Morpeth Curve

[Highlandspring]

LDHS?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

LDHS

I am guessing at Long Distance High Speed.

 

[swt_passenger]

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

Not really. The original plans were much straighter, roughly from Benton to just east of Bedlington then on to Warkworth, with Morpeth served by a branch. Bedlington had a much larger population catchment. Then there was a straighter line via Cramlington but still well east of Morpeth.
But eventually, it seems Morpeth just shouted louder. John Addyman’s book on the Newcastle and Berwick Railway explains all the original “optioneering”...

 

[railjock]

Not really. The original plans were much straighter, roughly from Benton to just east of Bedlington then on to Warkworth, with Morpeth served by a branch. Bedlington had a much larger population catchment. Then there was a straighter line via Cramlington but still well east of Morpeth.
But eventually, it seems Morpeth just shouted louder. John Addyman’s book on the Newcastle and Berwick Railway explains all the original “optioneering”...

Thanks, interesting info.

 

[TBY-Paul]

Yet another RUK crayon fantasy land thread! I don't see a business case for this line. Sorry to be dull and boring but the benefit simply isnt worth the cost. I know most of you will never agree with me but i can live with that.

So your saying nothing should be done north of York because it will never have a business case, anything and everything suggested North of York gets greeted with the same response "There's no Business Case".
Every time you put off doing something because it doesn't currently have a significant "Business Case" just leaves the area (to quote Meole)"not an economically significant region" so by definition, it will remain economically insignificant because nothing is done to make it more economically significant.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

According to DfT, our German friends spend £35m per mile - so that's £175m, plus any extra costs for viaducts and mining- related issues. Oh, and this isn't Germany, so the NIMBYs will ratchet that up by at least 25% for no benefit. Oh, and there'll be work to do to the existing signalling infrastructure too, unless your new tramway happens after ETCS is implemented on the route ("look Mummy, there's a pig up in the sky").

Note- I am only questioning your estimate, not any BCR issues. I think your time savings are wrong too, but my lunch-break is too short.

 

[DarloRich]

So your saying nothing should be done north of York because it will never have a business case, anything and everything suggested North of York gets greeted with the same response "There's no Business Case".

where have i said that? The issue is not geography but reality. For instance look at my views on the curve between Fenny Stratford and the WCML that is constantly and boringly proposed by experts here. This is something that if built would make my life easier. It is a waste of money, as is the suggestion here.

Every time you put off doing something because it doesn't currently have a significant "Business Case" just leaves the area (to quote Meole)"not an economically significant region" so by definition, it will remain economically insignificant because nothing is done to make it more economically significant.

So you would happily jazz tax payers money away on a "build it and they will come fantasy"?

 

[pdeaves]

So your saying nothing should be done north of York because it will never have a business case, anything and everything suggested North of York gets greeted with the same response "There's no Business Case".
Every time you put off doing something because it doesn't currently have a significant "Business Case" just leaves the area (to quote Meole)"not an economically significant region" so by definition, it will remain economically insignificant because nothing is done to make it more economically significant.

Remember that the people who would benefit from our hypothetical cut-off line are not the people through whose area it would pass, but those folk who do not want/need to stop at Morpeth (e.g. people travelling from Edinburgh to London, etc.). There would be no benefit, economic or otherwise, to the residents who would have to see/hear/give up their land for the bypass. Now, I am not saying it should or should not happen, just that the economically insignificant region would not become more significant if it were there (indeed may become even less significant). This would not be the scheme to regenerate the area.

 

[DarloRich]

Remember that the people who would benefit from our hypothetical cut-off line are not the people through whose area it would pass, but those folk who do not want/need to stop at Morpeth (e.g. people travelling from Edinburgh to London, etc.). There would be no benefit, economic or otherwise, to the residents who would have to see/hear/give up their land for the bypass. Now, I am not saying it should or should not happen, just that the economically insignificant region would not become more significant if it were there (indeed may become even less significant). This would not be the scheme to regenerate the area.

quite! it would suit me. A quicker journey form London to Edinburgh. Sweet. Not sure that is what people want to hear...............

