When will something be done about the Whitby branch ?

[yorksrob]

You must have used it very many years ago.

Scarborough to Whitby by bus is hourly, 7 days a week all year round, increased to every 30 mins from April and even every 20 mins in July-August. I honestly think that you simply don't want to believe that there are realistic alternatives for the ordinary visitors to that coast. It doesn't have to all come down to depending on your one train on one line.

It was about three years ago, and it was seasonal.

I'm aware that there are alternatives. I've used buses from Scarborough and Middlesborough. I've had lifts in motorcars to Whitby.

This isn't about alternatives. This is about the usual suspects on this forum using those alternatives as an excuse to propose running down railway services.

You've clearly used the railway as an alternative to those bus services in the past. Why are you so keen to have it run down ?

 

[ainsworth74]

It's only 25miles! Google has it as drivable in 40minutes.

Once you're out of Middlesbrough you can blast down the A171 at 60mph non-stop until you turn off for the final run into Glaisdale. The A171 is a very good road and very good fun to drive actually. Outside of winter snow these communities aren't actually that far away by car.

Meanwhile the train has meandered it's way from Middlesbrough to Battersby, not going non-stop at 60mph, before reversing and meandering it's way to Glaisdale, not going at non-stop at 60mph.

It's not surprising the car is significantly quicker.

 

[SideshowBob]

Scarborough will, of course, be half-hourly before too long as Northern will be introducing a York - Scarborough service (see here for more as we're starting to go off-topic!). Frequencies that the Whitby line could only dream of!

I think it's relevant in that it demonstrates that demand for services along seaside town branch lines can be greater than (to paraphrase) "just a few daytrippers in the summer". If the demand at Scarborough is there (which it evidently is given that the current level of service between there and York is to be doubled), I think it's difficult to argue that either it isn't there at Whitby right now (albeit suppressed) or couldn't/wouldn't be generated later as a result of at least improving the timetable (if not the infrastructure).

So, perhaps the emphasis needs to then switch to Scarborough. It will have far better train services than Whitby, and the Arriva buses serve Whitby from there (along some beautiful coastal scenery). Leave Whitby to the NYMR.

So rather than attempt to improve the current level of service, we should instead do the opposite and make it worse?

 

[Glenn1969]

When is Esk Valley signalling due to transfer to York which would presumably mean it being updated and upgraded?

 

[SideshowBob]

The Tees Valley (and one assumes the Esk will also benefit) network is earmarked for Hydrogen trains by 2022, according to the latest Transport for the North documents.

The issues are the timetable and the capacity of the trains on the line, not what fuel said trains run on.

 

[DarloRich]

I'm choosing to ignore the insults, but curious as to why you feel the need to change my mind? If I don't like them, I don't like them. They look nice inside but that is not enough, they need to be able to the jobs that may be asked of them. I don't think they can, I think Northern would want to use them far more extensively than just tootling about on a few branch lines, and until they've seen extensive use you can't argue they are capable of this. We've done this before over on the relevant thread.

I would simply prefer you were honest: Your view is based on bias and has little or no substance. You haven't travelled on the trains yet don't like them and base your view on that preconception. You also aren't interested in any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, that does not agree with your view. Perhaps if you took the blinkers off or listened to those of us us who have used the trains on a regular basis.................

As I said I was wrong about these trains. I wonder why you cant admit you might be.

PS what "jobs" will they be asked to do? Haul a container train from Felixstowe to Manchester? They are doing a decent job at shifting an increasing number of passengers along the Marston Vale.

 

[HSTEd]

By that argument, why have a railway at all ?

Railways are bulk passenger transport systems.
They excel at moving large numbers of people.

The current Whitby Branch does not really fill this role - despite relatively heavy loadings on trains that run, the number of passengers moved remains small because only a handful of trains run.

It's laughable really. It's not even a re-opening we're arguing for. Just a decent service on an existing route, yet the Beeching contingent aren't even satisfied with that.

.... I am the one arguing for investment and a half hourly service?
As it is the railway is a questionable use of public money and scarce railway resources.

