slower journey on a train (rather than changing onto a bus), it's seemingly too much hassle to deal with drags/ staff knowledge/ scheduling etc.



I can see the argument for having seat reservations on the S&C (the old 37s/ mk2s had reservations, which were pretty popular). I can see the argument for powerful 185s freed up from TPE. I can see the argument for some token service from Leeds to Windermere/ Barrow (that doesn't go south to Lancaster).

But the S&C is never going to be a busy main line - the speed will always be restricted by the slow heavy freight - 100mph DMUs won't make the journey much faster than the 90mph DMUs that currently run it (and there are bound to be moans about the 185s "central" doors opening at Dent on a cold winter days...).

As well as the speed problems, there's not much population between Skipton and Carlisle - even Carlisle isn't that big a place (and there aren't many people living in the southern Borders to tap in to). Maybe some 153 shuttles from Settle to Skipton (to connect to regular 333s to Leeds) could be justified, but north of Skipton there aren't huge numbers.

Looking at NRE, it can be as fast to go Leeds - Carlisle by changing at Manchester (than sitting on a 158 on the S&C) - presumably this'll get faster with electrification of the Transpennine route. Leeds - Glasgow can already be done every couple of hours on XC (via Newcastle and Edinburgh), so if you want to improve Leeds - Glasgow links then you could always extend the bi-hourly XC services that currently terminate in Edinburgh through to Glasgow Central.

The S&C was used as an example of what other rural lines could aspire to on
one of the Dawlish threads. Looking at the stations north of Settle you have...

• Horton-in-Ribblesdale 26.0 passengers per day
• Ribblehead 28.6 passengers per day
• Dent 14.9 passengers per day
• Garsdale 20.3 passengers per day
• Kirkby Stephen 43.9 passengers per day
• Appleby 94.4 passengers per day
• Langwathby 36.5 passengers per day
• Lazonby and Kirkoswald 25.5 passengers per day
• Armathwaite 13.1 passengers per day

...not in the "Breich" / "Tees Valley Airport" / "Golf Street" league of passenger numbers, certainly, but not amazing - I'd suggest that there are bigger priorities.

However what Northern may lose out in speed they could make up in walk on price. It's nearly half the price going Leeds to Glasgow via S&c

 

[The Planner]

The problem is a lot of the services run 2x158 or 158+153, ( there are a couple of sole 158s but that seems to be in the minority) a 185 would be a vast decrease in capacity on these services. If you can't use a 185 then sadly it's hard to get a service to Glasgow going because with a 158+153 you can't go over 75mph you'd need a consist of all 158s

Doesn't really matter anyway as the S&C is 60mph and whilst NR are looking at incremental line speed increases they won't be above 75mph and won't be across the whole line.

 

[BantamMenace]

Doesn't really matter anyway as the S&C is 60mph and whilst NR are looking at incremental line speed increases they won't be above 75mph and won't be across the whole line.

I think he means if it were to continue to Glasgow it'd need to be able to hit around three figures whilst on the WCML north of Carlisle

 

[alastair]

Are you sure there's no booked trains at night? Maybe you picked a bad night or a bad location?
Here's RTT from last Thursday for Settle:
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...000-2359?stp=WVS&show=non-passenger&order=wtt
showing 8 freights actually running past Settle between midnight and 0600, plus 4 Q paths unused.
Similar story on Friday 2nd.
However, if you put "Settle" in for future dates, nothing shows up, I guess as it's not a timing point. Try "Blea Moor" instead, and I get plenty of overnight paths on future dates, e.g. 28 May

I see what you mean,and thanks for pointing this out. I had actually put 8th May into RTT which produces zero night services at any point,but as you say from the following week onwards there are lots of paths showing. All a bit of a mystery!

 

[eastwestdivide]

I see what you mean,and thanks for pointing this out. I had actually put 8th May into RTT which produces zero night services at any point,but as you say from the following week onwards there are lots of paths showing. All a bit of a mystery!

No problem.
Perhaps there's overnight maintenance on that week: if you put Blea Moor in for 24 hours on 8th May, there's a first train of the day = 0600 Garsdale-Hellifield, and last train = 1700 Crewe Basford Hall-Kirkby Stephen, which look very much like engineering trains running from and to possessions to me.
Not so much a mystery as a detective story.

