Campaign for Malton-Pickering reopening to allow services to Whitby

[E&W Lucas]

Well whatever but I think the point remains that there is all sorts running about on it now that it would have have seen went it was part of the national network.

Your "arguements" get weaker by the second!

What on earth has running traction not used prior to closure got to do with anything?
It is a working railway, not a model railway. The LNER types simply do not exist, A8 tanks in particular. Even if they did, they wouldn't be "use nor ornament" for today's traffic requirements.

Preserved railways have to operate with what is available, economic and suitable for their traffic requirements. For the NYMR that means BR 4MT's, Black 5s and the absolutely perfect Southern S15 460. If you were going to purpose build a loco for the railway, you wouldn't go far wrong with that design. West Countrys, 9F's or whatever other type you care to mention pull trains, and delight the 90+% of the visitors, who couldn't tell one steam loco from another. All they care about, is that it isn't a diesel!

We are very lucky to have access to as many ex NER and LNER types as we do, plus the ex Lambton NCB 062t's, which as well as their NE heritage, are pretty similar to some ex NER types. Add in a decent rake of ex LNER coaches, and it's not looking too bad.

A vintage train would be lovely, but those pound notes don't grow on trees....

 

[JohnCarlson]

Your "arguements" get weaker by the second!

What on earth has running traction not used prior to closure got to do with anything?
It is a working railway, not a model railway. The LNER types simply do not exist, A8 tanks in particular. Even if they did, they wouldn't be "use nor ornament" for today's traffic requirements.

Preserved railways have to operate with what is available, economic and suitable for their traffic requirements. For the NYMR that means BR 4MT's, Black 5s and the absolutely perfect Southern S15 460. If you were going to purpose build a loco for the railway, you wouldn't go far wrong with that design. West Countrys, 9F's or whatever other type you care to mention pull trains, and delight the 90+% of the visitors, who couldn't tell one steam loco from another. All they care about, is that it isn't a diesel!

We are very lucky to have access to as many ex NER and LNER types as we do, plus the ex Lambton NCB 062t's, which as well as their NE heritage, are pretty similar to some ex NER types. Add in a decent rake of ex LNER coaches, and it's not looking too bad.

A vintage train would be lovely, but those pound notes don't grow on trees....

Heritage lines far from being "preserved" are often more developed in the period of time since they were taken over by volunteers than they were for much of their working lives. Indeed as you say its a working railway not a model railway. We have already had an HST on a heritage line. Not sure that a 185 would look realty so out of place.

Your arguments have all but vanished.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Nobody knows what tomorrow may bring. If it is a general assumption that once stretches of closed lines become heritage lines then they are forever lost to the national network then that is bad news.

What if....what if traffic on the West Highland grows and grows (under better management I know!) and the strategic national interest would be served by re-opening Dunblane to Crianlarich, but this can't be done because of a 4 steam trains a day private train set operation between Doune and Callander?

I note that your posting looks at matters in Scotland and the Borders Railway proposals have just moved a major step forward with the recently made announcement of the £ 220 million contract award to BAM Nuttall, but this will see an extension of the national network to Tweedbank under the vision of the Scottish Government, by use of modern stock to operate it once fully operational.

 

[kylemore]

I note that your posting looks at matters in Scotland and the Borders Railway proposals have just moved a major step forward with the recently made announcement of the £ 220 million contract award to BAM Nuttall, but this will see an extension of the national network to Tweedbank under the vision of the Scottish Government, by use of modern stock to operate it once fully operational.

Yes excellent news but just imagine that instead of intact disused trackbed there was a private heritage line sitting on the Galashiels to Stow section running 4 steam trains a day May to September which was hostile to being taken over? Result - no modern railway for the Borders!

There may well be reasons why it's not practical for the NYMR but as a general principle should national rail interests overide those of private heritage lines if they come into conflict?

 

[JohnCarlson]

Yes excellent news but just imagine that instead of intact disused trackbed there was a private heritage line sitting on the Galashiels to Stow section running 4 steam trains a day May to September which was hostile to being taken over? Result - no modern railway for the Borders!

There may well be reasons why it's not practical for the NYMR but as a general principle should national rail interests overide those of private heritage lines if they come into conflict?

As a general principal I think heritage lines should attempt to incorporate other rail services if at all possible. I would not force them to but I wonder what the legal position is?

