Windermere Branch

[Kingfisher200262]

There's a section in the McNulty Report, which implies that poor decisions have been made in relation to operational practice, without the implications of these decisions having properly been thought through (6.3, page 82 for anyone that's interested).

The Windermere Branch and its change in operation to TPE is cited as a case study, whereby an outcome of the change is that train weights have increased from 48.5 tonnes (2-car) pre-privatisation, to 163.0 tonnes (3-car, presumably a 185 without passengers) now, with the knock on effect being a rise in infrastructure maintenance cost on a lightly used rural route.

I can't for the life of me think what stock would have operated the branch just prior to privatisation. Google images seem to show some 144s and, in the '70s, Derby lightweight, Class 108s. However, even these can't get as low as 48.5 tonnes.

Three questions that I'm putting out there...

1. What rolling stock that weighed 48.5 tonnes unladen was used on the Windermere Branch prior to privatisation;

2. Is there a general agreement that McNulty is right about the accusation of poor decision making?; and

3. What should change for the future?

 

[sprinterguy]

According to the Platform 5 Combined Volume, the weight of a two carriage 144 is 48.5t: With the DMS vehicle weighing 24 tonnes and the DMSL weighing 24.5 tonnes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The decision to solely use Transpennine 185s on the Windermere branch is an expensive one, in terms of track maintenance, fuel costs and stock allocation. Ideally the branch should be electrified as part of the North West electrification and the Manchester Airport to Windermere service handed over to Northern to operate with a four carriage 319, although that too would be overkill in terms of capacity at quiet times. The cheaper option however would be running the branch with a diesel shuttle to and from Lancaster: Utilising a 142, 153 or possibly a 156 at busy times.

 

[northwichcat]

The Windermere branch was given a through service to Manchester Airport under FNW, which became 175 operated in the early 00s. It was then transferred to TPE as with the other 175 operated routes, in preparation for the 175s being replaced on North West routes to be used on South Wales routes instead.

The poor decision was made by DfT in telling TPE to run a Manchester Airport to Scotland service instead of their Man Airport to Windermere service but at the same time leaving the Windermere branch as a TPE route. That change should never have gone ahead without either giving TPE a small fleet of Voyagers, or ordering extra Desiros for them. DfT effectively admitted it was the wrong decision by a few months later deciding that Northern would have to run an additional Manchester-Preston service to plug a gap that DfT had created on the Bolton corridor by poor decision making. Then to complicate matters further Northern couldn't obtain enough extra local/regional rolling stock so the 180s went to Northern for stopping services.

 

[Kingfisher200262]

According to the Platform 5 Combined Volume, the weight of a two carriage 144 is 48.5t: With the DMS vehicle weighing 24 tonnes and the DMSL weighing 24.5 tonnes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The decision to solely use Transpennine 185s on the Windermere branch is an expensive one, in terms of track maintenance, fuel costs and stock allocation. Ideally the branch should be electrified as part of the North West electrification and the Manchester Airport to Windermere service handed over to Northern to operate with a four carriage 319, although that too would be overkill in terms of capacity at quiet times. The cheaper option however would be running the branch with a diesel shuttle to and from Lancaster: Utilising a 142, 153 or possibly a 156 at busy times.

I doubt that a business case for electrifying the branch would ever stack up.

Taking the cheaper option that you suggest, two points: -

1. Could the service operate Windermere - Morecambe - Heysham to mop up another problem branch?; and

2. Almost contradicting the first point, as it's only double track between the Morecambe junction and Oxenholme, wouldn't any of the DMUs that you've suggested snarl up the main line, and perhaps strengthen the argument for a light / tram train that operates Oxenholme - Windermere only? Perhaps this is the kind of role that Pacers could fulfil into retirement, with good connections being provided at Oxenholme.

 

[northwichcat]

1. Could the service operate Windermere - Morecambe - Heysham to mop up another problem branch?

So not only does a popular day/short break destination, in Windermere lose long distance services but so should a town with a ferry service to Belfast? That's one way to help prevent growth in the North West economy and sounds like a decision that would be typical of DfT.

Perhaps this is the kind of role that Pacers could fulfil into retirement, with good connections being provided at Oxenholme.

