Settle-Carlisle line & low traffic levels

[Tomnick]

I'd imagine the current arrangements at Keighley would preclude any regular through service from the KWVR - certainly requiring someone to operate the ground frame, plus a double reverse from the Up direction and maybe normally trailing points to be secured (not sure whether they're motor-worked). Not impossible, but equally probably not much less difficult to arrange than a path through Leeds!

 

[BantamMenace]

I'd imagine the current arrangements at Keighley would preclude any regular through service from the KWVR - certainly requiring someone to operate the ground frame, plus a double reverse from the Up direction and maybe normally trailing points to be secured (not sure whether they're motor-worked). Not impossible, but equally probably not much less difficult to arrange than a path through Leeds!

You're quite right and I hadn't factored in the point work at Keighley. My feeling that a once or twice daily weekend and summer steam service would be a success over the line and while the run around wouldn't be a huge problem at Skipton I'd like to see it continue to Keighley, Oxenhope or Leeds still.

 

[Bantamzen]

Some food for thought there, and if I may I'll pick up on a few points.

In my humble opinion, the S&C seems pretty fine as it is. If you want to throw extra stock at it then you could stick an extra 153 on the services for the busier summer trips, stick a 153 to shuttle from Settle etc to Skipton to provide the southern end with better connections to the frequent Airedale services, no radical surgery required though.

Okay, a 153 shuttling from Ribblehead to Skipton – a forty minute journey time, so one unit could easily provide a bi-hourly service slotting in between the bi-hourly 158s to Carlisle, giving Ribblehead/ Settle/ Hellifield an hourly service to Skipton...

An interesting thought and it might be worth a go to test demand on that section. However as a long term plan it might not be the solution. There is lot's of talk of new housing developments all the way up the Aire valley & the likelyhood is that the populations in the towns right up to Settle are going to grow. And with most of the employment opportunities in the region being in West Yorkshire, it's unlikely that a ride down from Settle to Skipton on a 153 to get the "big train" onwards isn't going to be a big draw for people to leave their cars at their local stations. If a shuttle service does hint at demand on that stretch, then maybe the longer term plans might point towards extending the wires to Settle to allow the Aire valley services to extend up there?

Distance is irrelevant. Those miles on the S&C with top speed of 60mph are going to take almost twice as long as a comparable distance on the WCML. As I said earlier in the thread, you could do Leeds – Carlisle via Manchester (approx 3h, inc time to change trains) almost as quickly as Leeds – Carlisle via Settle (approx 2h 45). With TPE electrification, and an increase in frequency via Huddersfield, this may become an even faster journey before long.

If you want to argue about Leeds – Manchester – Carlisle not being a sensible route then sitting on a Northern DMU via the Copy Pit line and changing at Preston can be faster than a direct service up the S&C, despite the longer distance.

For many of those places, it’s not the fastest route to Scotland. Normal passengers may worry about journey time or frequency, but they don’t generally fret about how many miles the train has travelled between origin station and destination. You’re looking for problems that don’t exist.

We need to spend lots of money to “solve” a problem that isn’t there?

Distance may not be an issue, but route capacity is. It's yet to be seen how the additional TPE service impacts the loadings on the Leeds-Manchester route, but my guess is that it will fill up very quickly. If you are travelling from Yorkshire to Glasgow, the thought of having to jump on a heavily loaded service just to get to your connection isn't too appealing. I know a fair few people who do use the S&C rather than squeeze onto onto a TPE at Leeds then face another rush & crush at Piccadilly.

How are you going to run a more frequent service on the S&C if you don’t want to start with a simple shuttle from Skipton into the Dales? Good luck finding spare paths from Leeds to Shipley, for start.

True, it's certainly quite well loaded at the moment, but at some point the issue is going to have to be looked at. Costly though it may be, the opportunity does still exist to 4 track it for much of the route between Shipley & Leeds. This will become more pressing once Apperley Bridge & Kirkstall Forge are built. It will be even more pressing if, as seems likely, much more housing is built up the Aire & Wharfe valleys.

