The proposed Eden Project North at Morecambe

[adamedwards]

Looking at my Quail map the crossovers appear to exist to allow bidirectional running from Lancaster to Morecambe South Junction. Signals connecting to the 1970s signal box at Preston might be trickier. As for electrification, how slow do the trains need to be for a simple trolley wire instread of full catenary? (As done to Trafford Park in Manchester.). I am assuming a one train emu means no need for an extra feeder. Can Team Paisley Canal come south and do this as they know how to do Aldi price wiring.

 

[Bald Rick]

Can Team Paisley Canal come south and do this as they know how to do Aldi price wiring.

It’s still a minimum of £2m/km.

 

[MarkyT]

And branch lines can, in certain circumstances, contribute to that role.

Including feeding a proportion of people into attractions such as Eden Project North (EPN).

However the response on here to potential new growth is often a little optimistic, shall we say.

One of the problems with judging what will happen at EPN is that there doesn't really seem to be any reasonable comparison - the Cornish EP is in a very different area and not ideal by public transport; Chester Zoo has a bigger attendance and decent bus links to Chester station. EPN is within walking distance of a station.

My judgement is that the rail market will be useful (might mean the shuttle will justify a 3car vice a 2car or equivalent) but is unlikely to justify the more optimistic suggestions such as through trains to various locations.

There is a roughly hourly bus direct to EP Cornwall from St Austell station during the attraction's normal opening hours. Creating a railway to the site would be a very difficult and expensive proposition and, looking at old maps, although it had tramways and inclines in the pit. There was never a rail link out of the old Bodelva china clay facility to anywhere else, so it was presumably always road served. The massive difference with EP North is that the rail link already exists and has an existing service that could be enhanced plausibly at moderate cost if desired.

 

[DerekC]

Realistically, as others have said, this is going to be a modest upgrade to the service on the current infrastructure with battery-electric units replacing DMUs in due course. However I do wonder if, with the relative importance of leisure travel by rail in the post-Covid world apparently increasing, specials might make more of a comeback. In which case occasional through trains from Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, maybe even Glasgow might just happen.

 

[yorksrob]

If we can only manage battery haulage on a route like Morecambe, short and easy to electrify, then there's not much hope for railway decarbonisation.

 

[MarkyT]

Realistically, as others have said, this is going to be a modest upgrade to the service on the current infrastructure with battery-electric units replacing DMUs in due course. However I do wonder if, with the relative importance of leisure travel by rail in the post-Covid world apparently increasing, specials might make more of a comeback. In which case occasional through trains from Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, maybe even Glasgow might just happen.

Morecambe is well equipped to deal with the occasional loco-hauled excursion as well, in the Heysham platform, which has a 300m+ run round and the platform face might be extended a little beyond its approx 140m length today.

 

[LittleAH]

My judgement is that the rail market will be useful (might mean the shuttle will justify a 3car vice a 2car or equivalent) but is unlikely to justify the more optimistic suggestions such as through trains to various locations.

Yet for convenience for the paying passenger - direct links are more important. For some, people would rather travel on just one train even if it takes longer than having to change trains. That must be factored in. It doesn't mean an hourly service, but I'd hope to see several direct trains a day from Manchester/Liverpool.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

I think the original eden project was an unexpected 'success' but I am not sure about the green motivations of the founder. I got his book where he talks about driving his volvo to London as fast as possible, and he advocated a new highway past Stonehenge. Provision for cycling to the site and parking for cycles was very poor.

Chucked the book in the recycling container.
..
How should such a project be good for the environment? It uses a lot of resources to start, does it then motivate people to wear jerseys at home, and to turn the heating down and travel less?

 

[30907]

Yet for convenience for the paying passenger - direct links are more important. For some, people would rather travel on just one train even if it takes longer than having to change trains. That must be factored in. It doesn't mean an hourly service, but I'd hope to see several direct trains a day from Manchester/Liverpool.

If you're not going to run a regular through service, then the most useful is a marginal-time working leaving at the end of the morning peak when people generally wanting to head out. People are less likely to want to be tied on the way home. It's classic commuter stock utilisation. Assumes suitable rolling stock (and such a thing as a morning peak) of course!

If we can only manage battery haulage on a route like Morecambe, short and easy to electrify, then there's not much hope for railway decarbonisation.

3 miles or so carrying 2 short tph isn't going to have much impact on our carbon footprint. Justifiable (like Marshlink) if it would eliminate a bimode island, eg as part of wiring to Barrow.

 

[yorksrob]

If you're not going to run a regular through service, then the most useful is a marginal-time working leaving at the end of the morning peak when people generally wanting to head out. People are less likely to want to be tied on the way home. It's classic commuter stock utilisation. Assumes suitable rolling stock (and such a thing as a morning peak) of course!


3 miles or so carrying 2 short tph isn't going to have much impact on our carbon footprint. Justifiable (like Marshlink) if it would eliminate a bimode island, eg as part of wiring to Barrow.