Either attempt to shift the service profile to one that a railway is actually good at, or transfer the route to a system that is suited to the current service profile.

EDIT:

As far as I can see in the Sectional Appendix there is very little track above DMU50 on the entire line, which means a Class 230 is likely to substantially beat Super Sprinter timings. 400hp on something like 30 tonnes and all axles motored on a 2-car set? It will take off like a rocket.

 

[SideshowBob]

Railways are bulk passenger transport systems.
They excel at moving large numbers of people.

...and goods.

The current Whitby Branch does not really fill this role - despite relatively heavy loadings on trains that run, the number of passengers moved remains small because only a handful of trains run.

Exactly! So why not attempt to grow that market? You could start by improving the timetable so that both a Mon-Fri 9-5 Whitby-Middlesbrough commute, and a Sat and/or Sun tourist trip become feasible, and take it from there.

As it is the railway is a questionable use of public money and scarce railway resources.

Are you referring to the whole UK railway, or this particular line?

Either attempt to shift the service profile to one that a railway is actually good at, or transfer the route to a system that is suited to the current service profile.

Given that this is a route currently in operation, it would seem more sensible to me to try and make it better than to give up on it altogether and thus greatly hamper the sustainability and development of the economies of Whitby and the surrounding area.

 

[HSTEd]

...and goods.

Perhaps, but goods traffic on the UK railway is mostly a long way away from where goods traffic can actually compete with other modes. It is often given access to massively disproportionate resources given the relatively small amount of material it succeeds in moving.

Exactly! So why not attempt to grow that market? You could start by improving the timetable so that both a Mon-Fri 9-5 Whitby-Middlesbrough commute, and a Sat and/or Sun tourist trip become feasible, and take it from there.

Because attempts to fiddle with the timetable to get a tiny bit more out of the existing infrastructure is just going to keep this inefficient mess going for years or decades, as it slowly becomes slightly less inefficient.

Are you referring to the whole UK railway, or this particular line?

This line in particular, although there are even more egregious examples including railways made obsolete by the Humber Bridge that remain open but have been reduced to a purgatory that makes them of little use for actual passengers.

Given that this is a route currently in operation, it would seem more sensible to me to try and make it better than to give up on it altogether and thus greatly hamper the sustainability and development of the economies of Whitby and the surrounding area.

I am all for trying to make it better, but fiddling with the timetable and the like will achieve nothing.
Either "big bang" it to a reasonable service level or stop throwing money after it.

As far as I can tell, additional loops at Castleton Moor and Glaisdale, and double track between Grosmont and Sleights would enable a half hourly service, and if you had double track into Whitby you might even be able to let the NYMR do far more. (This assumes the Class 230s can shave a little journey time to provide the reliability margin)

A modular resignal, two Penryn esque station loops and a dynamic loop isn't really absurd is it? Alongside 14 Class 230 vehicles, plus two spare.

 

[Killingworth]

No doubt almost all the materials for the Sirius pipeline and sites will come in by road, they not being near the rail head at Whitby, or will they? Whatever, they'll bring extra business to Whitby over the next few years.

See; http://siriusminerals.com/our-project/

 

[SideshowBob]

Because attempts to fiddle with the timetable to get a tiny bit more out of the existing infrastructure is just going to keep this inefficient mess going for years or decades, as it slowly becomes slightly less inefficient.

I am all for trying to make it better, but fiddling with the timetable and the like will achieve nothing.
Either "big bang" it to a reasonable service level or stop throwing money after it.

I don't see why positive timetable alterations wouldn't achieve anything, nor why trying to get a bit more out of the existing infrastructure wouldn't be worthwhile. In their previous incarnation as the Northern franchisee, Arriva were said to be supportive of (among other things) timetable improvements on this line 17 or so years ago and I (at least) am not aware of any evidence that they wouldn't be now.