The “extend it to Glasgow” argument doesn’t really convince me, I’m afraid – there are already a couple of trains an hour from Carlisle to Glasgow at many times of the day, so plenty of connections – you’d then struggle to path a 75mph/90mph DMU up the WCML (I know that most S&C services are wholly 158s, but if you want to have the flexibility of adding a 153 on for capacity then you have to path a service for the slowest type of stock)

The connections maybe there at Carlisle, but with the right amount of improvements along the S&C to allow any future freed 185s (for example) to run up it at reasonable speeds, then use their better speeds once on the WCML, there might be enough demand for Yorkshire - Glasgow runnings. I know where I work there is plenty of movement between Bradford & Glasgow at the moment, some done by car due to slow services on the S&C, and rammed services across the TPE services.

I’d not considered a direct steam service from the KWVR up to Carlisle, but I could see it being popular – plus it avoids the complications of paths at the Leeds end (plenty of 333s to connect to at Keighley). Interesting

It's a lovely idea, but I doubt that the K&WVR would have the capacity to be able to commit to a regular service even over the summer only, and although West Coast might be better placed to operate it I suspect they are currently content with the occasional running they operate as tours.

 

[Ploughman]

You're quite right and I hadn't factored in the point work at Keighley.

Points at Keighley are motor worked on the crossover and lead to the siding and KWVR and have been for many a year.
Groundman, however may be required to provide access / egress.

Movement is fully signalled for Loco or Track Machine moves but unsure about it being allowed for passenger working.

 

[Carlisle]

I believe speeds on some sections of the S&C used to be higher but a blanket 60 maximum was imposed at some point mainly as a result of the 1995 Ais Gill accident

 

[Anvil1984]

The connections maybe there at Carlisle, but with the right amount of improvements along the S&C to allow any future freed 185s (for example) to run up it at reasonable speeds, then use their better speeds once on the WCML, there might be enough demand for Yorkshire - Glasgow runnings. I know where I work there is plenty of movement between Bradford & Glasgow at the moment, some done by car due to slow services on the S&C, and rammed services across the TPE services.

Why are 185s mentioned for this line, a number of diagrams on this line are 158 + 153 and 1 is definitely 2 x 158 so we'll be reducing cycle and overall seatin capacity. A 185 only has 169 permanent seats (first and standard combined, tip ups excluded). If first class is replaced you could possibly get this to 181. A 2 car 158 has 138 seats (excluding tip ups) and a 153 is 75 seats so that's 213 (31 more than a potentially modified 185 44 unmodified), On the 2 x 158 diagram you'd be losing over 100 seats

 

[Condor7]

it’ll still be a 60mph railway that serves few intermediate stations of any size.

Wow what a response.
It is hard to argue with someone who has taken the time and trouble to respond in such a comprehensive way.

All I would say is that your above reference to it being a 60 mph railway and therefore not necessarily the faster route to Western Scotland, is that the whole point is it should not be a 60mph railway with the investment already put in (which I am very grateful for) it is a shame the investment did not continue to return the line to a faster speed, with more passing loops to return the line to a viable alternative to other routes some of which are already having pathing problems.

 

[adrock1976]

Regarding the shuttle service, would it be possible to extend the present Clitheroe service to Hellifield and also extend one Skipton service to Hellifield too? These could make use of the southern bay platforms with a shuttle from the northern bay platform to Settle or Appleby. This would maybe make a case for speeding up the Leeds - Carlisle journeys by missing out some stations.

In peace

Adam

 

[BantamMenace]

Regarding the shuttle service, would it be possible to extend the present Clitheroe service to Hellifield and also extend one Skipton service to Hellifield too? These could make use of the southern bay platforms with a shuttle from the northern bay platform to Settle or Appleby. This would maybe make a case for speeding up the Leeds - Carlisle journeys by missing out some stations.

In peace

Adam

More than once before have i expressed interest in electrifying to hellifield, make hellifield the new Skipton in terms of Airedale line termination and building a couple of thousand houses somewhere around gargrave or hellifield. Couple this with platform extension and 5 or 6 car new EMUs to cascade 333s and I'm sure a return on investment could be made. Further couple this with an hourly ManVic to Hellifield via Blackburn and Clitheroe with a view to electrification throughout this route. All of a sudden you've built a couple of thousand houses within just under an hour to Leeds and Bradford and just over an hour to Manchester in a highly desirable part of the north (the dales). But until I possess £250m to build the houses and double the same again for electrification and doubling the route to Manchester, not to mention the new stock we'll all have to sit and wait.