S. Holmes, over and out.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Two observations:
a) there seem to be an awful lot of coal trains on the WCML North (Hunterston-Fiddlers Ferry/Rugeley), routed via Shap rather than Ais Gill and Hellifield.
b) I passed a Drax-Hunterston coal train on the Copy Pit route recently, working via Wakefield, Preston and the WCML rather than the S&C.
There must be reasons why the S&C is not used for these workings.

 

[RichmondCommu]

But the S&C is never going to be a busy main line - the speed will always be restricted by the slow heavy freight - 100mph DMUs won't make the journey much faster than the 90mph DMUs that currently run it (and there are bound to be moans about the 185s "central" doors opening at Dent on a cold winter days...).

As well as the speed problems, there's not much population between Skipton and Carlisle - even Carlisle isn't that big a place (and there aren't many people living in the southern Borders to tap in to). Maybe some 153 shuttles from Settle to Skipton (to connect to regular 333s to Leeds) could be justified, but north of Skipton there aren't huge numbers.

In terms of the restrictions that heavy freight places on the S & C, it has been mentioned recently on this forum that the double track over Ribblehead viaduct might be reinstated. If this were to happen I think it's a good bet that the down loop at Blea Moor would be reinstated.

I'm afraid that your idea for a Skipton to Settle class 153 shuttle service is a non starter for two reasons. Firstly I'm not sure where we'd find a spare class 153. However more importantly there is no cross over at Settle and indeed there hasn't been one since the early 1980's.

 

[TheWalrus]

I was thinking about this the other day, is there a reason the Nottingham-Leeds couldn't join up with Leeds-Carlisle to operate a through Nottingham-Carlisle? This could also be extended to Glasgow as many people seem to want on this forum.

Also I know there is a lot of freight on this route but would it be impossible to increase the line speed to 75-90?

Another thing in regards to the express services on Sundays how well patronised are they?

 

[STANDISH]

Two observations:
a) there seem to be an awful lot of coal trains on the WCML North (Hunterston-Fiddlers Ferry/Rugeley), routed via Shap rather than Ais Gill and Hellifield.
b) I passed a Drax-Hunterston coal train on the Copy Pit route recently, working via Wakefield, Preston and the WCML rather than the S&C.
There must be reasons why the S&C is not used for these workings.

The train you must likely saw was 4S42 which runs on a Monday(not always), but I assume could run on other days. It is used for route knowledge if Settle/ Carlisle is blocked. This has train run for numerous years.

 

[Freightmaster]

Two observations:
a) there seem to be an awful lot of coal trains on the WCML North (Hunterston-Fiddlers Ferry/Rugeley), routed via Shap rather than Ais Gill and Hellifield.
b) I passed a Drax-Hunterston coal train on the Copy Pit route recently, working via Wakefield, Preston and the WCML rather than the S&C.
There must be reasons why the S&C is not used for these workings.

See Standish's reply above for an explanation of the 'token' Copy Pit coal train.

The reason for empty coal trains from Fiddlers Ferry running via Shap during
the day is because they can run at 75mph, so they are fairly easy to path
between class one services.

The loaded trains to Fiddlers Ferry run overnight, so can also run via
Shap with no pathing issues.


However, if there is a daytime loaded train booked to run to Fiddlers,
as has happened a few times in recent weeks, it has to be routed via
the S+C.


MARK

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Coal traffic is very cyclical - depending on spot World commodity rates and Ocean shipping availability - if the S&C is down , then maybe the GSW route (which also had investment for coal flows) , is equally down. CP3 was about protecting coal flows , CP4 about improving the container flows - Soton Tunnel for example.

As regards the S&C traffic (passenger) , 140 years ago the Midland was forced into building it by getting Parliamentary rights - even then , loadings on the crack trains well into the 20thC were low ,if not poor. 40 per train on the crack Anglo-Scottish diners north of Leeds was not uncommon. Maybe it is after all , a regional and tourist line ....?

 

[yorksrob]

Maybe it is after all , a regional and tourist line ....?

That seems like a fair description. Not that that's a bad thing. There seem to be enough people to keep the various single and double 15* units occupied on the route.

 

[Jonny]

I can't help but think that the Settle - Carlisle would be better served by a TPX rather than Northern. Currently there are usually 6tpd across the route between Leeds & Carlisle with long running times using mainly 158s. And although there is usually a decent level of patronage when I've been on them, you can't help feeling that the routes lack of through running at each end, as well as limited stock & no reservations being available hinders the route. Perhaps if TPX or whomever were to take over come the next round of franchises in 2016, they could develop longer services across the line providing a Glasgow - Yorkshire link along it, and maybe taking it beyond Leeds towards Doncaster, Sheffield or Hull? And if the stock were available alternate it with a Lakes – Lancaster – Leeds – (beyond) service?

