Settle & Carlisle Line - Past, Present & Future

[LNW-GW Joint]

Virgin would rather bus passengers than divert indicating a blatant refusal to divert

Well you have it in a nutshell. There is no WCML business case for using the S&C.
VT doesn't use loco haulage any more, and the former hourly Voyager service has largely been converted to 390 operation.
The connecting line from Blackburn/Clitheroe to Hellifield is even lower speed than the S&C.
The heavy freight (coal) which gave the line some purpose for a couple of decades has vanished, never to return.
It is faster and more frequent to Scotland via either the WCML or ECML.
A regional/tourist operation isn't going to fund a significant upgrade, although the signalling may have to be replaced and maybe one day get the Cambrian ETCS treatment.
We'll soon find out if the new WC operator is interested in diversions via the S&C - I suspect not.

 

[muddythefish]

When the WCML is closed would it not help to have the S&C available for diversions north of Hellifield regardless of whether a Leeds or Bradford to Glasgow service is introduced?

It's ridiculous that the S & C is no longer used for WCML diversions. Buses are not a good substitute for trains and I would rather travel by car than put up with the inconvenience of a rail replacement service. Why does the regulator allow the operators to get away with not using the S & C for diversions?

The S & C is an under-used railway. A basic 2-hourly local service, augmented by morning and evening "commuter" trains at the northern and southern ends, ought to be viable. There are no direct east Midlands - Glasgow rail links as far as I am aware, so there must be a market for a service catering for the leisure and tourist passengers, perhaps 2 trains each way.

There have been proposals in the past too about reopening the Clitheroe - Hellifield section to passengers in order to provide a Carlisle - Manchester service via Settle and Blackburn.

And if a regular summer steam service is possible in the west Highlands, would it not also be a huge attraction for tourists over the scenic S & C?

The former BR area manager Ron Cotton showed what was possible on the S & C in the 1980s with a bit of imagination, innovation and marketing flair. Do the present-day private operators have the same entrepreneurial ability, do they want to expand and develop the railway, or are they only interested in the short - term bottom line?

 

[Bald Rick]

So no, real financial or operational merit?

Operational, yes, but in the scheme of things, tiny.
Financial, no.

If / when the line is resignalled, then the signals can be put in the right place if they need to be moved. But it’s the civil engineering that will cost the cash.

 

[hexagon789]

Operational, yes, but in the scheme of things, tiny.
Financial, no.

A shame in my view, I feel it still has potential to be realised.

 

[Class 170101]

The millions that were spent were purely focused on increasing the capacity of the line to carry heavy freight. To re-signal the line to higher linespeeds would likely have added significant additional costs onto a project that was not concerned with speed.

But surely a Sprinter (or perhaps a Class 196 DMU depending on weight) would be able to operate at a higher speed and still brake in the same curve from the higher speed as a freight at a lower speed?

Whereas, one Voyager is all you'd need to increase the Leeds - Glasgow service to hourly during the daytime (i.e. extend the current XC services that terminate in Edinburgh).

One train to be fair. (Some on this board may want a HST)

It would but VT haven't signed it since around 2013/14 as they presumably didn't consider it necessary. So you'd need for them to either resign it or arrange route conductors.

Virgin would rather bus passengers than divert indicating a blatant refusal to divert

I would argue it should become a franchise requirement that where the track exists it should be used and that resorting to road transport should be minimised where possible.

 

[Bald Rick]

A shame in my view, I feel it still has potential to be realised.

Lots of railways have potential. But to realise that potential you need to spend an awful lot of money. And if the ‘potential’ realises not-a-lot of money, or other benefits, then that awful lot of money is better spent elsewhere.

 

[muddythefish]

B

I would argue it should become a franchise requirement that where the track exists it should be used and that resorting to road transport should be minimised where possible.

Resorting to road transport where a rail alternative exists should be banned.

 

[hexagon789]

Lots of railways have potential. But to realise that potential you need to spend an awful lot of money. And if the ‘potential’ realises not-a-lot of money, or other benefits, then that awful lot of money is better spent elsewhere.

And now we are entering into the realms of whether the government should spend more on rail and less on road I suppose, to fund this sort of thing.

I admit, I have to agree and concede that if the money can be better spent on something of more benefit to more people elsewhere I can't disagree with that because that is entirely logical.

 

[Glenn1969]

We may also be entering the realm of North- South divide as well. I am in favour of spending powers being devolved to Transport for the North to decide how to spend money on Northern transport priorities- which may or may not include S&C I suppose

 

[yorksrob]

It’s not, but the there’s not many people who would benefit. If every passenger using Settle - Armathwaite inclusive chipped in a quid each, you might be able to move one signal a year.

Our fares have already gone up by over a quid over the last few years !

 

[yorksrob]

The route's doing fine as it is.

Plenty of busy trains - the 2 carriage ones are too short in many cases.

With there being fewer coal trains, maybe there's capacity to open the route up to residents of Manchester and the North West via Clitheroe.

 

[johntea]

Leeds to Glasgow on a 142...that would certainly be an experience!

