Morpeth Curve

[pwig]

Just sat on the train at the moment pondering why they have never bypassed the Morpeth curve? Surely it costs a lot of time slowing down from 100+ and back up again.

I understand trains still need to stop at Morpeth, but for the trains that don’t why not have a bypass?

I’m guessing as ever it’s down to money?

 

[railjock]

Just sat on the train at the moment pondering why they have never bypassed the Morpeth curve? Surely it costs a lot of time slowing down from 100+ and back up again.

I understand trains still need to stop at Morpeth, but for the trains that don’t why not have a bypass?

I’m guessing as ever it’s down to money?

I’m assuming the curve exists for a very good topographical/geographical reason.

 

[Darandio]

Yes, it's entirely geographical.

 

[edwin_m]

Yes, it's entirely geographical.

I always assumed it was because the Scotsgap line came off the back of the curve, but Wikipedia says the station was built by the Newcastle and Berwick so presumably they determined the route through the station.

Looking at the OS map there are hills, the river and the town itself that would make it much more difficult for the railway to continue northwards in a straight line from its southward approach. However I don't see any obvious reason why it shouldn't have approached from the south on a more westerly course nearer where the A1 bypass now is, passing one side or the other of Grindle Hill, and swung eastwards on a much more gentle curve to re-join the route actually used just west of the station.

 

[class26]

Would be interesting to know how many minutes would be saved by a 125 mph by pass.

 

[Bald Rick]

Would be interesting to know how many minutes would be saved by a 125 mph by pass.

The ruling linespeed round there is 110mph.

Roughly speaking, a 50mph speed restriction of approx half mile on an otherwise 110mph railway costs 2m20sec for a 250metre passenger train.

Having said that, a bypass would be about a mile shorter, which would save another 30 seconds (at 110mph). Therefore, 3 minutes, for about 3 miles of new railway (including a viaduct across a particularly sensitive part of the River Wansbeck.)

 

[Meole]

Time saving on that line would not justify the cost, not an economically significant region after all.

 

[Mugby]

There was a catastrophic collision on Morpeth Curve in 1984 when the 'Night Aberdonian' train approached the curve at excessive speed.

 

[Bald Rick]

Time saving on that line would not justify the cost, not an economically significant region after all.

It’s not so much the economies of the region, but that there’s aren’t many trains on the section, and those that are on aren’t very full on average. However I suspect the case for new railway here is rather better than many other locations around the country.

 

[transmanche]

There was a catastrophic collision on Morpeth Curve in 1984 when the 'Night Aberdonian' train approached the curve at excessive speed.

That derailment (which caused 35 injuries) is not the only one on the Morpeth curve. There was a similar derailment in 1969 (six killed, 21 injured).

There was also a derailment way back in 1877, when the Railway Inspectorate stated, "It would obviously be better if a deviation line could be constructed, to avoid the use of so sharp a curve on a main line".

 

[ComUtoR]

Is the curve protected by TPWS ?

Our tightest curve drops from 70mph to 15mph but there is an AWS warning and TPWS

 

[transmanche]

It’s not so much the economies of the region, but that there’s aren’t many trains on the section, and those that are on aren’t very full on average.

I think there's currently two LNER, one XC and one Northern service each way every hour. This will be increased when TPE add their Edinburgh services, First add their open-access service and of course their's freight to consider too

A Morpeth by-pass would also be useful in creating a 'dynamic loop', making it easier to allow faster trains to overtake.

However I suspect the case for new railway here is rather better than many other locations around the country.

Agreed.

 

[InOban]

Wasn't it after the last incident, when a deltic entered the curve at 80mph, that fixed AWS magnets were introduced at locations where the speed limit dropped by such a large proportion?

 

[big all]

Wasn't it after the last incident, when a deltic entered the curve at 80mph, that fixed AWS magnets were introduced at locations where the speed limit dropped by such a large proportion?

do you mean the DP2 the class 50 prototype that looked like a deltic ??

ahhh ok that was thirsk my miss remembered memory

 

[38Cto15E]

DP2 derailed on the ECML but I thought that was in the Northallerton area.
The Night Aberdonian finished up in the lounge of a bungalow if I remember correctly.

 

[Bald Rick]

I think there's currently two LNER, one XC and one Northern service each way every hour. This will be increased when TPE add their Edinburgh services, First add their open-access service and of course their's freight to consider too

A Morpeth by-pass would also be useful in creating a 'dynamic loop', making it easier to allow faster trains to overtake.

All the Northern services stop there, indeed most start / terminate there.

To my surprise on checking, about a third of all the LNER and XC services also call. Taken together this means that only half the passenger trains passing through would benefit - around 60 trains a day total.

In reality, with that level of service there is little need for trains to overtake.

 

[Highlandspring]

The accident involving DP2 happened at Thirsk on 31st July 1967.

The accident at Morpeth on 7th May 1969 involved D9011 and was caused by the driver of the 1940 Kings Cross to Aberdeen losing situational awareness on the Down direction approach the the curve while thinking about a “please explain” for a previous minor delay he had received at the start of his shift. This brought about the introduction of Advanced Warning Indicators for certain permanent speed restrictions, which ironically the curve at Morpeth did not qualify for as originally implemented.