Pacers would require millions of pounds of investment to be kept in service beyond 2019 because of DDA, so it would be more cost effective to buy new trains than to try and keep Pacers in service any longer than they are already planned to be kept in service.

Even if Pacers could be kept in service they would need to run in multiple on the Windermere branch in the summer and do you know how many reliability problems occur as a result of Pacers being run in multiple formations?

 

[tbtc]

185s on the Windermere branch is a complete nonsense. A three coach 100mph DMU wasted here whilst other routes are desperate for stock. Hopefully this gets sorted out after electrification, but it can't come too soon.

As for Heysham, what long distance services does it get? The irregular Pacers from Leeds?

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Monday-Saturday - 1 Pacer a day to/from Leeds, no Sunday service.

 

[tbtc]

Monday-Saturday - 1 Pacer a day to/from Leeds, no Sunday service.

Cheers. So not much use for Belfast ferries...

 

[northwichcat]

Cheers. So not much use for Belfast ferries...

It seems on checking it is a Heysham-Douglas-Belfast service.

The arrival from Leeds via Lancaster is 12:57. A ferry leaves at 14:15.

The departure for Leeds via Lancaster is 13:15. A ferry arrives at 12:15.

If that is no use then do I take it destinations with daily flights from Leeds-Bradford Airport are also of no use to anyone?

 

[tbtc]

It seems on checking it is a Heysham-Douglas-Belfast service.

The arrival from Leeds via Lancaster is 12:57. A ferry leaves at 14:15.

The departure for Leeds via Lancaster is 13:15. A ferry arrives at 12:15.

If that is no use then do I take it destinations with daily flights from Leeds-Bradford Airport are also of no use to anyone?

Even when I lived in Leeds I never knew anyone who used the Heysham ferries, I thought they were mainly based on the freight market.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

A better idea may be reopening Fleetwood-Poulton and getting some good connecting times with the regular (if slow) Belfast passenger ferries from there...

 

[northwichcat]

Even when I lived in Leeds I never knew anyone who used the Heysham ferries, I thought they were mainly based on the freight market.

National Express/Eurolines used to send long distance coaches to Belfast via Heysham but they now use Cairnryan instead.

 

[philjo]

The Windermere branch needs to be electrified. It is 10 miles, single track. EMUs can then run the service with a fast acceleration on the wcml south of oxenholme to fit in better with the wcml services.
Would need Sdo as Burneside @ stavely currently only have 1door opened by the conductor as the platforms are too short for the 185s.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Barry Doe once commented that a mid-afternoon departure he was on from Windermere (a 185) carried more in First than it did in Standard! (7 people inc. himslef in First and 6 in Standard!)

 

[YorkshireBear]

I doubt that a business case for electrifying the branch would ever stack up.

Apprently it does as a EMU would not need a supply upgrade it just needs the wires putting up and off you go. it was in modern railways a few months back.

 

[tbtc]

Either wire the Windermere branch or forget having direct Manchester services.

 

[OxtedL]

Windermere is the line I think we should be watching over the coming few years, in terms of electrification. Whether or not it gets wires will be an indication of whether we are seeing a step change or not.

The BCR ought to be interesting. I quote the following from Network Rail's Head of Network Electrification, here.

When you look at the cost breakdown of the work to electrify a line, the alterations to the civils structures is normally approaching the same value of the overhead line system – and this is true of GW.

Based on this, the costs for Windermere ought to be low. I doubt there is a huge amount by way of civil engineering on the line (can anyone confirm this?). We have already been informed by various sources that Windermere can in theory tapped into existing supplies, helping the case even more.

This is good news, as the benefits aren't going to be spectacular. It will certainly simplify operation, but there are still many diesel units in that part of the world which can be used. An electric fleet would hopefully, however, allow more flexibility in capacity provision at busy times.

We'll see.

 

[sprinterguy]

With North West suburban electrification happening, the Windermere branch draws a lot of parallels with the un-electrified Uckfield branch IMO (Serving different populations and a different line length I know, but the principle’s the same).

 

[OxtedL]

Hmmmm...