 

[Bald Rick]

Just spent 15 minutes of lunch having a look at the numbers over a sandwich.

If you assume that every non-stop train through Morpeth has 250 passengers on average (roughly, a full Voyager, or half full LNER), and that the split is 40% business, 40% leisure, 20% commuter; and that the saving is 3 minutes, then such a cut off would need to cost around £100m to have a BCR of 1.0.

This does not allow for the cost saving in brakes and power, nor does it allow for the extra cost of maintaining and renewing the new line.

Similarly it does not allow for new demand generated by the 3 minute journey time reduction (of which there would be some). However neither does it allow for the fact that Edinburgh passengers from London and Birmingham will be usually going via the WCML post HS2.

Given that’s the capital cost would be in the region of £200m - 40 metre high viaducts don’t come cheap - it suggests the BCR would not be good. However it will be rather a lot better than most new lines proposed elsewhere on these pages!

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Just spent 15 minutes of lunch having a look at the numbers over a sandwich.

If you assume that every non-stop train through Morpeth has 250 passengers on average (roughly, a full Voyager, or half full LNER), and that the split is 40% business, 40% leisure, 20% commuter; and that the saving is 3 minutes, then such a cut off would need to cost around £100m to have a BCR of 1.0.

This does not allow for the cost saving in brakes and power, nor does it allow for the extra cost of maintaining and renewing the new line.

Similarly it does not allow for new demand generated by the 3 minute journey time reduction (of which there would be some). However neither does it allow for the fact that Edinburgh passengers from London and Birmingham will be usually going via the WCML post HS2.

Given that’s the capital cost would be in the region of £200m - 40 metre high viaducts don’t come cheap - it suggests the BCR would not be good. However it will be rather a lot better than most new lines proposed elsewhere on these pages!

Over which time period is that benefit?

Have you considered the benefit to the places that will be able to receive a better service as a result? (Not least Morpeth)

 

[Bald Rick]

Over which time period is that benefit?

Have you considered the benefit to the places that will be able to receive a better service as a result? (Not least Morpeth)

60 years.
And to answer the second question, no, because I’m not sure it does enable. How would Morpeth get a better service with a bypass?

 

[DarloRich]

Over which time period is that benefit?

the standard infrastructure life period.

Have you considered the benefit to the places that will be able to receive a better service as a result? (Not least Morpeth)

No - because without some political fiddling the impact on the business case is minimal. Posters here often think this argument, like a diversionary route, is some kind of investment sliver bullet. It isnt.

 

[Bald Rick]

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.

But that’s a different question.

There would be other, cheaper, ways of enabling a better local service; a loop here and there for example. This would also enable a reduction in calls of longer distance services at those stations - assuming that the good folk there would be happy with that (and you can guess the answer).

Think of the problem first, then find solutions.

 

[transmanche]

Think of the problem first, then find solutions.

I was thinking possibly; two birds, one stone?

 

[yoyothehobo]

Is there actually any freight on this bit of the ECML, i know there are some places around Blyth that used to get some/might still do but I dont think I have ever seen anything north of Morpeth.

But we do need a bypass...got to build bypasses

 

[Darandio]

Is there actually any freight on this bit of the ECML, i know there are some places around Blyth that used to get some/might still do but I dont think I have ever seen anything north of Morpeth.

Yes, anything from 6-12 per day.

But we do need a bypass...got to build bypasses

But why? Why does so much need to be spent for the sake of 3-4 minutes?

 

[yoyothehobo]

Yes, anything from 6-12 per day.



But why? Why does so much need to be spent for the sake of 3-4 minutes?

Thanks, I have spent quite a bit of time up that way and never seen any freight come down there and assumed it all went by the WCML.

