So is this reopening for short-distance passengers or long-distance passengers?
Short distance, medium distance and long distance passengers. That's the beauty of railways.
So is this reopening for short-distance passengers or long-distance passengers?
There is certainly a massive problem with how national infrastructure (not just the railways) are managed slowing everything down, but be sure to compare apples with apples. When did the legal process for Dore actually start?Alternatively, how long did it take to plan and build the Hazel Grove curve ?
I say that because I'm guessing that it wasn't as long as the twenty years it's taken to re-double Dore. Perhaps the long lead in time has something to do with the way the railway is managed, rather than an inherent problem with railway building.
Milton Keynes, NR are regularly advertising for planners.Great, where do I sign up.
But your justification for why it would work is that it wouldn't be very busy, and therefore it would represent poor value for money.But I'm assuming that you're not denying that we do manage with mixed use railways and I'm assuming that you agree that this line won't be as heavily used as the West Coast Main Line, so why are so many people on this thread using the fact that this route would be mixed traffic as a reason that this one somehow wouldn't work ?
They are, but they are about big bulk loads of people. What's the current AADT on the A6 between Matlock at Buxton?I want a transport network. Trains are a key part of a transport network to carry medium and longer distance passengers.
Well Woodhead isn't reopening either, so this point is rather moot.I personally think that this line would be far more useful to people than Woodhead. It has far more potential for local and intermediate services as there are more settlements to be joined.
Great, where do I sign up.
Its not just Matlock to Buxton though is it, even MEMRAP vaguely recognises its Ambergate to Manchester and the infrastructure hasn't been touched in 55 years apart from checking it won't collapse on anyone. It is a rebuild.The route has a lot of infrastructure. A lot will need to be repaired, some will need to be replaced but not all. Quite a different prospect from driving a completely new route through the landscape.
I personally think that this line would be far more useful to people than Woodhead. It has far more potential for local and intermediate services as there are more settlements to be joined.
It would enable more customers to use the railway to reach their destinations in the most efficient way - for a lot of potential customers, they'll be delivering loads to the Golden warehousing Triangle around Northampton/Birmingham. A mixed load train could be a regular traffic source that helps to pay for the ongoing running costs of the railway.But there is already a railway to Buxton. The quarries shift a lot of their output via it. Buxton spring water doesn‘t. Neither are time sensitive. How would a new railway between Buxton and Matlock change that? And what contribution would the freight traffic make to the construction cost of the railway?
Maybe not one, but several supermarkets have distribution centres along the M1 corridor that have rail connections or are close to access points.Unfortunately there is no supermarket distribution centre that would need a whole train load of one single brand of bottled water at a time.
I could see the argument for logistics to East Mids Airport (although that will still involve a runround somewhere). But anything to Northampton/Birmingham is going to be much easier to path via Crewe than viaIt would enable more customers to use the railway to reach their destinations in the most efficient way - for a lot of potential customers, they'll be delivering loads to the Golden warehousing Triangle around Northampton/Birmingham. A mixed load train could be a regular traffic source that helps to pay for the ongoing running costs of the railway.
There is certainly a massive problem with how national infrastructure (not just the railways) are managed slowing everything down, but be sure to compare apples with apples. When did the legal process for Dore actually start?
Of course you could send it Buxton - Matlock - Derby - Stoke - WCML if that would be easier.I could see the argument for logistics to East Mids Airport (although that will still involve a runround somewhere). But anything to Northampton/Birmingham is going to be much easier to path via Crewe than via Tamworth.
It would enable more customers to use the railway to reach their destinations in the most efficient way
for a lot of potential customers, they'll be delivering loads to the Golden warehousing Triangle around Northampton/Birmingham.
How? you need a run round at Stoke to do that, adding 25-30 minutes you could be travelling in. You also need to upgrade the North Staffs Derby line to gauge clear it as well if you are expecting Intermodal, so more cost.Of course you could send it Buxton - Matlock - Derby - Stoke - WCML if that would be easier.
For context, I've attached thumbnails of the W10 and W12 clearance around this line. Derby is only W8 cleared, although of course you could use something like IWA wagons (picture) for products like bottled water, if they're shipped in a way the distribution centres can handle.Of course you could send it Buxton - Matlock - Derby - Stoke - WCML if that would be easier.
Potentially Buxton water, Federal Mogul in Chapel, Swizzels Matlow in New Mills, Flowflex piping factory in Buxton are all places where a southern link would be an attractive proposition.Which customers? How many companies in Buxton, Bakewell and Matlock are looking for national distribution in the scales that make sense for rail?
For which you'd go via the WCML, not MML.
Do any of these produce sufficient volume to justify even 1 train per week to a single distribution centre? Or will it be cheaper for them to continue with road haulage to an existing railhead?Potentially Buxton water, Federal Mogul in Chapel, Swizzels Matlow in New Mills, Flowflex piping factory in Buxton are all places where a southern link would be an attractive proposition.
At which point you are facing completely the wrong way and would need to continue on to Water Orton, loop up via the Sutton Park Line, Aston and Stechford then run through Cov to get to Northampton.If you wanted to get to the Northampton loop, you can head through Derby - Burton - Leicester and Hinckley to Nuneaton.
That would require an upgrade of Chinley to Buxton via Peak Dale to passenger standards for barely any benefit.I wonder whether railway development around Buxton could focus on the present infrastructure which still exists on both routes into Manchester.
If the potential through station were to come to pass then an "out and back" service might prosper, being out via Whalley Bridge and back via Chinley, and reverse. That would avoid some layover and increase journey offers, including a change for Sheffield.
The Miller's Dale Jn to Matlock reopening is too remote - almost akin to Cudworth to Shipley via Dewsbury, the last glint in the MR's eye!