This was supported by Arriva Northern [sic], which currently owns the franchise and will be bidding for it again in 2003. A spokesman said: "We welcome [their] enthusiasm for this rail line and we are happy to work with them subject to the Strategic Rail Authority's endorsement."

https://www.whitbygazette.co.uk/news/rail-scheme-could-get-line-on-right-track-1-1880841

Could you expand on your point a little more?

As far as I can tell, additional loops at Castleton Moor and Glaisdale, and double track between Grosmont and Sleights would enable a half hourly service, and if you had double track into Whitby you might even be able to let the NYMR do far more. (This assumes the Class 230s can shave a little journey time to provide the reliability margin)

A modular resignal, two Penryn esque station loops and a dynamic loop isn't really absurd is it? Alongside 14 Class 230 vehicles, plus two spare.

Perhaps - I wouldn't know - but a half-hourly service isn't what the OP originally proposed, and such a level of frequency may be beyond the bounds of both sustainability and current requirements. The discussion about the use of Class 230s is also something of a red herring, in my view. I'm content to stick to making the timetable better and, if necessary, the trains currently in use on the route or their immediately useable replacements longer.

 

[HSTEd]

I don't see why positive timetable alterations wouldn't achieve anything, nor why trying to get a bit more out of the existing infrastructure wouldn't be worthwhile. Arriva were said to be supportive of (among other things) timetable imrpvements on this line 17 or so years ago and I (at least) am not aware of any evidence that they wouldn't be now.

Because it's highly unlikely that the line as it is exists comes anywhere close to covering it's costs.

The return fare between Middlesbrough and Whitby is only £7.50, and given the passenger statistics for stations on the line I doubt the farebox is much over a million pounds a year.

Tweaking the timetable is unlikely to change the lines financial situation, at which point I have to ask whether or not the money spent supporting it is the best use of a finite quantity of public money.

A big bang improvement of service that caused major passenger growth and became more useful for general passengers is likely to cost quite a bit more money, but it will give the public far more and thus would be better value for money.

Perhaps - I wouldn't know - but a half-hourly service isn't what the OP originally proposed, and such a level of frequency may be beyond the bounds of both sustainability and current requirements. The discussion about the use of Class 230s is also something of a red herring, in my view. I'm content to stick to making the timetable better and, if necessary, the trains currently in use on the route or their immediately useable replacements longer.

The problem is Sprinters are really not suited to very low speed frequent stop operations.
A Class 230 would likely allow significant improvement in journey times, which is important in making the service attractive to customers in the long run.

 

[SideshowBob]

Because it's highly unlikely that the line as it is exists comes anywhere close to covering it's costs.

The return fare between Middlesbrough and Whitby is only £7.50, and given the passenger statistics for stations on the line I doubt the farebox is much over a million pounds a year.

Tweaking the timetable is unlikely to change the lines financial situation, at which point I have to ask whether or not the money spent supporting it is the best use of a finite quantity of public money.

A big bang improvement of service that caused major passenger growth and became more useful for general passengers is likely to cost quite a bit more money, but it will give the public far more and thus would be better value for money.

You may well be right, and I'm certainly not against the idea of funding and implementing large-scale infrastructure improvements per se, but I think it would be silly to try to run before we can walk, so for the time being, why not bring in the kind of timetable improvements that I'm supporting and see how much your income increases as a result, then make future decisions based on that and other factors such as market research to guide you in your planning? Let's not get ahead of ourselves. Rome wasn't built in a day!

The problem is Sprinters are really not suited to very low speed frequent stop operations.
A Class 230 would likely allow significant improvement in journey times, which is important in making the service attractive to customers in the long run.

Not disagreeing with you; however, this discussion might be more suitable for some other thread.

 

[Bantamzen]

I would simply prefer you were honest: Your view is based on bias and has little or no substance. You haven't travelled on the trains yet don't like them and base your view on that preconception. You also aren't interested in any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, that does not agree with your view. Perhaps if you took the blinkers off or listened to those of us us who have used the trains on a regular basis.................

As I said I was wrong about these trains. I wonder why you cant admit you might be.

PS what "jobs" will they be asked to do? Haul a container train from Felixstowe to Manchester? They are doing a decent job at shifting an increasing number of passengers along the Marston Vale.