And for the bypass question, that was Arthur Dent's response

 

[DarloRich]

Is there actually any freight on this bit of the ECML, i know there are some places around Blyth that used to get some/might still do but I dont think I have ever seen anything north of Morpeth.

Yes, anything from 6-12 per day.

7 ran in 24 hours yesterday.

 

[class26]

The old BR saying was for ever one minute saved there was a one per cent increase in revenue.
BR did incremental speed increases along the ECML which progressively shortened the journey from London to Edinburgh but presumably they chose the low hanging fruit ? I have an article in a copy of Modern Railways from 1978 referring to the ECML entitled "13 minutes saved for £55,000"
Those were the days !

 

[Darandio]

And for the bypass question, that was Arthur Dent's response

Ah, well I had to Google that one. Not a fan!

 

[Killingworth]

Morpeth may have had only 418k passengers in 2017/18 but it's seeing consistent growth in excess of 5% a year. Many residents in South East Northumberland prefer to take a train north from Morpeth rather than driving into Newcastle. Not a few are now joining trains to go further south, the increased frequencies helping to make that more attractive. Removing all stops by long distance (non Northern) services at Morpeth would kill much of that growing business.There's a lot more than Newcastle commuter traffic here.

An east side diversion has attraction if a new station with good parking were provided, and with a third through passing line included. The cost would be enormous. Those who want to dispute that need to look at the contours on the OS map and an aerial view.

 

[bluenoxid]

You could get Ashington, Bedlington and Blyth back on the rail network for that money.

 

[transmanche]

Removing all stops by long distance (non Northern) services at Morpeth would kill much of that growing business. There's a lot more than Newcastle commuter traffic here.

I don't think anyone is suggesting removing all LDHS (long-distance high speed) services from Morpeth. I think there are currently 12 such services a day in each direction - six each from LNER and XC.

First's East Coast Trains open-access operation will serve Morpeth from 2021 (with their London-Edinburgh service, up to five times a day) and TransPennine Express will also call (with their Liverpool-Edinburgh service, building up to 1tph).

That's a pretty big increase in services calling at Morpeth over the next few years. Therefore it may be appropriate for some of the existing LNER and XC calls to skip Morpeth in order to speed services or to call at other stations in Northumberland.

For those unfamiliar with the area, here's a snippet of the 1960 OS map:

 

[Lucan]

Interesting that the 1960 OS map does not show the chord from the Bedlington branch northwards to the main line. When was that built?

 

[cle]

So would the saving only be 3-4 mins, at 125mph or close enough?

I recall Richard Branson talking about it once upon a time.

Might it be more cost effective if it was single-tracked? If say up to 6tph used it, surely that would be possible to path?

 

[Bald Rick]

So would the saving only be 3-4 mins, at 125mph or close enough?

I recall Richard Branson talking about it once upon a time.

Might it be more cost effective if it was single-tracked? If say up to 6tph used it, surely that would be possible to path?

3 minutes as I posted above.

Single tracking would save about 15-25% of the cost.

Yes it would be possible to timetable at that point, but it would impose a constraint on the whole rest of the line that would inevitably lead to pathing time being put back into the trans, thereby negating the whole point of the exercise.

 

[Class 170101]

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.

I would question your assertion that there aren't many trains on that section. In numerical terms this may well be but in capacity terms I thought it had been said by NR that all the operators aspirations for services between Newcastle and Edinburgh could not be met?

 

[Bald Rick]

I would question your assertion that there aren't many trains on that section. In numerical terms this may well be but in capacity terms I thought it had been said by NR that all the operators aspirations for services between Newcastle and Edinburgh could not be met?

That’s because of the interaction between the different operators' requirements, including freight and stopping services. 3tph in each direction is not a lot of trains!

 

[swt_passenger]

Interesting that the 1960 OS map does not show the chord from the Bedlington branch northwards to the main line. When was that built?

IIRC it was put in around 1980, possibly to allow through running for diversionary purposes during the ECML electrification period. Either that or a specific freight flow...