Should Skipton to Colne reopen with single track ?

[zwk500]

The line between Clitheroe and Hellifield is slow and not in top quality condition for handling a busy freight service with the heavy wagons. The S&C has plenty of spare capacity to be able to carry the freight which currently uses the WCML, along with the existing freight paths, so by doubling Burnley-Colne and reopening the Colne-Skipton line as a mainline-grade freight route (including an hourly passenger service), you could take all freight between Preston and Carlisle off the WCML and send it via the route I've suggested.

It'd be much cheaper to just refurb Clitheroe-Hellifield. Existing heavy freight uses that route without problems, alongside passenger charters. Sending trains even further around just to slog up more hills sounds rather self-defeating to me.

A park and ride scheme or dedicated station-town bus connection at Barnoldswick could solve the problem you've highlighted.

True, but will people actually use it, and who's going to fund it?

What possible benefit to anybody would diverting all WCML freight via the S&C be? Most of the freight are intermodals which will be just in time delivery and going via the S&C would:
a) mean electric traction had to be replaced by diesel traction
b) add 2 to 3 hours to the journey

To be fair, with HS2 coming along the freight strategy is to send more stuff via the S&C to clear the line via Shap for the expresses. Not much on the WCML is electric only anyway. The bigger question is if you're diverting WCML freight onto the S&C, why on earth would you send it all the way to Skipton rather than via Clitheroe? (The answer is - to prove a (not very good) point).

 

[Neptune]

The line between Clitheroe and Hellifield is slow and not in top quality condition for handling a busy freight service with the heavy wagons. The S&C has plenty of spare capacity to be able to carry the freight which currently uses the WCML, along with the existing freight paths, so by doubling Burnley-Colne and reopening the Colne-Skipton line as a mainline-grade freight route (including an hourly passenger service), you could take all freight between Preston and Carlisle off the WCML and send it via the route I've suggested.

The line between Clitheroe and Hellifield is in far better shape than the Colne to Skipton route

 

[Bald Rick]

A park and ride scheme or dedicated station-town bus connection at Barnoldswick could solve the problem you've highlighted.

Indeed. A dedicated bus from Baroldswick Town to the stations at Colne and Skipton would sort that, without having to spend £400m on a railway that would need a £10m+ annual subsidy.

 

[Bertie the bus]

To be fair, with HS2 coming along the freight strategy is to send more stuff via the S&C to clear the line via Shap for the expresses. Not much on the WCML is electric only anyway. The bigger question is if you're diverting WCML freight onto the S&C, why on earth would you send it all the way to Skipton rather than via Clitheroe? (The answer is - to prove a (not very good) point).

How can you clear the line via Shap for expresses when there isn't any freight anyway? The amount of daytime freight north of Preston is absolutely pitiful but I doubt that will stop Network Rail asking for hundreds of millions to upgrade the S&C when they upgraded it for freight a decade ago anyway and it has a couple of trains each way per day.

 

[The Planner]

How can you clear the line via Shap for expresses when there isn't any freight anyway? The amount of daytime freight north of Preston is absolutely pitiful but I doubt that will stop Network Rail asking for hundreds of millions to upgrade the S&C when they upgraded it for freight a decade ago anyway and it has a couple of trains each way per day.

That wont happen as the amount of work the S&C would need to enable W10 would never ever wash its face.

 

[Neptune]

I’m still trying to get my head around how it is presumed to be better to build a whole new section of track (Colne to Skipton) rather than upgrading an existing section of track (Clitheroe - Hellifield), especially when the result would be a much longer detour for these freight trains.

This suggestion smacks of just another desperate way to justify the project.

On another note, SELRAP was formed 21 years ago. Surely if this project actually had some merit then we would have seen some physical progress by now rather than continual ‘regular meetings with the DfT’.

If they were serious about helping the region’s connectivity then they should put it to better use such as campaigning for things that are actually achievable as I’ve mentioned before.

 

[Bald Rick]

As I say on every thread on this subject, one of my first posts on this forum gave my views on the subject and posted a bet that the line would not be reopened before 2030.

12 years later, the project is in much the same place as it was then.
Well, not quite, as it will now be rather more expensive than even I thought it would be back then.

 

[A0]

Indeed. A dedicated bus from Baroldswick Town to the stations at Colne and Skipton would sort that, without having to spend £400m on a railway that would need a £10m+ annual subsidy.

Doesn't even need that - at the moment it gets 4 buses an hour to Burnley and roughly hourly to Skipton provided commercially - so no need for a dedicated rail "bus" service. Simply provide through ticketing - job done.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Doesn't even need that - at the moment it gets 4 buses an hour to Burnley and roughly hourly to Skipton provided commercially - so no need for a dedicated rail "bus" service. Simply provide through ticketing - job done.

So what really is the issue then over this lost railway , apart from joining the map up.