 

[reb0118]

......But until I possess £250m to build the houses and double the same again for electrification and doubling the route to Manchester, not to mention the new stock we'll all have to sit and wait.

Have you considered asking Donald Trump? There are only two questions he needs answering:-

1) Can he build a luxury golf resort in the area? And....

2) No visible windfarms. (Seemingly they have an adverse effect on his affect his toupe/weave/combover).

Sorted.

 

[Darren R]

Hellifield is a village of 1,000 souls. Whilst patronage of Hellifield station has increased by 63% in the last decade, it still only had 27,000 passengers last year. There is never going to be a business case for electrification - not without an extra 20,000 houses being built; I think this is highly unlikely anytime soon.

There may be a case to run a couple of trains to Hellifield off the Clitheroe line on Saturdays (the Sunday services are now all-year-round) but that's all. Potential traffic comes from the leisure market from East Lancashire headed into the Dales - mostly on summer weekends. There is no latent market of tens of thousands of potential commuters, waiting to see an hourly electric service to Manchester (or Bradford and Leeds for that matter) in order to switch to rail and ditch their cars.

Extending services from Clitheroe to Hellifield and thence Skipton is not possible without remodelling and resignalling at Hellifield - at the moment it's not a signalled move.

Don't get me wrong - I'm all in favour of investment in our rail network and opening up of new services. But only when it's justified - we have to be realistic in these matters. It strikes me that most of the ideas in this thread are solutions looking for a problem that simply doesn't exist - and some suggestions are downright outlandish! (A general comment - aimed at no-one in particular!)

 

[Carlisle]

Considering Network Rail are busy spending large sums replacing signalling systems on some lines that were installed as recently as the 80s and 90s surely some investment (besides the Cambrian) to renew and improve the very ancient (probably partly Victorian)systems at places like Hellifield on secondary routes should be allowed too

 

[infobleep]

May be the old signals are put of the tourist charm.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[edwin_m]

Considering Network Rail is busy spending large sums replacing signalling systems on some lines that were installed as recently as the 80s and 90s surely some investment (besides the Cambrian) to renew and improve the very ancient (probably partly Victorian)systems at places like Hellifield on secondary routes should be allowed too

Mechanical signalling can probably carry on for ever, assuming the specialist skills to support it are still in existence. Until recently the cost of replacing it was so great that it was probably cheaper in the long term to keep it going as well. However modular signalling may have changed that, which is why it has appeared on several other routes such as Crewe-Shrewsbury and Ely-Norwich. If the savings are as much as claimed, it will spread to the S&C sooner or later.

Relay-based signalling, installed roughly from the 1960s to the 1980s, has a lifetime beyond which it would be unsafe or at least unreliable, unless so much was spent on it that it might as well be replaced. However the lifetime for individual schemes depends on what equipment was used, so some will be replaced while older equipment carries on.

1990s and some 1980s equipment is more likely to be re-controlled to centralise control at a Regional Operating Centre, without replacing the equipment on the trackside.

 

[Carlisle]

Thanks for explaining things , I did often wonder why lines like the Cumbrian coast's signalling seems unchanged in centuries yet we replace fairly modern power boxes like Slough and Leicester

 

[martinB]

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've often wondered why the service finishes at ribblehead. There's little population and its a pain to drive to (particularly in winter). Garsdale is far easier - serving both Sedbergh and Hawes. Terminating at Kirby Stephen would add even more potential customers.

 

[Bantamzen]

Why are 185s mentioned for this line, a number of diagrams on this line are 158 + 153 and 1 is definitely 2 x 158 so we'll be reducing cycle and overall seatin capacity. A 185 only has 169 permanent seats (first and standard combined, tip ups excluded). If first class is replaced you could possibly get this to 181. A 2 car 158 has 138 seats (excluding tip ups) and a 153 is 75 seats so that's 213 (31 more than a potentially modified 185 44 unmodified), On the 2 x 158 diagram you'd be losing over 100 seats

I only used the 185s as an example as they are going to be looking for new workings over the coming 4 or so years, and given that they work quite well on the climbs up the Pennines it seems logical to consider them if any improvements were to be made to the infrastructure & timings on the S&C in the next few years. Yes there's a loss of capacity using a single 185 if you replace it on a 2 x 158 or 158 + 153 diagram, but often a single 158 can be seen working them so on these capacity would be increased. And if you increased the number of services then you could probably offer a similar number of seats but with more flexibility for passengers.

