Speeding up Newcastle-Morpeth(-Chathill) stoppers: Any options?

[Myb]

It seems quite a waste of valuable capacity that the ECML Newcastle-Morpeth stoppers are operated by 75mph Pacer units. Especially at the moment where DMUs are as valuable as diamonds and spare EMUs easier to find.

All-electric running could reduce journey times by a few minutes to Morpeth and possibly 20 to 25 minutes for the daily run to Chathill, considerably increasing the attractiveness of rail commuting.

However, it would not be possible to maintain through services to Hexham/Metrocentre. The freed DMU could however provide extra frequencies to these destinations.

The main issue though would be stabling as there is no electric depot in the Newcastle area and the inefficiency of maintaining such a small fleet should one be built. Consequently this situation is set to carry on for quite some time.

 

[Class 170101]

It seems quite a waste of valuable capacity that the ECML Newcastle-Morpeth stoppers are operated by 75mph Pacer units. Especially at the moment where DMUs are as valuable as diamonds and spare EMUs easier to find.

All-electric running could reduce journey times by a few minutes to Morpeth and possibly 20 to 25 minutes for the daily run to Chathill, considerably increasing the attractiveness of rail commuting.

However, it would not be possible to maintain through services to Hexham/Metrocentre. The freed DMU could however provide extra frequencies to these destinations.

The main issue though would be stabling as there is no electric depot in the Newcastle area and the inefficiency of maintaining such a small fleet should one be built. Consequently this situation is set to carry on for quite some time.

Maybe run to / from Neville Hill - via Doncaster if needed in the interim.

Or ask TPE to cover it with their bi-mode trains maintaining them in Scotland.

 

[Iskra]

Maybe run to / from Neville Hill - via Doncaster if needed in the interim.

Or ask TPE to cover it with their bi-mode trains maintaining them in Scotland.

Surely Scotrail would be better for maintaining EMU's?

 

[najaB]

Surely Scotrail would be better for maintaining EMU's?

Indeed, to soon have a depot an hour or so up the road from Chathill.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Using a 319 and removing through running to Metrocentre would seem a sensible choice.

 

[deltic]

Scrapping the Chathill service altogether would be the most obvious solution- cheaper to provide a taxi

 

[Peter Mugridge]

All-electric running could reduce journey times by a few minutes to Morpeth and possibly 20 to 25 minutes for the daily run to Chathill, considerably increasing the attractiveness of rail commuting.

However, it would not be possible to maintain through services to Hexham/Metrocentre. The freed DMU could however provide extra frequencies to these destinations.

Interesting thought, but I do agree with the "microfleet" concerns.

Apart from the maintenance and knowledge issues mentioned above you'd need a minimum of two EMUs to guarantee availability, and that would free up one DMU? That doesn't look to me like efficient fleet use?

 

[tbtc]

Stations north of Morpeth get trivially low passenger numbers (Alnmouth excepted, obviously!), but that's a whole other argument.

In terms of EMU operation, the chief barrier isn't the fact that you'd need two units to cover one diagram (that's the same with the LM 139s), it's the fact that there are no facilities to easily reverse an EMU at Morpeth or Chathill.

I'm not sure why they didn't bother wiring the first hundred yards of the branch at Morpeth when they wired the ECML (they did that tiny headshunt at Berwick station after all), but...

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.1...4!1sl6myL1cxMo8Gwv7LVQvk8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

...the same goes for the (southbound) loop at Belford, which is where I presume that the service reverses after Chathill (in fairness, back when the ECML was wired, the token stopper for north Nothrhumberland ran through to Berwick, so there was scope to reverse an EMU there.

Without wanting to take the thread off topic, perhaps there's a separate discussion about "the smallest electrification projects" (since the tiny bit at the start of the branch at Morpeth and the loop at Belford would both be clearly separate to the original ECML wiring.

Whilst the new Northern franchise will see a more generous provision to far flung branches like Bentham, Barrow, Bridlington and Bishop Auckland, it looks like it'll mean a reduction at the Metro Centre (a mere 363,000 passengers per year), so the loss of a direct service to north Northumberland may happen regardless of any change in the type of stock. Ideally, I'd consider freeing up valuable platform space at Newcastle by extending (terminating) TPE/ XC/ Northern services through to the Metro Centre, but I appreciate I'm swimming against the tide here!