I suppose a good bus link to Manchester Road from wherever the demand is , along with through ticketing (as TfW does onto the Carmarthen - Aberystwyth bus - another "obsessive" railway restitution) would appear to be the best option VFM wise.

From someone who used to work at the DfT (now retired) , was asked to go to Skipton to discuss this line some years ago , reports that one of the supporters admitted (not a local) , that his enjoyment and involvement in the project was to do with railway cartography.

 

[Bald Rick]

From someone who used to work at the DfT (now retired) , was asked to go to Skipton to discuss this line some years ago

One of the ‘regular’ meetings!

(terminology note Regular does not equal Frequent)

 

[Techniquest]

In the modern era, assuming the trackbed is cleared/easy enough to clear, would it not make more sense to use the old formation for an active travel route? Done up to the required standard, of course.

Note that I have no prior knowledge of this proposal, apart from what's in this thread. Reading the posts so far, it does not appear to be worth reinstating the railway quite honestly. If the buses were being heavily used all the time, then I could see some justification for putting the railway back.

From what I can see, it is done as a railway but there are potentially better ways to link the two towns!

 

[Bald Rick]

In the modern era, assuming the trackbed is cleared/easy enough to clear, would it not make more sense to use the old formation for an active travel route? Done up to the required standard, of course.

There’s a dual carriageway, various commercial and residential properties, the River Aire and the Skipton bypass in the way. The proposers seem to forget about that.

 

[zwk500]

There’s a dual carriageway, various commercial and residential properties, the River Aire and the Skipton bypass in the way. The proposers seem to forget about that.

But on the OS map it says 'Dismantled Rlwy' and that's something we simply cannot have!

 

[BayPaul]

There's no option for 4 tracking it, electrified, on an alignment for 320kph...

I'll vote for no tracking, since it would be my taxes helping to pay for an utterly pointless scheme.

 

[rototunablack5]

I have never been able to track down any plans showing the proposed route. If the idea is to use as much of the old track bed as possible I have always wondered how it is planned to cross Vivary Way in Colne. This is effectively a continuation of the M65 at nearly level with the old railway. A level crossing does not sound feasible. Can anyone enlighten me?

 

[wilbers]

I have never been able to track down any plans showing the proposed route. If the idea is to use as much of the old track bed as possible I have always wondered how it is planned to cross Vivary Way in Colne. This is effectively a continuation of the M65 at nearly level with the old railway. A level crossing does not sound feasible. Can anyone enlighten me?

I've found an answer of sorts, though if its a practical one is questionable. https://www.selrap.org.uk/faq.html



How will it cross Vivary Way?

SELRAP anticipates that the road will be lowered as the railway would need to be at its original level because of nearby bridge constraints. However, until the Department for Transport has undertaken its Engineering Studies, we don't know what will be proposed.

 

[Bald Rick]

I have never been able to track down any plans showing the proposed route. If the idea is to use as much of the old track bed as possible I have always wondered how it is planned to cross Vivary Way in Colne. This is effectively a continuation of the M65 at nearly level with the old railway. A level crossing does not sound feasible. Can anyone enlighten me?

That’s a very good question, which has never been answered. Similarly how to get through The Wharf at Foulridge, or across Salterforth or Skipton Roads in Earby, or through Brooksbank Industries at Elslack, or across the Skipton Bypass.

I‘m be surprised if the early feasibility study did not identify these as major issues, with expensive solutions. Bridging Vivary way couldn’t cost less than £40m alone to lift the road. If the road was to be dropped, then it’s well on the way to 9 figures.


Incidentally that “FAQ” is comical. Most of the answers are “Dunno”.

 

[Techniquest]

There’s a dual carriageway, various commercial and residential properties, the River Aire and the Skipton bypass in the way. The proposers seem to forget about that.

Thanks. So an absolute no-hoper then! Although, without looking at the promoting group's website, I have to admire their dedication to the cause!

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Studied (Yawn) as part of the "Connecting Communties" report by ATOC in the last century - what is left of the track bed is way below standards , and in certain areas a brand new formation is required.

This study - at very low cost , but done by a senior and practical railway Civil and Maintenance Engineer was well done , and trustworthy. I would take his word over any amateur. The Skipton approach was particularly challenging.

Maybe , this can be put to bed /grave even.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Depends what 'provision for double tracking' means. Once you've built all your bridges, earthworks etc to take double track, there's not much saving to be made. Loops may be more expensive operationally as Colne-Skipton is short enough to run as a single signal section.

Colne to Skipton could be run as a single section, but you'd actually be running Rose Grove to Skipton as a single section if you didn't put any loops in at all.

All academic of course, as there's more chance of Holmfirth Parish Council developing a Rapid Transit System based on wheeled bathtubs than there is of Skipton to Colne reopening.

 

[Bald Rick]

All academic of course, as there's more chance of Holmfirth Parish Council developing a Rapid Transit System based on wheeled bathtubs than there is of Skipton to Colne reopening.

Careful - the former has been done, at least unofficially !