Well, Uckfield would (probably) cost quite a bit more as is a bit longer, and would require lots of feeder stations all along the route (this being one the drawbacks of third rail). From what I've seen, the sleepers aren't the right sort for it either, so a lot of work is required. In addition to this, it would also have benefits reduced by the need to still have diesel on Marshlink - yes, I know I say this every time it comes up .

However, that said, the Uckfield would be very beneficial to the local train network and commuter population, so again, we'll see.

I like your thinking.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

A better idea may be reopening Fleetwood-Poulton

In the June 2011 edition of Modern Railways in the Infrastructure News (London North Western section) the following appears:-

Between Poulton le Fylde and Burn Naze

These lines. previously NRU, have been designated out of use on a permanent basis under a GI Notice of Network Change

This seems to be rather a definate blow to any line reopening hopes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Either wire the Windermere branch or forget having direct Manchester services.

My wife and I use the Manchester Airport to Windermere DIRECT services (from Manchester Airport) on a regular basis to visit friends and, from late spring onwards, to enjoy sailing on the lake on the leisure boats. Another reason is, by means of the 555/556 bus connection at Windermere, to visit Ambleside where her sister resides. It is good to have no train changes to make in either direction. The tourism board would not take kindly to your suggestion of the direct rail service from Manchester area being used as a bargaining tool in electrification discussions.

My wife responds to your suggestion by asking what rail services in YOUR area could be discussed for cancellation that would cause a lack of tourist potential....unless you do not have any places worthy of such a comparison.:cry:

You have not made a new friend of my wife here!

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I'd be tempted to say keep it unelectrified, and just ran an Oxenholme-Windermere shuttle all day, with a 170, and get the 185 stuck on it onto the more important Hull/South TP jobs...

 

[YorkshireBear]

My wife and I use the Manchester Airport to Windermere DIRECT services (from Manchester Airport) on a regular basis to visit friends and, from late spring onwards, to enjoy sailing on the lake on the leisure boats. Another reason is, by means of the 555/556 bus connection at Windermere, to visit Ambleside where her sister resides. It is good to have no train changes to make in either direction. The tourism board would not take kindly to your suggestion of the direct rail service from Manchester area being used as a bargaining tool in electrification discussions.

My wife responds to your suggestion by asking what rail services in YOUR area could be discussed for cancellation that would cause a lack of tourist potential....unless you do not have any places worthy of such a comparison.:cry:

You have not made a new friend of my wife here!

I dont see the offence. With alot of the rest of the TPE NW being electrified if this doesn't then it will 90% sure not get a direct service to manchester as it would involve alot of under the wires and operational difficulty. He makes a point that electrifying it will allow a much better chance of a direct service to manchester.

 

[yorksrob]

Whether the current stock is suitable for the Windemere branch seems to me to depend on the following:

1) Do passengers on the branch gain, and more importantly, does the utilisation of the branch improve due to the direct nature of the service to Manchester. There is no point moving to a shuttle from Oxenhope for example, if this puts too many people off travelling and harms the viability of the branch. If the answer is yes:

2) Are there any other suitable trains to run the whole service. A two unit Pacer may be suitable for the Windemere leg of the journey, but if this isn't suitable for the Manchester end then you have to use stock which is suitable. The main line sections are more critical in terms of speed and time keeping etc, so obviously whatever is used will have to be suitable for that.

From the section of the report on regional railways, McNulty doesn't appear to have understood this.

Secondly, I would argue that we should have been attempting to develop lighter trains rather than allowing things to become heavier all the time. However, this would require some sort of railway planning and research capability, for McNulty to have pointed this out, would have meant him having to say something that the establishment didn't want him to.

 

[ainsworth74]

I'd be tempted to say keep it unelectrified, and just ran an Oxenholme-Windermere shuttle all day, with a 170

If we're going down the shuttle route I would suggest giving it over to Northern and just run a 153 (or pacer) up and down it all day as a 170 would be overkill.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If we're going down the shuttle route I would suggest giving it over to Northern and just run a 153 (or pacer) up and down it all day as a 170 would be overkill.

A Pacer...I am sure that the tourist board would view this with horror.

I am sure that you only said that in jest.