The point is, if you're going to achieve a low carbon railway, it will be necessary to do all of the low hanging fruit in terms of electrification.

A short stub like Morecambe is definitely low hanging fruit.

 

[HST43257]

If there are no through services from Morecambe to places beyond Lancaster, it shouldn’t be electrified. Battery is fine. I’d suggest Windermere is more of a priority given my feeling that through services are very important.

Of course the ideal is having batteries in 331s, but this is not looking like the simplest thing to do for whatever reason.

 

[Bald Rick]

The point is, if you're going to achieve a low carbon railway, it will be necessary to do all of the low hanging fruit in terms of electrification.

Indeed, ‘low hanging fruit’ meaning giving the best return on the investment compared to alternatives, not necessarily the lines that are easiest to do.

 

[yorksrob]

Indeed, ‘low hanging fruit’ meaning giving the best return on the investment compared to alternatives, not necessarily the lines that are easiest to do.

Best return on investment, followed by the easiest to do. I can't see how the railway will achieve sufficient de-carbonisation without electrifying more routes than just those that show a traditional return on investment.

 

[30907]

Best return on investment, followed by the easiest to do. I can't see how the railway will achieve sufficient de-carbonisation without electrifying more routes than just those that show a traditional return on investment.

Hence my suggestion that you would tag it on to Barrow.

 

[MarkyT]

Best return on investment, followed by the easiest to do. I can't see how the railway will achieve sufficient de-carbonisation without electrifying more routes than just those that show a traditional return on investment.

But batteries ARE a valid decarbonisation solution, increasingly becoming mainstream, and with the opportunity to charge in-motion under the wires from Lancaster to the junction and while stationary laying over in the bay platform, this really is an almost 'perfect' rail application. The battery would not even need to be particularly capacious, as the unwired section on the branch is only approx. 7km out and back per circuit. Of course, wiring is the right solution for ever more of our trunk mainline network, but battery-equipped electric trains will be the bi-modes of the future for selected branches and extremities.

 

[simonw]

And branch lines can, in certain circumstances, contribute to that role.

Including feeding a proportion of people into attractions such as Eden Project North (EPN).

However the response on here to potential new growth is often a little optimistic, shall we say.

One of the problems with judging what will happen at EPN is that there doesn't really seem to be any reasonable comparison - the Cornish EP is in a very different area and not ideal by public transport; Chester Zoo has a bigger attendance and decent bus links to Chester station. EPN is within walking distance of a station.

My judgement is that the rail market will be useful (might mean the shuttle will justify a 3car vice a 2car or equivalent) but is unlikely to justify the more optimistic suggestions such as through trains to various locations.

Which is pretty much my point. The development, if it happens, will have an impact on the usage of the railway, but it won't be the change that some people 'think ' it will be.

 

[SouthernR]

But batteries ARE a valid decarbonisation solution, increasingly becoming mainstream, and with the opportunity to charge in-motion under the wires from Lancaster to the junction and while stationary laying over in the bay platform, this really is an almost 'perfect' rail application. The battery would not even need to be particularly capacious, as the unwired section on the branch is only approx. 7km out and back per circuit. Of course, wiring is the right solution for ever more of our trunk mainline network, but battery-equipped electric trains will be the bi-modes of the future for selected branches and extremities.

The once a day "boat train" to Heysham Port has an additional 12km to cover. In the past this has been operated by extending one Leeds service, but except for Sundays is currently operated by the branch shuttle.

 

[yorksrob]

But batteries ARE a valid decarbonisation solution, increasingly becoming mainstream, and with the opportunity to charge in-motion under the wires from Lancaster to the junction and while stationary laying over in the bay platform, this really is an almost 'perfect' rail application. The battery would not even need to be particularly capacious, as the unwired section on the branch is only approx. 7km out and back per circuit. Of course, wiring is the right solution for ever more of our trunk mainline network, but battery-equipped electric trains will be the bi-modes of the future for selected branches and extremities.

Fine if you've no aspirations for any through services. But with a town such as Morecambe, it does seem odd that there isn't some sort of a through service to one of the North West conurbations. The Eden Project will exacerbate this anomaly.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Fine if you've no aspirations for any through services. But with a town such as Morecambe, it does seem odd that there isn't some sort of a through service to one of the North West conurbations. The Eden Project will exacerbate this anomaly.

The line is almost exclusively used by locals to go to/from Lancaster, or secondarily most likely to connect to London - I reckom a through service to Manchester would, like Barrow, have very significant turnover of passengers at Lancaster.

I can see some sense in wiring it and moving the Barrow to terminate there with Barrow as a connection, but only because that would remove diesel under wires running, to be fair.

 

[yorksrob]

The line is almost exclusively used by locals to go to/from Lancaster, or secondarily most likely to connect to London - I reckom a through service to Manchester would, like Barrow, have very significant turnover of passengers at Lancaster.

I can see some sense in wiring it and moving the Barrow to terminate there with Barrow as a connection, but only because that would remove diesel under wires running, to be fair.

