VTEC Middlesbrough - London route

[Starmill]

Oh. Ok. But VTEC trains are considerably nicer, they provide a much more comfortable journey. In my opinion.

But you have never been on these trains. How on earth do you know that?

As for the pricing, the cheapest return from Middlesbrough to London is £130.10. From Eaglescliffe by GC it is £101.40 - a saving neither of these is exactly a bargain. The Advance ticket situation is little different.

 

[Starmill]

ok then clever clogs - find me the money. Good luck. Off you go.

A rather different problem to the one of the new platforms being unnecessary!

As it happens though I agree that a through up platform on the east side of the current fast lines (in addition to a bay or two there) is the only way to untangle the conflicts.

It was reported in Modern Railways that the issues with the pathing of the Bishop Auckland service are being looked at. Unfortunately this service is starting in just a few months, so with the lack of money you identify it seems likely that the only plausible outcome is... fewer express ECML services.

 

[ainsworth74]

The depot area was cleared for redevelopment but nothing more has happened. Christ knows what is under the ground!

I have a feeling that they cleared the site just in time for the worst of the recession to bite (possibly just after but before the recovery) so if there was anyone lined up I can easily imagine that they gave up on the idea at that point.

I also have a feeling the whole thing was tied up with closing the current line used by passenger services and sending everything round the back of the yard on the freight only lines as well (which has a) never happened and b) unlikely to happen anytime soon!) which means access to the site is still rather restricted with active railway on all sides!

 

[DarloRich]

A rather different problem to the one of the new platforms being unnecessary!

As it happens though I agree that a through up platform on the east side of the current fast lines (in addition to a bay or two there) is the only way to untangle the conflicts.

i am not convinced the bay platforms would actually help that much. Actually thinking a little outside the box I wonder if a double faced platform could be provided where the current curtain wall is opposite the south bound platform. Think platform 8 at Newcastle.

It was reported in Modern Railways that the issues with the pathing of the Bishop Auckland service are being looked at. Unfortunately this service is starting in just a few months, so with the lack of money you identify it seems likely that the only plausible outcome is... fewer express ECML services.

it should be possible to fit the new Bishop trains into the current timetable with a bit of jiggery pokery.

I feel there is slack in the timetable to accommodate some of the new express trains if something creative is done. There seems to be 2 c.10 minute gaps per hour and a bit more time could be bought by routing all freight via the coast and Stillington to Northallerton which could help fit them in.

I have a feeling that they cleared the site just in time for the worst of the recession to bite (possibly just after but before the recovery) so if there was anyone lined up I can easily imagine that they gave up on the idea at that point.

I also have a feeling the whole thing was tied up with closing the current line used by passenger services and sending everything round the back of the yard on the freight only lines as well (which has a) never happened and b) unlikely to happen anytime soon!) which means access to the site is still rather restricted with active railway on all sides!

it was - there is a terribly low bridge on the approach to the old depot which really limits site access.

 

[800001]

I am pretty certain that the Middlesbrough - London, was going to be routed via Yarm.

Calling pattern:- Middlesbrough, Northallerton, York, Peterborough and Kings Cross.

Thought I had read it in a magazine, but have also just read the following statement, from this report

http://www.orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/21392/ch2m-report-2016-01-15.pdf

This service proposition involves introduction of a new weekday two-hourly service between King’s
Cross, Peterborough, York, Northallerton and Middlesbrough.
The York stop would be switched from the corresponding fast Edinburgh service, enabling faster journey
times between Edinburgh and London.
The Peterborough and Northallerton stops would be switched from the corresponding stopping
Newcastle service, enabling faster journey times between a number of locations.

 

[swt_passenger]

I am pretty certain that the Middlesbrough - London, was going to be routed via Yarm.

Calling pattern:- Middlesbrough, Northallerton, York, Peterborough and Kings Cross.

Thought I had read it in a magazine, but have also just read the following statement, from this report

http://www.orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/21392/ch2m-report-2016-01-15.pdf

This service proposition involves introduction of a new weekday two-hourly service between King’s
Cross, Peterborough, York, Northallerton and Middlesbrough.
The York stop would be switched from the corresponding fast Edinburgh service, enabling faster journey
times between Edinburgh and London.
The Peterborough and Northallerton stops would be switched from the corresponding stopping
Newcastle service, enabling faster journey times between a number of locations.

Just confirms or justifies what is in the track access contract I linked to last week. Post #41.

 

[TBY-Paul]

ok then clever clogs - find me the money. Good luck. Off you go.

As part of the Tees Valley devolution deal, Darlington Station has to be made "HS2 Ready", and some outline plans have been published. The New Tees Valley Mayor has just announced that in addition to the £15 million (per year) from government, he has secured a further £200 mill of investment from the Tees Valley pension fund, so there's money available.

BTW new south facing bays built in the existing station car park wont help fit hourly Bishop Auckland - Middlesbrough services into the time table or in fact any of the services you suggest. Nor will they help fix any of the crossing moves unless a new line is laid from the existing Darlington South Junction.

That will require moving a large berm or embankment designed to screen the residents in the houses on the former Cleveland Bridge site from the railway. it also needs some bridging works on Smithfield Road - none of that is an insurmountable challenge but it all adds to the cost.

The Smithfield bridge used to carry 4 tracks, so not a lot of work would be required, and the rest , as you say, is not insurmountable.

However the only issue that investment fixes is removing the crossing movement from the up Saltburn to the down main/station area at Darlington South. It fixes none of the other conflicts set out above which btw have existed since time began.

By removing the conflicts, it then gives scope to re-introduce a proper Darlington to Hartlepool(Durham Coast) service, instead of the present weekend parliamentary service that just about exists. You could even introduce a Darlington to Nunthorpe service to give the people of Darlington access to James Cook Hospital when Darlington Memorial loses it's A&E department (North Tees or Darlington are going to loses their A&E Dept)

My point is that south facing bays are not the answer to the question. What would be of use is another through platform.

Although South Bay platforms don't address all the problems in the Tees Valley, it's a start to solving some of them that are present now, and mitigate some problems that will arise in the future.

Also,There's nothing to stop a couple of through platforms being constructed in addition to the Bay platforms.