 

[E&W Lucas]

As a general principal I think heritage lines should attempt to incorporate other rail services if at all possible. I would not force them to but I wonder what the legal position is?

Heritage lines are private property. They are just parcels of land, declared surplus by BR, and sold off. They are no longer anything to do with the mainline rail network.

They are also businesses. If another operator wants to run a service over their metals, then they would need to make it financially worthwhile. They would also need to be in compliance with the Safety Management System, etc., under which the independent heritage outfit operates.

 

[JohnCarlson]

Heritage lines are private property. They are just parcels of land, declared surplus by BR, and sold off. They are no longer anything to do with the mainline rail network.

They are also businesses. If another operator wants to run a service over their metals, then they would need to make it financially worthwhile. They would also need to be in compliance with the Safety Management System, etc., under which the independent heritage outfit operates.

I did wonder if European access legislation would apply to them particularly if it could be shown that there was a "public good" coming from a third party having access.

 

[Sidious]

That'd be a long way down a list of re-opening priorities in northern England (compared to Matlock - Buxton, Woodhead, Leamside etc)

I was specifically talking about within the North Yorkshire County Council area.

 

[martinsh]

I believe it's an aspiration of the CVR to get to Alton Towers - but in reality it's many years away from even being likely - and it faces a couple of hurdles as well.

I suspect that even if there were a rail link to AT, at the most it would only bring 10% of the visitors to the park - so 270,000, divide that over 27 weeks (as AT isn't open all year round) and by 7 and you're looking at about 1,500 people a day which isn't really that many and certainly not enough to warrant reinstatement economically.

My understanding was that a Park & Ride service would be run from Stoke

 

[kylemore]

I did wonder if European access legislation would apply to them particularly if it could be shown that there was a "public good" coming from a third party having access.

I don't think you would have to go that far, if Parliament decides that a line of Railway should run along a particular route and passes an ACT OF PARLIAMENT which then receives Royal Assent then that is the Law of the Land, non compliance is not an option. Otherwise how on earth was 1000s of miles of Railway built in this country against the "Tooth and Nail" opposition of the Land owning classes (Bribary helped but the threat of force was neccessary to back it up!)

 

[reb0118]

This may have been mentioned above but would a branch line from Malton to Pickering be viable on a stand alone basis? Or course through running to York &c would be permitted (capacity constraints accepted).

What I am saying is that does Pickering have a big enough customer base to be rejoined into the national network as a branch terminus or does through running need to be extended to Whitby to make the line viable? (That said, in my opinion many passengers travelling to Pickering would be going to visit/use the NYMR).

 

[IanD]

Heritage lines are private property. They are just parcels of land, declared surplus by BR, and sold off. They are no longer anything to do with the mainline rail network.

They are also businesses. If another operator wants to run a service over their metals, then they would need to make it financially worthwhile. They would also need to be in compliance with the Safety Management System, etc., under which the independent heritage outfit operates.

I thought some were run on long term leases from Network Rail (or some other body).

Alos, if a heritage railway didn't want to sell up/out to NR then I'm sure compulsory purchase powers could be used just as with any other transport scheme deemed a priority.

 

[E&W Lucas]

This may have been mentioned above but would a branch line from Malton to Pickering be viable on a stand alone basis? Or course through running to York &c would be permitted (capacity constraints accepted).

What I am saying is that does Pickering have a big enough customer base to be rejoined into the national network as a branch terminus or does through running need to be extended to Whitby to make the line viable? (That said, in my opinion many passengers travelling to Pickering would be going to visit/use the NYMR).

Some may be leased, but the one in question is owned.

As for your second point, you've probably guessed right with your last sentence. I can't see there being much demand for six months of the year, and that would include Whitby.

I would be interested to know how much subsidy is applied to the Scarborough line; if that isn't viable as a stand alone route, nothing else in the area is likely to be. The Esk Valley Line is certainly subsidised. However, if someone wants to run a six mile spur to Pickering, then fine.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Alos, if a heritage railway didn't want to sell up/out to NR then I'm sure compulsory purchase powers could be used just as with any other transport scheme deemed a priority.

Plus compensation claims from over 100 people who would be out of a job, plus other businesses that would loose trade. The value of the tourist railway to the regional economy, is in the tens of millions per year.