Once the Trans-Pennine electrification is completed, the freed 185s could be deployed to these routes (as well as York - Leeds - Bradford - Blackpool), as their excess power would come in useful on the long climbs up towards the summits. Northern could then use the freed DMUs from these routes to strengthen other services & maybe offer new routes as well? Or perhaps run the TPX as express services, with a Northern based stoppers running between to serve the smaller stations along the routes?

A good idea, a TPE class 185 could be very useful in terms of being able to ascend quickly but the downside is that it might need to throttle back as the linespeed is ^only^ 60mph (or less in places) - so it would only be justified with displaced units and/or (less likely) linespeed-raising works.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

That seems like a fair description. Not that that's a bad thing. There seem to be enough people to keep the various single and double 15* units occupied on the route.

I think that is a fair comment - back in the day - up to about 1930 there were non stop services from down south to up north - then the local services were presumably of limited use to a sparse rural area. The line kept going into BR days as a route for the non express freight trains routed off the ever busier West Coast Main line. Come the 1980's , the low point was reached with the death of the slow wagonload /unfitted freight services.(market just collapsed - think M6 etc) - the residual service of as low as 2 through passenger trains a day limped on , and the line was saved by the "regional" interests and a growing tourist , bit of slower through traffic , and commuter flows into Leeds and Carlisle respectively. Most people would trade off a couple of BR era MK1 sets for a 2 hourly 158 ! (bar the hard core enthusiasts) , so the line has really secured a new future. I don't think speed above 60 mph is really a thing to die in a ditch for.....unless it can happen for a modest spend , which is doubtfull if heavy southbound coal trains re-appear in great numbers....

 

[Class 170101]

Check that the Class 185s would be permitted on the S&C. The 185s are not permitted to do Sprinter speeds unlike 158s. Even 170s may not be permitted to use them even though they exploit them in other routes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm afraid that your idea for a Skipton to Settle class 153 shuttle service is a non starter for two reasons. Firstly I'm not sure where we'd find a spare class 153. However more importantly there is no cross over at Settle and indeed there hasn't been one since the early 1980's.

A 153 would be a a big let down running round on its own. Secondly just go to Ribblehead instead and reverse on the viaduct.

 

[Condor7]

As well as the speed problems, there's not much population between Skipton and Carlisle - even Carlisle isn't that big a place (and there aren't many people living in the southern Borders to tap in to). Maybe some 153 shuttles from Settle to Skipton (to connect to regular 333s to Leeds) could be justified, but north of Skipton there aren't huge numbers.

Whenever we get a thread about the S&C this argument always comes up.
In actual fact the distance between Lancaster and Carlisle is about the same as the S&C and the population between them is also sparse, yet no one suggests that it is not worth running trains over that section of line.

We never refer to that section as the Lancaster and Carlisle railway, because we see it as only a part of a much larger journey.

I sometime wonder if calling the S&C by that name is not it's undoing, as everyone seem to see it as just that.

Certainly for areas like Leicester, Nottingham, Sheffield, Wakefield, Leeds, Bradford, it is the most direct route to Scotland.

Despite it's recent investment, there are still many problems as have been highlighted in this thread. The need to double track Ribbleshead viaduct, the reinstatement of the loop at Blea Moor, a cross over at Settle, and many more such like comments further up the line that have been raised in earlier threads.

It appears to me that despite the investment in the line, the job has not been completed. Yes it is great that we have regular freight and a passable passenger service, but we need to be looking at the line as just a part of a much larger overall journey and invest further to bring that about.

 

[RichmondCommu]

A 153 would be a a big let down running round on its own. Secondly just go to Ribblehead instead and reverse on the viaduct.

I concur with all of this and of course this is exactly what the 19.19 from Leeds does. In all fairness I think the suggestion of running shuttles north from Skipton is not sensible irrespective of what units were used. However I do think that the frequency on the S & C should be improved and that the last train of the day should be extended to Garsdale.

 

[BantamMenace]

Whenever we get a thread about the S&C this argument always comes up.
In actual fact the distance between Lancaster and Carlisle is about the same as the S&C and the population between them is also sparse, yet no one suggests that it is not worth running trains over that section of line.