 

[Buttsy]

I've often wondered why the service finishes at ribblehead. There's little population and its a pain to drive to (particularly in winter). Garsdale is far easier - serving both Sedbergh and Hawes. Terminating at Kirby Stephen would add even more potential customers.

As far as I am aware, there are only signalled crossovers (as opposed to groundframes) at Blea Moor and Appleby, so you can only run services to these places to enable a return.

Btw, I may be wrong and there are crossovers at Garsdale and Kirby Stephen, which makes the point valid.

 

[Carlisle]

As far as I am aware, there are only signalled crossovers (as opposed to groundframes) at Blea Moor and Appleby, so you can only run services to these places to enable a return.

Btw, I may be wrong and there are crossovers at Garsdale and Kirby Stephen, which makes the point valid.

I don't know if it still does , but the first southbound train of the day only went to Kirby Stephen and back so there must be some kind of crossover there

 

[chorleyjeff]

I believe speeds on some sections of the S&C used to be higher but a blanket 60 maximum was imposed at some point mainly as a result of the 1995 Ais Gill accident

Before WW2 was there any speed limit? My understanding is that there were no line speed restrictions or permanent speed restrictions but, of course, I may wel be wrong on that.

 

[30907]

I've often wondered why the service finishes at ribblehead. There's little population and its a pain to drive to (particularly in winter). Garsdale is far easier - serving both Sedbergh and Hawes. Terminating at Kirby Stephen would add even more potential customers.

It allows Settle to be served, which is the last place likely to attract regular traffic (and it's useful for the 3 Peaks trade on the return!). I've used the train out of Leeds and it's not been busy even at that end.

At the time it was introduced, Garsdale box was normally switched out so Blea Moor was the only option once Settle box went. (IIRC the train replaced a Leeds-Morecambe many years ago which served Giggleswick - or was that just the morning equivalent?).

 

[Carlisle]

Before WW2 was there any speed limit? My understanding is that there were no line speed restrictions or permanent speed restrictions but, of course, I may wel be wrong on that.

Interesting , I don't know the ansewer ,however I do remember older drivers in the 1980s who said steam locos they worked in the 50s and early 60s we're not usually fitted with speedometers

 

[martinB]

It allows Settle to be served, which is the last place likely to attract regular traffic (and it's useful for the 3 Peaks trade on the return!). I've used the train out of Leeds and it's not been busy even at

Garsdale leeds london is a very attractive alternative to the wcml, albeit slower. There is already commuter traffic on the line and an early train would encourage greater useage in both these areas.

 

[30907]

there is an early one now. discussion is about the evening train

 

[RichmondCommu]

Okay, a 153 shuttling from Ribblehead to Skipton – a forty minute journey time, so one unit could easily provide a bi-hourly service slotting in between the bi-hourly 158s to Carlisle, giving Ribblehead/ Settle/ Hellifield an hourly service to Skipton...

Both you and I know that people in this country don't like changing trains, especially when they currently have direct services. The main road from the Northern Dales into Settle is not the best and the train wins every time. However given that most people will be travelling to Leeds or perhaps Bradford, once people have to factor in the added time of changing at Skipton (in particular from Settle) they may conclude that its quicker to use the car. Especially given that Airedale services are going to stop a lot more frequently than the Leeds - Carlisle trains this also needs to be taken into consideration.

...what I love about these threads is the way that people can suggest all sorts of “blue sky” improvements (taking just this thread as an example - finding sufficient 125mph stock to run bi-hourly London services via the single track/passing loops of the Penistone line, doubling the S&C frequency from Leeds to Carlisle, putting Voyagers/185s on the S&C, finding sufficient 125mph stock to run bi-hourly London services up the S&C, extending S&C services to Nottingham/ Doncaster/ Glasgow etc)...

...but when you suggest something rather modest like finding one spare 153 (a class which Northern operate, a class that already runs some S&C services when coupled to a 158) to fill some gaps on the busiest section of the route, you get told that there are no spare 153s.

Okay, at the moment there are no spare DMUs full stop (we’ll have to wait a couple of years for more electrification – I wasn’t planning on introducing any new service in the next week), but that kind of detail is never mentioned when people make outlandish suggestions.