I can hardly see this scheme being regarded as any kind of priority; in fact, it would be very easy to make a public interest case against it, as I hope I have demonstrated to many above.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Worth a read: http://www.whitbygazette.co.uk/news/business/link-would-endanger-historic-railway-1-5212230

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Worth a read: http://www.whitbygazette.co.uk/news/business/link-would-endanger-historic-railway-1-5212230

Good to see comment being made by a senior personage in the heritage line with regards to the effects this proposal would have upon them.

 

[IanD]

Some may be leased, but the one in question is owned
...
I can hardly see this scheme being regarded as any kind of priority; in fact, it would be very easy to make a public interest case against it, as I hope I have demonstrated to many above.

True but I was commenting on the statement that all preserved railways are private property and nothing to do with the main rail network.

I don't see this scheme as a priority and I can't see that it could ever be part of some bigger scheme that was. However, there are some re-opening calls that would involve disprupting other less prominent preserved lines which may one day be deemed a priority (eg Uckfield to Lewes).

 

[Tomnick]

Although a few do lease the land (and even then probably not from Network Rail), I'm not aware of any who don't own everything above ballast level - so any CPO process would result in an empty (but railway shaped) bit of land being purchased rather than a fully functioning railway.

 

[billio]

This may have been mentioned above but would a branch line from Malton to Pickering be viable on a stand alone basis? Or course through running to York &c would be permitted (capacity constraints accepted).

What I am saying is that does Pickering have a big enough customer base to be rejoined into the national network as a branch terminus or does through running need to be extended to Whitby to make the line viable? (That said, in my opinion many passengers travelling to Pickering would be going to visit/use the NYMR).

Pickering has a quite adequate bus service to/from Malton using modern, comfortable, fast buses. The bus station is adjacent to the railway station in Malton. The bus has the advantage that it also takes tourists to Eden Camp, Flamingoland, Thornton-le-Dale, Dalby Forest and a scenic ride across the North York Moors to Whitby.

An increase in frequency of trains on the Scarborough line would be a benefit, especially if some services called at new stations in some larger settlements along the route, for example Haxby, Strensall, and at more speculative sites such as a park and ride near Barton Hill and Sherburn. This could also make connections with the bus service more convenient.

If there is any money to invest in North Yorkshire then I believe this would be the best opportunity to improve services and increase rail use.

 

[kylemore]

It seems that this project is a non starter and the previous poster's view that any available funds should be spent on enhancing existing lines such as that to Scarborough is probably right.

The "mood music" is discouraging tho which only makes me grateful that in Scotland there has been relatively few lines taken over for heritage purposes and none that could seriously endanger future development of the National Railway Network.

"Heritage" and "Real" railway operations can co-exist and the perfect illustration of that is the Fort William to Mallaig Steam operation which I would argue is the highest profile "Steam Heritage" operation (ahead of Bo'ness and Strathspey) that ordinary people as opposed to enthusiasts would recognise in Scotland.

I say again would the extension of the National Network to Galashiels and Tweedbank in the Borders with all the real benefits this will bring have been possible if there had been an NYMR type operation sitting on a few miles of the line required?

 

[JohnCarlson]

Some may be leased, but the one in question is owned.

As for your second point, you've probably guessed right with your last sentence. I can't see there being much demand for six months of the year, and that would include Whitby.

I would be interested to know how much subsidy is applied to the Scarborough line; if that isn't viable as a stand alone route, nothing else in the area is likely to be. The Esk Valley Line is certainly subsidised. However, if someone wants to run a six mile spur to Pickering, then fine.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Plus compensation claims from over 100 people who would be out of a job, plus other businesses that would loose trade. The value of the tourist railway to the regional economy, is in the tens of millions per year.

I can hardly see this scheme being regarded as any kind of priority; in fact, it would be very easy to make a public interest case against it, as I hope I have demonstrated to many above.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Worth a read: http://www.whitbygazette.co.uk/news/business/link-would-endanger-historic-railway-1-5212230

I think all you have demonstrated is a negative outlook. If a link to Pickering were to be be built it would certainly improve linkage to areas such as York. and Leeds. That would be good for the area and the NYMR. It would certainly allow charters to be brought onto the NYMR far easier than through the existing route. Again the peak commuter times to and from Whitby would seem to me to be damaging to the NYRM. So I fail to see how everyone or indeed anyone is likely to loose their job.

