Highlandspring
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 2,777
LDHS?
I am guessing at Long Distance High Speed.LDHS
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.I’m assuming the curve exists for a very good topographical/geographical reason.
Thanks, interesting info.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”...
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".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.
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.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.
Over which time period is that benefit?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)
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)
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.
I was thinking possibly; two birds, one stone?Think of the problem first, then find solutions.
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
Yes, anything from 6-12 per day.
But why? Why does so much need to be spent for the sake of 3-4 minutes?
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.
And for the bypass question, that was Arthur Dent's response
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.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.
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?
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?
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...Interesting that the 1960 OS map does not show the chord from the Bedlington branch northwards to the main line. When was that built?