Are you trying to suggest that as I've taken the trouble to reply to your post then I should also be required to respond to every other post on this thread? I wasn't aware that this was included in the forum rules.

How are you going to run a more frequent service on the S&C if you don’t want to start with a simple shuttle from Skipton into the Dales? Good luck finding spare paths from Leeds to Shipley, for start.

...since you’ve pointed out that there isn’t a single spare 153 in the country (and you don’t want shuttles from Skipton), I’d be interested to know how you are going to improve journey opportunities for those wanting to get from the Dales to Leeds (?).

I doubt that there are any spare paths at the Leeds end (six EMUs an hour through Kirkstall plus lots of random slow freight plus the current bi-hourly S&C services plus a handful of awkwardly timed Lancaster/Morcambe services), which is why I was suggesting a shuttle to/from Skipton, to connect with those regular EMUs to Leeds/ Bradford (off topic - funny how often I read that Bradford needs better services to places south of it, but you never see people suggest services from Bradford to Morecambe/ Settle etc).

So, if you want to increase the number of journey opportunities from the Settle area to Leeds then you can either find some spare Sprinters with good acceleration to run in the path of a four coach high density 333 on the Airedale service, or you can hope for something simple like a spare 153 to shuttle from Skipton to Ribblehead. It’s not glamorous, it’s not as exciting as running 125mph stock from London up the S&C, but it’d fill the gaps between the current bi-hourly S&C service and would be a good starting position to assess whether there’s much more of a market out there. Who knows, it could even be upgraded to a 142 after a couple of years...

Given how flexible and useful the class 153's are they will surely be the last to be given up by a TOC, either by Northern or indeed anyone else. Not only that but your proposed shuttle service would cause problems further up the line at Blea Moor. Now once or twice a day probably isn't a problem but once every two hours and I would have thought that you might have pathing problems.

I'm not looking for any "glamorous" or "exciting" service suggestions, just sensible ones and I don't include a Ribblehead to Skipton shuttle in that bracket. However what you could do is split the Lancaster services at Skipton (or even Hellifield) with one portion heading up the S & C with the remainder heading off towards Carnforth. That way you have additional services from Leeds to Settle and beyond whilst not demanding further paths.

 

[yorksrob]

To pick up on Richmond Commuters aim for sensible suggestions, I think you'd be hard put to better FoSC's own ambitions for a through service from Manchester. If the issues south of Blackburn could be sorted out, you'd have a ready made market similar to Leeds and West Yorks.

 

[RichmondCommu]

To pick up on Richmond Commuters aim for sensible suggestions, I think you'd be hard put to better FoSC's own ambitions for a through service from Manchester. If the issues south of Blackburn could be sorted out, you'd have a ready made market similar to Leeds and West Yorks.

I concur with all of what you've said but if you're commuting to Manchester you really need to ensure your knees are under the desk by at least 09.00. As always, improve job opportunities for young people living in the Dales and they will be less likely to move away.

 

[30907]

Even with a considerable speed-up S of Blackburn, Manchester would still be a significantly longer commute than Leeds from Hellifield and beyond, and I fear the market would be quite small.

 

[Condor7]

Even with a considerable speed-up S of Blackburn, Manchester would still be a significantly longer commute than Leeds from Hellifield and beyond, and I fear the market would be quite small.

The Friends of the Settle & Carlisle have done quite a bit of research into this and on the contrary they have found quite a significant demand certainly enough to warrant a regular service.

 

[43074]

Surely a new Manchester to Carlisle via Settle service would be aimed primarily at the leisure market, i.e. for day trips from Manchester to the Dales, so a journey from Manchester Victoria at 09:00 and a return from Carlisle at 15:00 would be more ideal.

If a Dales to Manchester service aimed at commuters was required surely it would only need to start at Settle, because the largest settlements (Hawes, Sedbergh, Appleby etc) anywhere remotely large enough for there to be the demand for commuter services are within 30/40 minutes of WCML stations at Penrith and Oxenholme anyway, which offer much faster journey times than the Settle & Carlisle (S&C) could ever deliver.

I agree the S&C ought to be developed as a leisure or community line, it doesn't need to be a major commuter or regional link because there are faster (or equally fast) alternatives avaliable between the centres the S&C would also connect.