As I've said on previous threads, there are plenty of people who stay in the train through Lancaster in my experience. A large proportion of these do appear to be leisure travelers.

 

[muddythefish]

Fine if you've no aspirations for any through services. But with a town such as Morecambe, it does seem odd that there isn't some sort of a through service to one of the North West conurbations. The Eden Project will exacerbate this anomaly.

This is a project that will literally transform a town that has struggled for decades, giving it a huge financial boost and give it much needed confidence. The least the railway can do is show similar ambition by reconnecting it to the outside world instead of leaving it stuck at the end of branch line with shuttles to Lancaster.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This is a project that will literally transform a town that has struggled for decades, giving it a huge financial boost and give it much needed confidence. The least the railway can do is show similar ambition by reconnecting it to the outside world instead of leaving it stuck at the end of branch line with shuttles to Lancaster.

Shuttles to a station with a really rather good service for the city's size, with connections to all over the place?

It's like saying Ormskirk is badly connected. It's not, via Liverpool (and other than Sundays, Preston) you can connect with one change* to much of the country.

I know I've been pushing the whole Bletchley<->MKC thing on the East West threads, but this is a bit different because there's no one place where it's obvious that a through service would be best (and don't forget it already does have a through service, albeit infrequent, to Leeds). Liverpool or Manchester would be most operationally convenient, but like with Barrow the demand is very mixed, and a fair bit will be onto the London trains which couldn't practically** run through.

There do exist "operational convenience" through services like the whole Ormskirk/Colne/Blackpool S thing, but in practice that is done because it's easier than terminating each at Preston (particularly as there's no north facing passenger bay), and this would be operationally inconvenient.

* Basically nobody uses the Loop line for that purpose; they walk between stations.
** Awaits proposals for the HS2 Lancaster terminator to run through to Morecambe

 

[4-SUB 4732]

So the suggestion from all of this is we need some sort of overhead wiring and EMU going up and down all day every 30 minutes?

Lovely idea and mostly agree, but definitely needs some infrastructure changes else you can’t reliably get the shuttle in. Something like a very high speed crossover just north of where the Morecambe branch goes off to allow two simultaneous northbound departures?

 

[Bald Rick]

But batteries ARE a valid decarbonisation solution, increasingly becoming mainstream, and with the opportunity to charge in-motion under the wires from Lancaster to the junction and while stationary laying over in the bay platform, this really is an almost 'perfect' rail application. The battery would not even need to be particularly capacious, as the unwired section on the branch is only approx. 7km out and back per circuit. Of course, wiring is the right solution for ever more of our trunk mainline network, but battery-equipped electric trains will be the bi-modes of the future for selected branches and extremities.

Spot on.

In this case, given the length of the branch, its speed and the intermediate stop, a three car EMU could easily manage with a battery of the same size as you find in a Renault Zoe.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So the suggestion from all of this is we need some sort of overhead wiring and EMU going up and down all day every 30 minutes?

Lovely idea and mostly agree, but definitely needs some infrastructure changes else you can’t reliably get the shuttle in. Something like a very high speed crossover just north of where the Morecambe branch goes off to allow two simultaneous northbound departures?

It's already 2tph, albeit at slightly rough intervals caused mainly by the involvement of Leeds services (could be separated) and the Heysham run (could be run using a taxi instead; passenger numbers don't really require a train).

 

[6Gman]

This is a project that will literally transform a town that has struggled for decades, giving it a huge financial boost and give it much needed confidence. The least the railway can do is show similar ambition by reconnecting it to the outside world instead of leaving it stuck at the end of branch line with shuttles to Lancaster.

We wait to see whether that will happen.

There have been plenty of projects which were going to transform towns which were either damp squibs or never happened at all.

 

[simonw]

We wait to see whether that will happen.

There have been plenty of projects which were going to transform towns which were either damp squibs or never happened at all.

Quite. What percentage will just visit the centre and not visit the town?My guess based on what happens elsewhere is it will be a high percentage.

 

[PTR 444]

It's already 2tph, albeit at slightly rough intervals caused mainly by the involvement of Leeds services (could be separated) and the Heysham run (could be run using a taxi instead; passenger numbers don't really require a train).

Slightly off topic but has there ever been a proposal to build a station closer to Heysham town centre? There was the short-lived Middleton Road Bridge Halt but that only lasted for a year and still wasn’t even close enough. I’m thinking if a new station was opened either at the B5273 Oxcliffe Road bridge or next to the Meldon Road housing estate, it would serve a large enough population catchment to warrant an hourly service to Heysham Port. Good for regeneration of the surrounding area.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Quite. What percentage will just visit the centre and not visit the town?My guess based on what happens elsewhere is it will be a high percentage.

Because it's located basically in the town centre, fewer than otherwise, I suspect.

 

[mmh]

But batteries ARE a valid decarbonisation solution, increasingly becoming mainstream

Mainstream? A single unrepeated trial counts as mainstream? Where do these magic zero carbon batteries come from?