 

[gnolife]

I dont see the offence. With alot of the rest of the TPE NW being electrified if this doesn't then it will 90% sure not get a direct service to manchester as it would involve alot of under the wires and operational difficulty. He makes a point that electrifying it will allow a much better chance of a direct service to manchester.

Or it could run via Chorley, as I don't think that lines being electrified

can anyone tell me if the line to Barrow will get electrified, or will they stop the service to there as well when electrification happens?

If Barrow and Windermere do lose their direct service to Manchester completely, will there be a shuttle from Lancaster (170)? Alternatively, could the Barrow (or Windermere) be tacked onto the end of the line to York, with Blackpool Sth to Colne being run by Northern, and Barrow or Windermere to York via Burnley Manc Road being run by TPX. This could allow Manchester - Scotland to become 1tph instead of 1tp2h

So TPXNW would end up like
1tph Manchester Airpt to Lockerbie via Wigan NW, with alternate hour continuation to Glasgow and Edinburgh (185)
1tph Manchester Airpt to Blackpool North via Chorley (185)
1tph York-Lancaster via Burnley Manc'r Road, with alternate hour continuation to Barrow and Windermere (170)

and Northern could run a 1tp2h between Barrow and Lancaster to fill in for when the TPX is running to Windermere

 

[mbonwick]

A better idea may be reopening Fleetwood-Poulton and getting some good connecting times with the regular (if slow) Belfast passenger ferries from there...

err....what ferries? Operations moved from Fleetwood to Heysham at the start of the year, hence why the freight area at Heysham is now always full!

 

[Greenback]

Surely Windermere is an imprtant station in terms of tourism and deserves more than a shuttle to and from Oxenholme?

I accept that 185's may not be the optimal use of rolling stock, but through trains must be important for the local economy.

 

[Nym]

If the windermere branch isn't electrified, only half of tpe nw would be,
If windermere is, with the current scheme, direct emus could run under tpe again, with the only diesels being barrow, 1tp2h.
Or adjoining windermere to blackpool trains aswell, and increase barrow to hourly, in the current path, with some gaps for windermere. The problem would be stock swaps at manc air. Careful diagramming, or dumping stock n stacking, or sidings nr manc air
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
when chat moss is done, it should go back to how it was before, 1tph tolancaster, then to barrow or windermere.

 

[tbtc]

Windermere is the line I think we should be watching over the coming few years, in terms of electrification. Whether or not it gets wires will be an indication of whether we are seeing a step change or not

I agree.

The announcement that the GWML was being electrified was good news, but then the small print that the Thames Valley branches weren't being electrified (?) shows it in a bad light (leaving more "diesel islands", especially self contained ones that would release more DMUs for short distances of electrification).

I like the idea of Windermere being a "bellweather" for the future, you make a good point.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

My wife and I use the Manchester Airport to Windermere DIRECT services (from Manchester Airport) on a regular basis to visit friends and, from late spring onwards, to enjoy sailing on the lake on the leisure boats. Another reason is, by means of the 555/556 bus connection at Windermere, to visit Ambleside where her sister resides. It is good to have no train changes to make in either direction. The tourism board would not take kindly to your suggestion of the direct rail service from Manchester area being used as a bargaining tool in electrification discussions.

My wife responds to your suggestion by asking what rail services in YOUR area could be discussed for cancellation that would cause a lack of tourist potential....unless you do not have any places worthy of such a comparison.:cry:

You have not made a new friend of my wife here!

Not sure where the offence comes from (or your comment about the lack of tourist attractions around here)...

There are only two direct services from Manchester Airport/ Manchester to Windermere, the 09.29 and the 16.00 (Monday to Thursday). Similarly two services a day on a Saturday and a Sunday. The services which used to run from Manchester Airport to Windermere now run to Edinburgh or Glasgow. So, I'm not talking about "cancelling" anything.

With electrification allowing the Manchester Airport - Glasgow/Edinburgh services to move to EMU operation (albeit via Wigan), there's suggestion that the Windermere - Oxehholme shuttle is extended to Manchester Airport again. Personally I think its daft to electrify a line and then send a new DMU service 75 miles along that line - why bother electrifying the line and then introducing new diesel services?