WAO
Don’t give people ideas!The Miller's Dale Jn to Matlock reopening is too remote - almost akin to Royston to Shipley via Dewsbury, the last glint in the MR's eye!
That sounds like an extremely congested route to me. Makes you wonder if some people ever look at a track map doesn’t it!At which point you are facing completely the wrong way and would need to continue on to Water Orton, loop up via the Sutton Park Line, Aston and Stechford then run through Cov to get to Northampton.
Indeed. It's less busy now than it has been I think but it's still a right pain to fit a 60/75mph train through!That sounds like an extremely congested route to me. Makes you wonder if some people ever look at a track map doesn’t it!
As noted, you are either going to Washwood Heath to run round or via the Sutton Park to get towards Rugby. Burton to Leicester is knackered and again, not gauge clear. So more cash to justify it. You would just carry on at Burton.Potentially Buxton water, Federal Mogul in Chapel, Swizzels Matlow in New Mills, Flowflex piping factory in Buxton are all places where a southern link would be an attractive proposition.
The WCML through Stockport and Crewe is congested and there's no potential for any more than a few extra paths due to the cancellation of HS2 phase 2b.
If you wanted to get to the Northampton loop, you can head through Derby - Burton - Leicester and Hinckley to Nuneaton.
The plan was always a sharp slow curve at Whitacre to enable flows from Derby to Nuneaton. Never got anywhere though.Indeed. It's less busy now than it has been I think but it's still a right pain to fit a 60/75mph train through!
What could benefit the case for freight would be a pair of curves at Tamworth to allow Burton-Nuneaton traffic in both directions to avoid the West Mids, but that's its own project and I'm fairly sure housing is now sprouting up on the area it would need to go into. Probably a separate speculative thread!
Potentially Buxton water, Federal Mogul in Chapel, Swizzels Matlow in New Mills, Flowflex piping factory in Buxton are all places where a southern link would be an attractive proposition.
Ah, the Hazel Grove chord. Peter Fox would be able to tell a lot about that - and redoubling at Dore, his local station. Sadly he's no longer with us but he's left a few clues found here in the NARKIVE railway archive; https://uk.railway.narkive.com/2raOfFlr/hazel-grove-chord
There is certainly a massive problem with how national infrastructure (not just the railways) are managed slowing everything down, but be sure to compare apples with apples. When did the legal process for Dore actually start?
Milton Keynes, NR are regularly advertising for planners.
But your justification for why it would work is that it wouldn't be very busy, and therefore it would represent poor value for money.
They are, but they are about big bulk loads of people. What's the current AADT on the A6 between Matlock at Buxton?
Well Woodhead isn't reopening either, so this point is rather moot.
Careers - Network Rail
Are you looking to do meaningful work everyday? Start a rewarding career with us. Search our current vacancies.www.networkrail.co.uk
Its not just Matlock to Buxton though is it, even MEMRAP vaguely recognises its Ambergate to Manchester and the infrastructure hasn't been touched in 55 years apart from checking it won't collapse on anyone. It is a rebuild.
By the logic of the bit in bold, why be inhibited by a substandard route the Victorians built ? After all the route through the peaks was only built because the Midland wanted access to Manchester from the East Midlands - so if that's the rationale why, apart from entirely emotional reasons, push for this reopening ?
Why not promote a Buxton - Ashbourne - Derby line ? Or Leicester - Burton - Uttoxeter - Leek - Macclesfield - which completely avoids the national park and would provide direct connectivity from the East Midlands to Manchester ?
.....about 10 route miles....Chapel gets a proper station...lots of new journeys possible....Hazel Grove a delightfully direct way to Sheffield from Buxton...if you stop the fast trains at HAZ (along with their other stops), can they still be "fasts?"That would require an upgrade of Chinley to Buxton via Peak Dale to passenger standards for barely any benefit.
Better to introduce connections with the fast Sheffield services stopping at Hazel Grove, if your goal is Sheffield connections.
I personally didn't bring up Woodhead, but in a narrative where pro-reopening voices are often characterised as crayonistas who want to reopen every line to every hamlet, it's sometimes worth looking at the varying merits of different cases.
In context, 'AADT' most likely stands for Annual Average Daily Traffic, a measurement of just how busy a road is, calculated using the totals for the year, divided by 365.Apologies - I don't know what AADT stands for.
Why build a new line when you already have your tunnels (lots of them in this case) and viaduct in place ?
And lets face it, in a national park, a pre-existing railway is going to have more brownie points than a concrete new build.
You know exactly the part I was on about.Well, Chinley to Manchester has two routes available, and whilst there ought to be some capacity improvements (the bit south of Longsight where the fast and slow lines cross over on the level) I think it's wrong to characterise that section as unchecked for 55 years and requiring a rebuild.
6500 at Ashford in the Water, with 170 being HGVs. So if you go off the general view of a train is 76 HGVs, its 2tpd, or probably 1tpd in each direction.They are, but they are about big bulk loads of people. What's the current AADT on the A6 between Matlock at Buxton?
In context, 'AADT' most likely stands for Annual Average Daily Traffic, a measurement of just how busy a road is, calculated using the totals for the year, divided by 365.
You know exactly the part I was on about.
15 miles from Matlock to Millers Dale, ignoring all the other works needed from Ambergate to Chinley which is 30 miles.The missing link really is a short section.
15 miles from Matlock to Millers Dale, ignoring all the other works needed from Ambergate to Chinley which is 30 miles.
Which again, based on the E-W rail section between Bicester and Bletchley costing £1.3 billion for 19 miles ( https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...ting-officer-assessment-april-2021#regularity ) puts this at around £2 billion. The bit that everyone goes la la la about when scrabbling around for excuses to build it.Indeed. A very short section.