Skipness
Member
In the "good old days" was double track Grosmont to Whitby.That block section needs to be broken up, one way or another.
In the "good old days" was double track Grosmont to Whitby.That block section needs to be broken up, one way or another.
Most probably done in anticipation of the strident "let's open all old branch lines" brigade campaign to reopen the former Devon and Somerset Railway link at Morebath Junction Halt...![]()
In the "good old days" was double track Grosmont to Whitby.
Yes, it does - at Grosmont Junction, I'd suggest. Indeed, it's a pity resources weren't there to do that at the outset of regular NYMR services.That block section needs to be broken up, one way or another.
Yes, it does - at Grosmont Junction, I'd suggest. Indeed, it's a pity resources weren't there to do that at the outset of regular NYMR services.
Ideally, of course, it would also be far more automated/mechanised, removing the need for protracted pauses while traincrew work groundframes and so on.
Belatedly: it is shown as starting at Grosmont. I wonder if pax from Whitby were carried on a delayed NYMR train or bussed? (Sorry, realise on Sundays it is the last train of the day - very odd to turn it short then!Quite, but the question remains, what happened to passengers apparently dumped at Grosmont (probably not very many), and if the train was terminated there how did the more numerous passengers out of Whitby proceed to Grosmont and beyond?
The train showing as leaving Whitby on RTT barely had time to stop, let alone connect to other carriages at Grosmont.
For this to be of any use, squeezing in an extra teatime train, you'd need a block post at Sleights (otherwise the NR train would sit at Glaisdale for 10min to allow the NYMR to fit between, because of the journey times).That block section needs to be broken up, one way or another.
Belatedly: it is shown as starting at Grosmont. I wonder if pax from Whitby were carried on a delayed NYMR train or bussed? (Sorry, realise on Sundays it is the last train of the day - very odd to turn it short then!
Edit: yesterday the 1600 ex Whitby was cancelled throughout according to RTT, leaving unit and crew at the terminus! I imagine that's not quite the whole story....
For this to be of any use, squeezing in an extra teatime train, you'd need a block post at Sleights (otherwise the NR train would sit at Glaisdale for 10min to allow the NYMR to fit between, because of the journey times).
The funding is due through a Section 106 Agreement. That agreement will specify how much must be paid and when eg commencement on site, commencement of operations. The amount due is small in comparison to the overall costs of the mine project.On the news today thatSirius Minerals is having to scale back its progress because of a lack of finance. This is the company that is providing financial support for the expansion of the Esk valley timetable from the December change. (see my post from Sept 7th)
Interesting article in Modern Railways this month, on the changes to the Whitby branch that have been undertaken and are planned.
It confirms fifth and sixth trains (at the start and end of the day) for the December timetale change. It also addresses the issues with adding the seventh and eighth trains in the middle of the day (which would be more useful for those visiting from outside). It seems to be suggesting either a loop or changes to the signalling system i.e. shorter block sections. Either way they say it will be 2-3 years before anything concrete happens on these.
The piece doesn't really address the overcrowding on the current services that I and others on here have experienced. If it is going to be 2-3 years before the extra trains, they're goinf to need to do something about it in the short term.
Hmmmm. I suspect any introduction of trains 7 and 8 will depend a lot on the impact of trains 5 and 6 on attracting traffic?
The problem, I fear, is that the line is simply too slow to make any real impact on Whitby + intermediate stations to Teeside commuter flows. A new loop or reduced block sections would certainly help capacity, but I wonder if a steady programe of track upgrading to allow, say, a +10 mph speed increase where possible would be a better use of funds in the long term? (I confess I'm sitting in an armchair as I type - and I'm all speculation here. I would love to see the line develop, but I've never used it myself.)
I don't think the length of the line is the problem - there never seems to be a shortage of end-to-end traffic.
The new train in the morning is more for Whitby residents than incommers, so will have little bearing on visitors to the town. An additional train at the end of the day might increase the popularity of the route with visitors though.
I don't think anyone, anywhere believes any significant population of Teeside will be rising at 04.15 to catch the new train TO Whitby.
I don't think anyone, anywhere believes any significant population of Teeside will be rising at 04.15 to catch the new train TO Whitby. It will run more days than not largely as ECS, I'd bet.
The question is, how many from Whitby and intermediate stations will rise catch the first train into Teeside (or beyond)? As an overall journey of 90 minutes (or so), I fear not very many. But I hope I get proved wrong. Perhaps if good, and secure connections are made at Darlington, it may prove attractive to some long-distance passengers.
Are Northern just paying lip service here, introducing a train with no connections for long distance travel at the other end and is there a commuter market from Whitby in to Teeside? Then just waiting for it to fail to say 'we told you so'?
Local user group have been campaigning for years for a train that arrives into Middlesbrough before 9am for people to use to access the job market or onward travel earlier than the current 1015 first arrival into Middlesbrough).
Whether or not there's any actual demand for a service that leaves at 0633 and arrives at 0756 I think is up for debate. Perhaps if it was more like an 0830 arrival (so around 0700 off Whitby) it might have more prospect of success but this was the only time that they could find that would work with the restrictions around Nunthorpe.
Personally whilst I think it will have a few users but I doubt it'll be particularly well used but the usergroup got their wish. After a fashion...
Funding is via North Yorkshire County Council and the Sirius Minerals development so as long as that lasts the service will last. Whether it continues after that is anyone's guess.
A pity the precarious financial position of Sirius may soon remove one leg of the finance.
Noting how popular a 6.15 departure has become for early commuters from Sheffield to Manchester (taking 50 minutes) I wouldn't totally discount use of this 6.33 train, nevertheless over 80 minutes from Whitby to Middlesbrough at that hour sounds a somewhat masochistic journey.
I note that the 0720 is retimed 0642 as part of the alterations - the whole thing being done within existing stock diagrams.That being said from Nunthrope it might actually do quite well once word gets around. Departing at 0742 allows it to fill a gap between the 0720 and the 0820 by providing an arrival into Middlesbrough at 0755.
How unrealistic is the obvious crayon improvement of cutting off Battersby - ballpark cost and gains? ....
I guess the big question would be whether it would save enough time to make a difference?
Oh so it is. The danger of having too many tabs running RTT at the same time!I note that the 0720 is retimed 0642 as part of the alterations - the whole thing being done within existing stock diagrams.
Well, if the Potash funding is under question, there needs to be a plan B.
Who is paying for plan B and what is not getting funded instead?
And that is before embarking on a 35 mile tunnel to Middlesbrough. It would be quicker to tunnel just to Whitby and take the stuff out by rail as at Boulby. If it is difficult tunnelling under the Esk, reopen Larpool Viaduct and part of the former Hawsker branch to as near the mine as possible.The potash mine operators are in financial trouble already. Take it that means the associated rail improvements will no longer be happening?