The alternative would be to run two TPE services an hour from Manchester/ Leeds/ York through to Morpeth (with one carrying on to Edinburgh as planned, and the other - hopefully bi-mode - unit going into the branch to reverse - it'd be a way of putting faster stock on the Morpeth service plus freeing up platform space at Newcastle).

Does anyone know whether it'd free up any paths on the ECML (if you replaced the 75mph DMU with a 100mph EMU)? The long sections of two-line track north of Morpeth make me wonder whether any extra passenger capacity would just catch up freight paths sooner.

 

[john prytherch]

Hopefully, Belford will reopen to passengers soon, and so may other stations between Newcastle and Edinburgh (eg Reston).

 

[backontrack]

On this forum I often see proposals for a stopping Edinburgh-Newcastle service, calling at Musselburgh, Dunbar, East Linton, Reston, Berwick-upon-Tweed, Belford, Alnmouth, Widdrington, Pegswood, Morpeth and Cramlington. I'm not sure how that would work, logistically. How would the paths work out? It may be easier to run two services to Berwick.

 

[edwin_m]

On this forum I often see proposals for a stopping Edinburgh-Newcastle service, calling at Musselburgh, Dunbar, East Linton, Reston, Berwick-upon-Tweed, Belford, Alnmouth, Widdrington, Pegswood, Morpeth and Cramlington. I'm not sure how that would work, logistically. How would the paths work out? It may be easier to run two services to Berwick.

This is a Scottish proposal and is very difficult to path (I've tried!). If the service was split at Berwick the two parts would have to connect with each other to give the intermediate stations access to both Newcastle and Edinburgh. If that is to be so then you might as well just have a through working that has to sit in a loop somewhere for what would otherwise be the connection period. A further problem with splitting it, as mentioned somewhere upthread, is that there is no other reason to base EMUs in Newcastle so this would be a micro-fleet. This might change when Metro gets new dual-voltage rolling stock so the Sunderland line could convert to 25kV.

 

[backontrack]

This is a Scottish proposal and is very difficult to path (I've tried!). If the service was split at Berwick the two parts would have to connect with each other to give the intermediate stations access to both Newcastle and Edinburgh. If that is to be so then you might as well just have a through working that has to sit in a loop somewhere for what would otherwise be the connection period. A further problem with splitting it, as mentioned somewhere upthread, is that there is no other reason to base EMUs in Newcastle so this would be a micro-fleet. This might change when Metro gets new dual-voltage rolling stock so the Sunderland line could convert to 25kV.

Hmm. What I was suggesting was:

-Northern stoppers extend to Berwick
-Scotrail Dunbar trains extend to Berwick
-Passengers connect to the next trains north/south in either direction

 

[142094]

It would be a better place to terminate the Newcastle trains at than Chathill and allow overnight stabling for the only morning train instead of running empty from Heaton.

Just a note - the morning train runs in service from Newcastle at 05.55 to Chathill, and is the first train to call at Cramlington, Morpeth and Alnmouth. Stabling overnight would mean that a driver and guard would have to travel up in a van early in the morning. However I agree if the line was extended back to Seahouses it could increase usage, especially during the summer.

 

[142094]

The main issue though would be stabling as there is no electric depot in the Newcastle area and the inefficiency of maintaining such a small fleet should one be built. Consequently this situation is set to carry on for quite some time.

Heaton depot is electrified. If there were issues with training staff to do maintenance of electric units at Heaton, they could be run to Neville Hill via Doncaster as suggested. There is/was a diagram where Northern diesel stock was moved from IIRC Knaresborough to York and up the ECML to Heaton for maintenance purposes during the week.

 

[Tetchytyke]

The issue isn't the speed of the units, the issue is the time taken to stop at the stations. A 90mph EMU would barely make a dent; the idea 25 minutes could be saved is ridiculous. The only way of speeding up the service would be to not stop, defeating the whole point of the service in the first place.

 

[Bletchleyite]

How did these stations manage to keep their service when in BR days so many small stations on InterCity lines were closed?

 

[najaB]

How did these stations manage to keep their service when in BR days so many small stations on InterCity lines were closed?