I have been honest, I have made it clear I haven't ridden on them. And I have been honest in the reasons why I don't like them, which I won't go over again.

As for the work that would be asked of them if they did ever appear in Yorkshire / Teeside, you know damn well that they would not be limited to occasional chugs down the Esk valley. By its very nature, the Northern operation rarely confines diesel units to individual routes (aka Random Unit Generator). You might not agree with them doing it, and might believe that that they would be better splitting branches out, but that is not the Northern operation right now. If this still annoys you by being a block to 230 procurement, I'd suggest taking that up with them.

 

[yorksrob]

Railways are bulk passenger transport systems.
They excel at moving large numbers of people.

The current Whitby Branch does not really fill this role - despite relatively heavy loadings on trains that run, the number of passengers moved remains small because only a handful of trains run.



.... I am the one arguing for investment and a half hourly service?
As it is the railway is a questionable use of public money and scarce railway resources.

Either attempt to shift the service profile to one that a railway is actually good at, or transfer the route to a system that is suited to the current service profile.

EDIT:

As far as I can see in the Sectional Appendix there is very little track above DMU50 on the entire line, which means a Class 230 is likely to substantially beat Super Sprinter timings. 400hp on something like 30 tonnes and all axles motored on a 2-car set? It will take off like a rocket.

Fair play - if the money becomes available, lets invest heavily in the route. But if that isn't forthcoming, there are less expensive improvements that can be done to improve the timetable and capacity that are worthwhile, which would bring the service nearer to that provided on similar routes elsewhere.

It's not really good enough to protest in one breath "but I'm the one proposing to invest loads of money in a half hourly service" then in the next say that if that loads of money happens to not turn up, we should close it and replace it with a bus. That is a dishonest way of arguing for closure.

 

[yorksrob]

I would simply prefer you were honest: Your view is based on bias and has little or no substance. You haven't travelled on the trains yet don't like them and base your view on that preconception. You also aren't interested in any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, that does not agree with your view. Perhaps if you took the blinkers off or listened to those of us us who have used the trains on a regular basis.................

As I said I was wrong about these trains. I wonder why you cant admit you might be.

PS what "jobs" will they be asked to do? Haul a container train from Felixstowe to Manchester? They are doing a decent job at shifting an increasing number of passengers along the Marston Vale.

Whatever type of trains we have on the route, the key is that we need more of them.

 

[Bantamzen]

Whatever type of trains we have on the route, the key is that we need more of them.

I'd like to see at least one or two services a day coming from at least the ECML, say York, during the summer to make connectivity a bit better & to try & attract at least a few more out of their cars (and off the A64!).

 

[yorksrob]

Perhaps, but goods traffic on the UK railway is mostly a long way away from where goods traffic can actually compete with other modes. It is often given access to massively disproportionate resources given the relatively small amount of material it succeeds in moving.

Because attempts to fiddle with the timetable to get a tiny bit more out of the existing infrastructure is just going to keep this inefficient mess going for years or decades, as it slowly becomes slightly less inefficient.

This line in particular, although there are even more egregious examples including railways made obsolete by the Humber Bridge that remain open but have been reduced to a purgatory that makes them of little use for actual passengers.



I am all for trying to make it better, but fiddling with the timetable and the like will achieve nothing.
Either "big bang" it to a reasonable service level or stop throwing money after it.

As far as I can tell, additional loops at Castleton Moor and Glaisdale, and double track between Grosmont and Sleights would enable a half hourly service, and if you had double track into Whitby you might even be able to let the NYMR do far more. (This assumes the Class 230s can shave a little journey time to provide the reliability margin)

A modular resignal, two Penryn esque station loops and a dynamic loop isn't really absurd is it? Alongside 14 Class 230 vehicles, plus two spare.