We never refer to that section as the Lancaster and Carlisle railway, because we see it as only a part of a much larger journey.

I sometime wonder if calling the S&C by that name is not it's undoing, as everyone seem to see it as just that.

Certainly for areas like Leicester, Nottingham, Sheffield, Wakefield, Leeds, Bradford, it is the most direct route to Scotland.

Despite it's recent investment, there are still many problems as have been highlighted in this thread. The need to double track Ribbleshead viaduct, the reinstatement of the loop at Blea Moor, a cross over at Settle, and many more such like comments further up the line that have been raised in earlier threads.

It appears to me that despite the investment in the line, the job has not been completed. Yes it is great that we have regular freight and a passable passenger service, but we need to be looking at the line as just a part of a much larger overall journey and invest further to bring that about.

If franchise boundaries were all thrown up in the air and reallocated id be an advocate for EMT hourly sheffields extended alternatively to Bradford via the penistone so to serve Barnsley and Huddersfield and to Carlisle via Doncaster, Hambleton junction and Leeds so to avoid a reverse at Leeds.

This would provide the direct competition some people want to see for Carlisle, Leeds, Doncaster and Bradford to London services. While they might not be time competitive a cheaper alternative could force virgin and East coast to pull their socks up.

(granted the S&C and the Penistone would need a huge upgrade and procuring what would likely need to be bimode stock would be expensive)

 

[47802]

I don't see any real issues with the current timetable I suspect it meets the majority of demand, as has been pointed out the population beyond Settle is sparse, yet both ends of the line have a morning commuter train, while there is a good spread of trains from Leeds in the morning to cater for Walkers and those that want to travel the line etc.

 

[HSTEd]

The only way to get faster passenger journeys would be to be increase the transit speed of the freight services - which would probably require electrification.

But outside a Swiss Total Electrification Programme that isn't going to happen.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Certainly for areas like Leicester, Nottingham, Sheffield, Wakefield, Leeds, Bradford, it is the most direct route to Scotland.

Why would through passengers opt for a much longer journey via Settle?
It is never going to compete with the upgraded ECML/WCML, even at 75mph and with through trains.

 

[infobleep]

Whenever we get a thread about the S&C this argument always comes up.
In actual fact the distance between Lancaster and Carlisle is about the same as the S&C and the population between them is also sparse, yet no one suggests that it is not worth running trains over that section of line.

We never refer to that section as the Lancaster and Carlisle railway, because we see it as only a part of a much larger journey.

I sometime wonder if calling the S&C by that name is not it's undoing, as everyone seem to see it as just that.

Certainly for areas like Leicester, Nottingham, Sheffield, Wakefield, Leeds, Bradford, it is the most direct route to Scotland.

Despite it's recent investment, there are still many problems as have been highlighted in this thread. The need to double track Ribbleshead viaduct, the reinstatement of the loop at Blea Moor, a cross over at Settle, and many more such like comments further up the line that have been raised in earlier threads.

It appears to me that despite the investment in the line, the job has not been completed. Yes it is great that we have regular freight and a passable passenger service, but we need to be looking at the line as just a part of a much larger overall journey and invest further to bring that about.

Does the S&C have more stations per population living in the area than the L&C? If so is that due to tourism?

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[Buttsy]

I concur with all of this and of course this is exactly what the 19.19 from Leeds does. In all fairness I think the suggestion of running shuttles north from Skipton is not sensible irrespective of what units were used. However I do think that the frequency on the S & C should be improved and that the last train of the day should be extended to Garsdale.

I thought the 19:19 reversed in the loop at Blea Moor rather than on the viaduct as I don't remember there being signalling to allow this sort of move on the viaduct itself.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why would through passengers opt for a much longer journey via Settle?
It is never going to compete with the upgraded ECML/WCML, even at 75mph and with through trains.

A woman I worked with in Leicester used to get a lift to Leeds and a train back to Glasgow every Friday and the reverse on the Sunday. After checking the prices, £43 return via Appleby was much better priced than £75 (I think) via Edinburgh and the journey time wasn't that much longer once she knew not get on the first Glasgow service at Carlisle (via GSW). I had told her to take the second train, but not everyone listens...

I contend that from the West Yorks area, it is cheaper to go via the S&C to West Scotland rather than ECML if you can't get an advance.