Much like (for example) Springfield, Golf Street and Barry Links on the Edinburgh Aberdeen route - it was more trouble to close them than it was to keep them open.

 

[edwin_m]

How did these stations manage to keep their service when in BR days so many small stations on InterCity lines were closed?

I guess they were (and mostly still are) so far out in the middle of nowhere that there would have been serious hardship to a handful of people on closure.

Also, as Beeching was planning to concentrate Anglo-Scottish traffic on the WCML, would this still have been an InterCity line?

 

[deltic08]

I have often wondered if Seahouses is big enough to reinstate the branchline a few miles from Chathill. It would be a better place to terminate the Newcastle trains at than Chathill and allow overnight stabling for the only morning train instead of running empty from Heaton. Perhaps 20 years too late as once the A1 is upgraded to dual carriageway as promised all the way to Berwick-Morpeth, it will be more convenient to drive from coastal towns and villages on the Northumberland coast and possibly abstract footfall from the current service.

Conversely, by the time the A1 is upgraded, Pacers on this route will have been replaced possibly by extension of the proposed Edinburgh-Berwick service using new 100mph electric units.

 

[darloscott]

Heaton depot is electrified. If there were issues with training staff to do maintenance of electric units at Heaton, they could be run to Neville Hill via Doncaster as suggested. There is/was a diagram where Northern diesel stock was moved from IIRC Knaresborough to York and up the ECML to Heaton for maintenance purposes during the week.

Yup two 142s come up each night - though they now run in service to York before going ECS to Heaton. There is another double 142 set goes the other way after working the late evening (2230 iirc) Newcastle-Darlington service then ECS to York. They work to Selby, Doncaster and onto the Lincoln/Adwick circuit next day.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Much like (for example) Springfield, Golf Street and Barry Links on the Edinburgh Aberdeen route - it was more trouble to close them than it was to keep them open.

And I suppose Norton Bridge, Barlaston and Wedgwood, though these did eventually die.

 

[Hophead]

How did these stations manage to keep their service when in BR days so many small stations on InterCity lines were closed?

Perhaps a much lower frequency was in place between Newcastle & Edinburgh back in the 1950s, 60s & 70s, with a lower top speed, such that a minimal local service could be maintained?

 

[TheWalrus]

This is a Scottish proposal and is very difficult to path (I've tried!). If the service was split at Berwick the two parts would have to connect with each other to give the intermediate stations access to both Newcastle and Edinburgh. If that is to be so then you might as well just have a through working that has to sit in a loop somewhere for what would otherwise be the connection period. A further problem with splitting it, as mentioned somewhere upthread, is that there is no other reason to base EMUs in Newcastle so this would be a micro-fleet. This might change when Metro gets new dual-voltage rolling stock so the Sunderland line could convert to 25kV.

Could it run in front of an express from Edinburgh to Dunbar and be overtaken there?

What is the plan for the TPX going to Edinburgh?

 

[142094]

Yup two 142s come up each night - though they now run in service to York before going ECS to Heaton. There is another double 142 set goes the other way after working the late evening (2230 iirc) Newcastle-Darlington service then ECS to York. They work to Selby, Doncaster and onto the Lincoln/Adwick circuit next day.

It is a while since I've seen anything 'unusual' at Heaton overnight, used to often see a 150 or rarely a 158.

 

[Kite159]

The number of passengers would increase from those stations with currently a rubbish service if they had a decent level of service (I.e. not two trains a day). Maybe the EMU stoppers could be timetabled to be looped in some of the freight loops, wiring them up if needed. Running the EMUs from Edinburgh early morning and late at night.

Then it will free up the intercity stuff so they can call at Berwick only.

Pipe dream

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Speeding up Newcastle-Morpeth(-Chathill) stoppers: Any options?

Push the power handle to notch 2...?

Joking aside, I agree with others that electric is the way to go

 

[deltic08]

Scrapping the Chathill service altogether would be the most obvious solution- cheaper to provide a taxi

Another negative post. There wouldn't be a railway at all if we were all like you which thankfully we aren't. This site is called RailUK forums. Is there not an AntirailUK forum you and a few others like you could join?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Stations north of Morpeth get trivially low passenger numbers (Alnmouth excepted, obviously!), but that's a whole other argument.