Well, doubling the frequency to something useable isn't really 'tinkering'. Its a substantial recast, of the type that have been seen to deliver significant increases in passenger usage elsewhere on the network.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see investment - a loop further west, so that trains have more time to get between Middlesborough and the passing place would be beneficial, but we also have to be prepared to make better use of what we've got.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Because it's highly unlikely that the line as it is exists comes anywhere close to covering it's costs.

The return fare between Middlesbrough and Whitby is only £7.50, and given the passenger statistics for stations on the line I doubt the farebox is much over a million pounds a year.

Tweaking the timetable is unlikely to change the lines financial situation, at which point I have to ask whether or not the money spent supporting it is the best use of a finite quantity of public money.

I think the problem with that argument is threefold: Firstly, it neglects the possible benefits of running the line, even as it currently is - in terms of keeping at least some cars off the road - given that it's been remarked that Whitby is already extremely congested. Plus the usual community/social benefits of having the line.

Secondly, it neglects whatever payments NR are receiving as open access charges for allowing the heritage railway to use the line, plus the economic benefits of having the heritage line run to Whitby (which would obviously be lost if you closed the line to save the subsidy).

And thirdly, if you did close the line in order to save whatever the current subsidy is, it almost immediately becomes far more expensive and harder to turn it into a decent line, with the investment required to provide a much better and more attractive service, if that's deemed appropriate at some point in the future - since you'd now be talking about re-opening a disused line rather than merely upgrading an existing one.

I think we agree that the ideal solution would be for the Government to stump up the cash to massively improve the line so it can run at least a two-hourly frequency with much better journey times on more suitable rolling stock. (And I'd argue for half-hourly at the Western end where the line goes through a fair bit of urban area and could usefully serve as a metro line, hourly at the Eastern end: After all, places like Windermere, Aberystwyth and Tweedbank all manage to sustain something approaching or exceeding hourly). However, until/unless that happens, keeping the line going roughly as is does at least preserve the line intact so that it's available for future improvements if/when the Government decides to act on it.

 

[yorksrob]

Because it's highly unlikely that the line as it is exists comes anywhere close to covering it's costs.

The return fare between Middlesbrough and Whitby is only £7.50, and given the passenger statistics for stations on the line I doubt the farebox is much over a million pounds a year.

Tweaking the timetable is unlikely to change the lines financial situation, at which point I have to ask whether or not the money spent supporting it is the best use of a finite quantity of public money.

A big bang improvement of service that caused major passenger growth and became more useful for general passengers is likely to cost quite a bit more money, but it will give the public far more and thus would be better value for money.



The problem is Sprinters are really not suited to very low speed frequent stop operations.
A Class 230 would likely allow significant improvement in journey times, which is important in making the service attractive to customers in the long run.

Most of the railway network doesn't cover its costs on a line by line basis.

Why are you expecting this line to be uniquely profitable when other parts of the regional network aren't ?

As for sprinters not being suitable, they manage every other local route, so I don't see the problem.

 

[yorksrob]

I'd like to see at least one or two services a day coming from at least the ECML, say York, during the summer to make connectivity a bit better & to try & attract at least a few more out of their cars (and off the A64!).

Part of me wonders, if rolling stock availability were no object, it wouldn't be better to run a 2-hourly service between Darlington and Whitby, providing better main line connections.

There's also plenty of platform capacity to wait in.

 

[SideshowBob]

Whatever type of trains we have on the route, the key is that we need more of them.

Do we? I thought we just needed them to run at better times and, ideally, also be longer, calls for both of which I've been very happy to get behind. Given the level of disdain from some quarters even for this modest ambition, I would caution against getting carried away with dangerous and outlandish notions like more frequent services as well!!

 

[SideshowBob]

I'd like to see at least one or two services a day coming from at least the ECML, say York, during the summer to make connectivity a bit better & to try & attract at least a few more out of their cars (and off the A64!).

Seconded! Goodness me, this discussion is really starting to motor!

 

[yorksrob]

Do we? I thought we just needed them to run at better times and, ideally, also be longer, calls for both of which I've been very happy to get behind. Given the level of disdain from some quarters even for this modest ambition, I would caution against getting carried away with dangerous and outlandish notions like more frequent services as well!!