The accident at Morpeth on 24th June 1984 involved 47452 and was caused by the driver of the 1950 Aberdeen - Kings Cross losing situational awareness on the Up direction approach to Morpeth either due to having been heavily intoxicated by alcohol or due to syncope brought on by a coughing fit as a result of chronic bronchitis. One mk3 sleeper coach did indeed end up embedded 2.5m into the gable end of a house off High Park Lane, having derailed and overturned at approximately 85mph. The driver was eventually tried at Newcastle Crown Court on a count of endangering the safety of railway passengers contrary to Section 34 of the Offences Against The Person Act 1861 but a verdict of not guilty was returned by the jury.

 

[Far north 37]

Wasn't it after the last incident, when a deltic entered the curve at 80mph, that fixed AWS magnets were introduced at locations where the speed limit dropped by such a large proportion?

After the first derailment aws magnets were introduced on the approaches to the curve to give the drivers sufficient braking time they were referred to as the morpeth magnets by traincrew apparently.

 

[Highlandspring]

After the first derailment aws magnets were introduced on the approaches to the curve to give the drivers sufficient braking time they were referred to as the morpeth magnets by traincrew apparently.

As per my post above, they weren’t. See the 1984 accident report for full details.

 

[vdriud]

There was a further derailment here in 1992. And another in 1994.

https://www.revolvy.com/page/Rail-accidents-at-Morpeth

1992 accident

A further accident, unrelated to the Morpeth curve, occurred on 13 November 1992, when a collision between two freight trains at Morpeth led to one fatality. A Class 56 locomotive ran into the back of a pipe train. The cab of the locomotive was crushed and the driver was killed. The accident occurred during engineering work and was the result of the locomotive driver and the signaller at Morpeth failing to come to a clear understanding concerning required movements.[9]

1994 derailment
On 27 June 1994 an express parcels train crashed at the curve. The locomotive and the majority of carriages overturned, without fatalities, but causing injury to the driver. As with the 1969 and 1984 accidents, the train had been travelling at 80 mph (130 km/h). The Health and Safety Executive estimate that trains will overturn at above 75 mph (120 km/h), and noted that "Morpeth 1994 was a very serious event, which could easily have been fatal".[10]

A by-pass is very much needed.

 

[Far north 37]

As per my post above, they weren’t. See the 1984 accident report for full details.

Ah maybe i misread the report it mentions an awi not aws does that ring a bell in the cab same as a aws.

 

[Highlandspring]

You need to read the report again.

 

[Highlandspring]

There was a further derailment here in 1992. And another in 1994.

The 1992 accident was a collision due to an operating irregularity, nothing to do with the severity of the curve.

 

[deltic08]

I think there's currently two LNER, one XC and one Northern service each way every hour. This will be increased when TPE add their Edinburgh services, First add their open-access service and of course their's freight to consider too

A Morpeth by-pass would also be useful in creating a 'dynamic loop', making it easier to allow faster trains to overtake.

Agreed.

Currently one Northern service an hour but the plan is for 2 tph.

As has already been said, a straighter route of four or five miles to the east of Morpeth would allow a fast loop to overtake slower traffic and allow 2 tph stoppers to/from Newcastle and Morpeth. Only trains slowing to a stop would need to use the curves either side of Morpeth

Bald Rick will probably say different, but £70m + £15m for electrification should cover it. Not a lot nowadays when Reading station cost nearly a £billion and Kings Cross roof was £550m.

 

[Starmill]

Time saving on that line would not justify the cost, not an economically significant region after all.

First time I've ever heard anybody describe Edinburgh as a 'not economically significant' part of the UK.

 

[Ken H]

I am gobsmacked that the Northern locals to Morpeth and chathill are EMU. especially when they were short of EMU. Yes I know they interowrk in the current timetable. but should have been EMUd a long time ago

 

[Bald Rick]

Bald Rick will probably say different, but £70m + £15m for electrification should cover it. Not a lot nowadays when Reading station cost nearly a £billion and Kings Cross roof was £550m.

Just the viaduct across the river would be about £70m. I’d say it would be in the region of £200m incl electrification.

Kings Cross was just a teeny bit more than a new roof!

 

[class 9]

I am gobsmacked that the Northern locals to Morpeth and chathill are EMU. especially when they were short of EMU. Yes I know they interowrk in the current timetable. but should have been EMUd a long time ago

They aren't EMU, they're DMU. A lot of them carry on to Carlisle, which isn't electrified

 

[Ken H]

They aren't EMU, they're DMU. A lot of them carry on to Carlisle, which isn't electrified

the first 'EMU' should have been 'DMU'

 

[transmanche]

All the Northern services stop there, indeed most start / terminate there.

To my surprise on checking, about a third of all the LNER and XC services also call. Taken together this means that only half the passenger trains passing through would benefit - around 60 trains a day total.

In reality, with that level of service there is little need for trains to overtake.

My understanding is that the infrastructure limitations are the reason for the very limited stopping service north of Morpeth. Having a 'dynamic loop' to allow faster trains to overtake would enable more local trains, which in turn could allow more expresses to skip Morpeth/Alnmouth/Berwick and thus speed-up LDHS services.