In terms of EMU operation, the chief barrier isn't the fact that you'd need two units to cover one diagram (that's the same with the LM 139s), it's the fact that there are no facilities to easily reverse an EMU at Morpeth or Chathill.

I'm not sure why they didn't bother wiring the first hundred yards of the branch at Morpeth when they wired the ECML (they did that tiny headshunt at Berwick station after all), but...

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.1...4!1sl6myL1cxMo8Gwv7LVQvk8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

...the same goes for the (southbound) loop at Belford, which is where I presume that the service reverses after Chathill (in fairness, back when the ECML was wired, the token stopper for north Nothrhumberland ran through to Berwick, so there was scope to reverse an EMU there.

Without wanting to take the thread off topic, perhaps there's a separate discussion about "the smallest electrification projects" (since the tiny bit at the start of the branch at Morpeth and the loop at Belford would both be clearly separate to the original ECML wiring.

Whilst the new Northern franchise will see a more generous provision to far flung branches like Bentham, Barrow, Bridlington and Bishop Auckland, it looks like it'll mean a reduction at the Metro Centre (a mere 363,000 passengers per year), so the loss of a direct service to north Northumberland may happen regardless of any change in the type of stock. Ideally, I'd consider freeing up valuable platform space at Newcastle by extending (terminating) TPE/ XC/ Northern services through to the Metro Centre, but I appreciate I'm swimming against the tide here!

The alternative would be to run two TPE services an hour from Manchester/ Leeds/ York through to Morpeth (with one carrying on to Edinburgh as planned, and the other - hopefully bi-mode - unit going into the branch to reverse - it'd be a way of putting faster stock on the Morpeth service plus freeing up platform space at Newcastle).

Does anyone know whether it'd free up any paths on the ECML (if you replaced the 75mph DMU with a 100mph EMU)? The long sections of two-line track north of Morpeth make me wonder whether any extra passenger capacity would just catch up freight paths sooner.

If Sheffield only had one Pacer train a day in each direction numbers would be trivial there.

Turnround facilities at Chathill couldn't be simpler and takes only a few minutes. My suggestion of reopening the branch to Seahouses would stop the need to turnround standing on the up main but also make the service more attractive with possibility of increasing footfall in the peaks. Reinstatement could be completed for about £10-£12m plus £2m for electrification.

There is a very large car park in Seahouses where the original station was. Parking at Chathill is very limited, less than a dozen spaces, and stifles growth.

Looking at it the other way as I have mentioned so many times before in the Keswick discussion, nobody travels to Seahouses and Bamburgh by train as Chathill is inconvenient as a railhead. Even if there were connecting buses visitors do not like a change of mode.

I regularly drive from a rented cottage in Beadnell to Seahouses only to find it is full. Nowhere to park. If day visitors from Newcastle and County Durham could travel all the way by train then the car parks would be less full and a more frequent train service would be available to the locals.

Chathill or even Alnmouth could then become an interchange station providing more traffic for a cross border Scotrail/TPEx service as proposed and current Chathill-Newcastle stations.

There is going to be a glut of EMUs shortly and I am sure the ROSCOs would be happy to lease them for light use on services such as Newcastle-Chathill at very low cost than scrap them for a few thousand.

Bimodes on Newcastle-Morpeths is overkill. Just electrify 200 yards of siding with 2 poles and registration arms and 200 yards of trolley wire. £50k.

Any 100mph EMU would knock a few minutes off a stopping service on a mainline operated by a 75mph Pacer by acceleration alone. Not that much freight on the ECML north of Morpeth to catch up with and even if there was, an all stations stopper to Chathill wouldn't catch up a 75mph freight to Chathill between freight loops.

I thought all the loops north of Newcastle are wired. The Up Loop at Drem and south of Alnmouth must be as I have been on class 90 hauled charters in the 1990s that were looped to allow an HST to pass. Both loops at Grantshouse are definitely weird.

 

[DarloRich]

oh dear..............

Another negative post. There wouldn't be a railway at all if we were all like you which thankfully we aren't. This site is called RailUK forums. Is there not an AntirailUK forum you and a few others like you could join?