Yes indeed. It seems there is no credit given in some quarters for the modesty of ones proposal

It's a bit like reopening proposals which are caught in a whirlpool because modest single track proposals can never seem to make a business case, so the proponents try and turn them into mega-projects, for which there'll never be the capital funding.

 

[Bantamzen]

As for sprinters not being suitable, they manage every other local route, so I don't see the problem.

There isn't, from a passenger / tourist perspective, then 156s (and by proxy the 158s) do a good job. They can soak up large numbers of locals as well as us pesky, suitcase lugging tourists. The only real ask here is that a few more services run, and that maybe have a 153 semi-permanently attached or occasionally doubled up. As these units work other and newly proposed services, it would also offer extra capacity to these too.

Its also worth reiterating that quite a few users of these services will have travelled quite some distance & not just started at Middlesbrough. So having a reasonably comfortable service for the hour & half is a pull. Nobody wants to have travelled for several hours, only to have to stand for that last leg. Most would either give up the next time & drive, or go to Scarborough & taxi their way in from there (despite the extra cost).

Part of me wonders, if rolling stock availability were no object, it wouldn't be better to run a 2-hourly service between Darlington and Whitby, providing better main line connections.

There's also plenty of platform capacity to wait in.

It would certainly be a quicker win, and maybe one to work for a while. But in the longer term I would like to see some come from York or further, if for no other reason to reduce the timings. But that's aspirational for now, starting them from Darlington would at least tick another box. And haven't Northern applied for a new path from Newcastle to Middlesbrough? Is that via Darlington, and if so could some eventually run all they way through? Just thinking out loud like....

Edit: Scratch that last bit, the path doesn't go as far South as Darlington. But even so, a Whitby extension would be a way of getting the good folk from Tyneside down to Whitby in one easy, reasonably quick run....

 

[SideshowBob]

Yes indeed. It seems there is no credit given in some quarters for the modesty of ones proposal

It's a bit like reopening proposals which are caught in a whirlpool because modest single track proposals can never seem to make a business case, so the proponents try and turn them into mega-projects, for which there'll never be the capital funding.

Nor support on this forum. And sadly, shooting ideas down in flames becomes a habit so smaller proposals get the same treatment and any hope of seeing the bigger picture is lost in the noise. Anyway, this is way off-topic, better get back to the matter in hand!

 

[DarloRich]

I have been honest, I have made it clear I haven't ridden on them. And I have been honest in the reasons why I don't like them, which I won't go over again.

As for the work that would be asked of them if they did ever appear in Yorkshire / Teeside, you know damn well that they would not be limited to occasional chugs down the Esk valley. By its very nature, the Northern operation rarely confines diesel units to individual routes (aka Random Unit Generator). You might not agree with them doing it, and might believe that that they would be better splitting branches out, but that is not the Northern operation right now. If this still annoys you by being a block to 230 procurement, I'd suggest taking that up with them.

your last little comment complete invalidates your point which I happen to agree with! That said there are many lines on the Northern Network the 230 would be a useful tool to improve service.

I'd like to see at least one or two services a day coming from at least the ECML, say York, during the summer to make connectivity a bit better & to try & attract at least a few more out of their cars (and off the A64!).

lets try and be realistic shall we? The time taken for such a journey from York or Leeds is simply not competitive. The Coastliner bus will have you in Whitby more quickly. The best you could do is extend some service to Darlington and offer a better ECML connection that way. The issue there is going to be capacity over Darlington South junction. A better idea might be via Yarm but even then timings will not beat the bus and certainly not the car

And haven't Northern applied for a new path from Newcastle to Middlesbrough? Is that via Darlington,

It is via Stillington so not via Darlington

Whatever type of trains we have on the route, the key is that we need more of them.

Agreed - but the overarching problem is time. When i lived in Darlington it was quicker to drive to Whitby for a day out. It was about 75 minutes. A66>A19>A174>A171. Set off about 08:00 and be wandering by 09:30. By bus takes about 2 hours with a change at Middlesbrough. The train takes about 2 hours 15 minutes.