Having worked in local media I would ascribe the Newspaper story story more to local politics and slow news days than anything else. I am sure a search of back copies of the Whitby Gazette would find articles on how proposals to run steam trains along the Whitby and Pickering line would damage the local area by causing fires and prevent the creation of jobs by not allowing the demolition and site redevelopment of the redundant Pickering station and so forth.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It seems that this project is a non starter and the previous poster's view that any available funds should be spent on enhancing existing lines such as that to Scarborough is probably right.

The "mood music" is discouraging tho which only makes me grateful that in Scotland there has been relatively few lines taken over for heritage purposes and none that could seriously endanger future development of the National Railway Network.

"Heritage" and "Real" railway operations can co-exist and the perfect illustration of that is the Fort William to Mallaig Steam operation which I would argue is the highest profile "Steam Heritage" operation (ahead of Bo'ness and Strathspey) that ordinary people as opposed to enthusiasts would recognise in Scotland.

I say again would the extension of the National Network to Galashiels and Tweedbank in the Borders with all the real benefits this will bring have been possible if there had been an NYMR type operation sitting on a few miles of the line required?

Well there is no money anyway, even for perfectly reasonable schemes such as a station at Haxby so yes nothing much is going to happen and personalty that well affect me not one jot.

However I understand what you mean by the mood music. I live in Tyneside where we opened a metro system around thirty years ago and while it is currently now being upgraded Teesside is still struggling to get anywhere with its own system. Indeed I found the document located at

https://www.teesvalleyunlimited.gov.uk/media/39872/metro_progress_report.pdf

a little pathetic as it seems to be trying to pass off incremental improvements and platform based destination screen as being on the way to a metro.

What areas get isn't just determined by logical assessments of need but by lobbying organisation and drive. If this thread is to go by I am not that surprised if not much is happening in this region.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What areas get isn't just determined by logical assessments of need but by lobbying organisation and drive. If this thread is to go by I am not that surprised if not much is happening in this region.

At the present time, there are financial strictures that have need of adherence. Did you hear today of yet more restrictions upon Local Authority budgets by less monies from Central Government coupled to a freeze in annual rating bills.

Lobbying organisation and drive, as you describe, have no such financial constraints, until they clash with financial shortcomings in certain budgets. It is then that economic reality then comes into play. You just cannot totally ignore financial reality, be it private or public centered.

Perhaps this thread has a far better grasp of financial reality than you give it credit for.

 

[JohnCarlson]

At the present time, there are financial strictures that have need of adherence. Did you hear today of yet more restrictions upon Local Authority budgets by less monies from Central Government coupled to a freeze in annual rating bills.

Lobbying organisation and drive, as you describe, have no such financial constraints, until they clash with financial shortcomings in certain budgets. It is then that economic reality then comes into play. You just cannot totally ignore financial reality, be it private or public centered.

Perhaps this thread has a far better grasp of financial reality than you give it credit for.

There have always been financial strictures.I am amazed you seem find them something new. If there was unlimited cake then there would never be a problem and no need for lobbying. I know a few people who work in the lobbying industry and I am sure they would be amazed to hear the have no financial constraints. Gobsmacked even.

I think a few people on this thread have a grasp of financial reality, including myself. However as much of this thread has been about potential and capacity and what might need to be improved to allow through trains from York to Whitby rather than how much it would all cost. No one, and certainly not myself is proposing to rush out an build it. However some seem unaware of the diffidence between criticism of a theoretical project nd simple negativity.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There have always been financial strictures. I am amazed you seem find them something new.

Oh, really..:roll:...Where did I ever say that I found financial strictures as something new ?

Before retirement as a Senior Head in our Consultancy, I had forty years in senior managerial roles, both in England and also in Canada where I headed our Consultancy team dealing with a large hydro-electric project, which involved meetings with the state legislature members on such financial strictures that they were at pains to incorporate into discussions.

Please do not make such naive and simplistic accusations about someone of whom you know absolutely nothing about.

 

[moggie]

Oh, really..:roll:...Where did I ever say that I found financial strictures as something new ?

Before retirement as a Senior Head in our Consultancy, I had forty years in senior managerial roles, both in England and also in Canada where I headed our Consultancy team dealing with a large hydro-electric project, which involved meetings with the state legislature members on such financial strictures that they were at pains to incorporate into discussions.

Please do not make such naive and simplistic accusations about someone of whom you know absolutely nothing about.