Whilst i am sure that was a throw away comment there is some commercial sense in the suggestion, which is why you don't like it! The number of people involved off set against being able to free up both crews and units for other services and the reduction in infrastructure maintenance could make such a suggestion attractive.

I ma not suggesting i support such a move, just that there could be some commercial sense in exploring it.

Turnround facilities at Chathill couldn't be simpler and takes only a few minutes. My suggestion of reopening the branch to Seahouses would stop the need to turnround standing on the up main but also make the service more attractive with possibility of increasing footfall in the peaks. Reinstatement could be completed for about £10-£12m plus £2m for electrification.

not in the railway world it couldn't. That cant be a serious suggestion.

There is a very large car park in Seahouses where the original station was. Parking at Chathill is very limited, less than a dozen spaces, and stifles growth.

Surely the fact it is in the middle of a albeit very attractive nowhere is the main growth inhibitor

I mean I like Seahouses, it is fantastic and has a great fish shop, is picturesque, delightful, almost twee but it has about c.2,000 lucky residents........

Bimodes on Newcastle-Morpeths is overkill. Just electrify 200 yards of siding with 2 poles and registration arms and 200 yards of trolley wire. £50k.

Stick a 0 on that end of that estimate and you might be closer to the truth. I think we would all like the prices to be so low and perhaps they should be, but they aren't for all manner of reasons

Any 100mph EMU would knock a few minutes off a stopping service on a mainline operated by a 75mph Pacer by acceleration alone. Not that much freight on the ECML north of Morpeth to catch up with and even if there was, an all stations stopper to Chathill wouldn't catch up a 75mph freight to Chathill between freight loops.

I would like to see a better service on this section of line, at least between the bigger towns, and think EMU's will offer that in due course. I just don't think you will ever vastly increase passenger numbers at places like Acklington, Widdrington, Chathill, due to their isolated, rural and underpopulated locations.

Pegswood could have a chance as a link to Ashington if transport links don't adequately join up Morpeth and Ashington but then there is a good bus service direct form Ashington to Newcastle. The X21 ( i think it is) does the trip in under an hour.

I thought all the loops north of Newcastle are wired. The Up Loop at Drem and south of Alnmouth must be as I have been on class 90 hauled charters in the 1990s that were looped to allow an HST to pass. Both loops at Grantshouse are definitely weird.

The loops are wired up although the various sidings and Chevington, Alnmouth and Belford are not being used as they are mainly for OTM stabling. The exchange sidings, or at least their remains, at Widdrington are not wired.

PS: I realise that this is an stereotypical anti rail " hyena" post so please accept my apologies but I thought I might try to enter some real world realism to the discussion.

 

[sprinterguy]

Whilst the new Northern franchise will see a more generous provision to far flung branches like Bentham, Barrow, Bridlington and Bishop Auckland, it looks like it'll mean a reduction at the Metro Centre (a mere 363,000 passengers per year), so the loss of a direct service to north Northumberland may happen regardless of any change in the type of stock.

I'm not sure where you get that idea from. As part of the new Northern franchise, "the MetroCentre will have 42 trains per day to and from Newcastle, 30 trains per day to and from Hexham, 28 trains per day to and from Carlisle, and at least 12 trains per day to and from each of Sunderland and Morpeth." So essentially maintaining the current level of service but with additional direct trains to and from Carlisle as a result of the doubling of frequency west of Hexham. The MetroCentre will also be upgraded to a Northern Connect branded and managed station.

As such, splitting the Morpeth - Metrocentre service at Newcastle might be more politically complex under the upcoming Northern franchise than this thread is suggesting.

 

[Tetchytyke]

How did these stations manage to keep their service when in BR days so many small stations on InterCity lines were closed?

Back in the days of 1tph Edinburgh-London, with the odd CrossCountry thrown in, the stopper- which went through to Berwick- was the main service for Alnmouth. Many of the really really small stations did go, and rightly (with the exception of Belford, which should have stayed open) but the ones that stayed were worth keeping.

They still are, and if there was a better service they'd popular enough, given their location. The X18 and the X20 do a pretty good trade up the coast through Pegswood, Widdrington, Acklington, Amble and Warkworth, especially when it's visit day at HMP Northumberland.

The idea of re-opening a branch to Seahouses (population: 1500) is a corker mind