When I lived in York the car journey was a similar time: A64>A169. The Coastliner bus from York to Whitby takes about 2 hours 15 minutes. The train takes about 3 hours depending on where you change. You can sometimes cut some time off by getting the train to Malton and the Coastliner from there.

From Middlesbrough the bus takes about 70 minutes. The train takes 90. The train service has to be really good to "buy back" those 20 minutes, especially if you can get a later bus home!

I think an earlier train and a later train make sense - beyond that we are struggling a bit simply because the road is quicker

 

[Bantamzen]

your last little comment complete invalidates your point which I happen to agree with! That said there are many lines on the Northern Network the 230 would be a useful tool to improve service.

Well I disagree, as you know. But this is going off-topic.

lets try and be realistic shall we? The time taken for such a journey from York or Leeds is simply not competitive. The Coastliner bus will have you in Whitby more quickly. The best you could do is extend some service to Darlington and offer a better ECML connection that way. The issue there is going to be capacity over Darlington South junction. A better idea might be via Yarm but even then timings will not beat the bus and certainly not the car

What's not realistic about it? People do travel from places like West & South Yorkshire to Whitby by train, so I don't understand why you think it would not be an improvement? The Coastliner is OK if you don't mind being stuck on a bus for three hours providing the A64 isn't locked solid, which it often is. Plus the 840 only runs a few times a day, so capacity is very limited, especially if travelling with luggage. And of course for people travelling from beyond Yorkshire the Coastliner is even less attractive, even if picked up from York where it is often already rammed.

It is via Stillington so not via Darlington

Yes I realised that I had that wrong & made an edit to that post.

 

[yorksrob]

your last little comment complete invalidates your point which I happen to agree with! That said there are many lines on the Northern Network the 230 would be a useful tool to improve service.



lets try and be realistic shall we? The time taken for such a journey from York or Leeds is simply not competitive. The Coastliner bus will have you in Whitby more quickly. The best you could do is extend some service to Darlington and offer a better ECML connection that way. The issue there is going to be capacity over Darlington South junction. A better idea might be via Yarm but even then timings will not beat the bus and certainly not the car



It is via Stillington so not via Darlington



Agreed - but the overarching problem is time. When i lived in Darlington it was quicker to drive to Whitby for a day out. It was about 75 minutes. A66>A19>A174>A171. Set off about 08:00 and be wandering by 09:30. By bus takes about 2 hours with a change at Middlesbrough. The train takes about 2 hours 15 minutes.

When I lived in York the car journey was a similar time: A64>A169. The Coastliner bus from York to Whitby takes about 2 hours 15 minutes. The train takes about 3 hours depending on where you change. You can sometimes cut some time off by getting the train to Malton and the Coastliner from there.

From Middlesbrough the bus takes about 70 minutes. The train takes 90. The train service has to be really good to "buy back" those 20 minutes, especially if you can get a later bus home!

I think an earlier train and a later train make sense - beyond that we are struggling a bit simply because the road is quicker

Well, that would help, but it isn't just about the road. There are lots of places that are possibly quicker by road, but which sustain a train service. Frequency is a key part of the problem here.

 

[yorksrob]

Well I disagree, as you know. But this is going off-topic.



What's not realistic about it? People do travel from places like West & South Yorkshire to Whitby by train, so I don't understand why you think it would not be an improvement? The Coastliner is OK if you don't mind being stuck on a bus for three hours providing the A64 isn't locked solid, which it often is. Plus the 840 only runs a few times a day, so capacity is very limited, especially if travelling with luggage. And of course for people travelling from beyond Yorkshire the Coastliner is even less attractive, even if picked up from York where it is often already rammed.



Yes I realised that I had that wrong & made an edit to that post.

Quite. I was once on a TPE to middlesborough which got diverted to Darlington at the last minute. By the time we got to Middlesborough, there were still enough Whitby passengers to fill a 24 person mini-bus, and that was after day-trippers had been told that they might as well turn back at Darlington.