Precisely - but would you not agree that ordinary people power can seed the germ of an idea. Eventually Lobyists get interested on behalf of one or more groups to push the case with opinion formers. Further down the line the opinion formers find some money to conduct feasability studies. Organisations like yours tender for the works and prepare the reports - no doubt to a brief from your client as to how the works could be funded. And if there's enough momentum generated with a reasonable economic case at some point money may be found to commence designs.

Simplistic - maybe - possible - entirely given the will there is always a way - eventually - although maybe not for rural Nth Yorks - busy road mind - and a big new potash mine to be built along the route nr Whitby - maybe - subject to finance of course. So maybe not such a crazy idea for the future?

 

[A0]

I think all you have demonstrated is a negative outlook. If a link to Pickering were to be be built it would certainly improve linkage to areas such as York. and Leeds.

And I think you need to wake up and smell the coffee.

Pickering has a population of less than 7,000.

Whitby has a population of less than 15,000.

Whitby has a mainline rail service. Pickering is 8 miles from Malton, where there is a rail service to York.

Frankly, given their population, both have an entirely appropriate level of provision.

There are many places more deserving of either being re-linked to the national rail network e.g. Coalville (popn 33,000), Kenilworth (popn 22,000), Fleetwood (popn 26,000) - and the track is in-situ for those so rebuilding new formations isn't needed.

 

[DarloRich]

I was just typing a similar post to the above! #84

How do you expect to find the money to pay for the building of this line? Here is the Mouchel report for NYCC: https://www3.northyorks.gov.uk/n2rail/report5/report5.pdf

It will cost more now. Answers on a postcard as to where the money will come from. Bear in mind that NYCC/Ryedale/The National Park champion this scheme every so often but have put up roughly sod all to build it, other than the costs of the above report.

Also consider that was JUST for Pickering - Malton and NOT doing up the NYMR to current standards or enhancing the Esk Valley Line or Whitby Station.

over to you..........................

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Lobbying organisation and drive, as you describe, have no such financial constraints, until they clash with financial shortcomings in certain budgets. It is then that economic reality then comes into play. .

In respect to an earlier comment, the quote above made by me in a posting is the total point that I made....not just the first part of the first sentence, that was so selectively chosen, to give a totally fallacious view on the matter.

 

[kylemore]

Is it just me or is it not a bit WEIRD that people on a presumably pro rail forum are getting REALLY REALLY ANGRY at the mere suggestion of re-opening a Railway

 

[JohnCarlson]

And I think you need to wake up and smell the coffee.

Pickering has a population of less than 7,000.

Whitby has a population of less than 15,000.

Whitby has a mainline rail service. Pickering is 8 miles from Malton, where there is a rail service to York.

Frankly, given their population, both have an entirely appropriate level of provision.

There are many places more deserving of either being re-linked to the national rail network e.g. Coalville (popn 33,000), Kenilworth (popn 22,000), Fleetwood (popn 26,000) - and the track is in-situ for those so rebuilding new formations isn't needed.

Just to point out again I am not proposing to build it or that some one else builds it or even that it is the best ever scheme. I am just discussing how it might work if it were.


Whitby does have a rail service although IIRC the first train doesn't arrive in Borough until after ten making it little use for communing. Teesside I believe is also a decline area where York is not.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Is it just me or is it not a bit WEIRD that people on a presumably pro rail forum are getting REALLY REALLY ANGRY at the mere suggestion of re-opening a Railway

No its not just you and it is weird.

Mind you similar things happened with the proposal to run former underground trains on the Harrogate loop.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Mind you similar things happened with the proposal to run former underground trains on the Harrogate loop.

That particular thread contained many postings from forum members with a deep understanding of some of how the use of the elderly London Underground trains on that line may be not really have been the correct rolling stock to have been considered. One point in particular, from a member with a very great experience in work inside tunnels gave a full description of the very poor conditions encountered in the Bramhope Tunnel that has a length of no less than 2 miles 241 yards.

 

[E&W Lucas]

Is it just me or is it not a bit WEIRD that people on a presumably pro rail forum are getting REALLY REALLY ANGRY at the mere suggestion of re-opening a Railway

Perhaps that is because some have a deeper understanding of the particular issues here, and can recognise that there will actually be detrimental effects.

However, if the counsellors had the access and influence to make this happen, they would be dealing with decision makers at the DFT, behind closed doors. They wouldn't be messing about with petitions, which are notoriously ineffective. In all probability, this is just grandstanding to the local electorate.