 

[Carlisle]

Lots of railways have potential. But to realise that potential you need to spend an awful lot of money.

Generally true, but Ive heard maximum speeds on certain sections of the S&C were only reduced in response to the 1995 Ais Gill accident, so shouldn’t need to cost an absolute fortune to restore given there’s been significant investment in track, some signalling & GSMR since then, happy to be corrected if wrong.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Many years ago there were a few 125 services over the S&C specials under IIRC the title "What might have been". I was awfully close to one on the foot crossing at Horton purely by chance out for a walk. I did wonder at the time how fast it was going...

No faster than the 47s + Mk1s that operated the services over the line at the time.

These specials were mostly run by Hertfordshire Rail Tours who had an agreement with InterCity to charter the Midland main Line rake that was spare on Saturdays at the time. Here's 43054 and 43074 at Appleby during a planned photo stop on 28th January 1989 on one such tour - I think this particular trip was billed as the first HST over the Settle - Carlisle.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

I was knocking about with a concept Simsig timetable in which there was a two-hourly 'Express' from Leeds to Glasgow Central, part-operated by each of Northern and ScotRail. It was a 4/158 and took advantage of 75mph line speeds on the S&C as the old argument of 'passenger services will just catch up with freight' hardly exists now thanks to the loss of coal.

In short, services leave Leeds at the same time each hour. They stop at Shipley (Bradford connections) and Skipton; with a two-hourly service calling forward to Settle, Kirkby Stephen, Appleby and Carlisle thence Dumfries, Kilmarnock, Stewarton, Barrhead and Glasgow Central. The proposed journey time would be around 2h20 from Leeds to Carlisle and a further 2h00 from Carlisle to Glasgow.

A two-hourly service from Leeds to Lancaster would also be provided; as well as a two-hourly service (stopping) from Skipton to Carlisle.

A two-hourly service 'flighted in' from Carlisle to Glasgow Central with local stop (such as Gretna and Sanquhar) would depart around 35/40 minutes after the Leeds - Glasgow express from Carlisle to gain the same path from Barrhead to Glasgow; and some peak additional Carlisle - Dumfries services would be provided in the peak direction.

Of course, it is highly unlikely that the Government would get behind such a thing although the reality is that with a two-hourly express from Leeds to Carlisle there is certainly an ability not only to provide a decent through service using Sprinter-ish stock via Kilmarnock but also to get decent connections on Intercity services.

 

[tbtc]

One train to be fair. (Some on this board may want a HST)

True (subject to HSTs being able to cope with Voyager timings, without removing some intermediate stops further south) - or a cascaded 222 from the East Midlands - but much easier than finding sufficient 125mph self powered trains to run regular Leeds - Settle -Carlisle - Glasgow services (i.e. capable of keeping pace on the WCML)

I would argue it should become a franchise requirement that where the track exists it should be used and that resorting to road transport should be minimised where possible

Sounds nice in theory, but this is an example where road transport will generally be a lot faster - a coach can nip straight up the M6 from Preston/ Lancaster, whilst a "drag" is going to mean a slow route through Blackburn and up to Hellifield

Even when TOCs run services on the parallel route they often decide that diversions aren't worth the candle, which is why it's odd that some people still try to use occasional diversions as one of the main justifications for re-opening some rural lines.

The route's doing fine as it is.

Plenty of busy trains - the 2 carriage ones are too short in many cases

A two carriage Sprinter every couple of hours, sometimes busy... but that's fairly unremarkable in northern England - there are plenty of lines with much bigger capacity problems - plenty of lines that are bigger priorities (despite the rural charm of the S&C meaning it becomes a much bigger obsession for some).

It'd be hard to justify putting the S&C high up the list of routes in northern England needing significant additional capacity, IMHO.

Or, in other terms, any spare stock that people want to throw at the S&C is stock that could be used on crowded lines into Manchester/ Leeds/ Sheffield/ Liverpool etc. Opportunity cost.

 

[backontrack]

A two-hourly service from Leeds to Lancaster would also be provided; as well as a two-hourly service (stopping) from Skipton to Carlisle.

Bad idea to cut all the direct Leeds-Horton/Ribblehead/Dent/Garsdale services because Yorkshire Dales walkers from the Leeds end are a fairly large part of total Settle & Carlisle Line users. Also, Bingley and Keighley would lose all their services to Settle and points north, which seems a strange decision to make given that these fairly large stations add to this demographic.

There's some merit to your concept, though.

 

[cactustwirly]

Basically an overhyped railway line, which in reality is fairly insignificant. The train service atm is very adequate for the line IMO

 

[a_c_skinner]

atm is very adequate for the line IMO

Sadly that is probably true, for frequency if not seating capacity.

 

[ainsworth74]

Sounds nice in theory, but this is an example where road transport will generally be a lot faster - a coach can nip straight up the M6 from Preston/ Lancaster, whilst a "drag" is going to mean a slow route through Blackburn and up to Hellifield

Perhaps I'm forgetting but I'm under the impression that Passenger Focus, as was, did some research and came to the conclusion that passengers in general prefer to remain on a train even if a diversion adds a considerable amount of time to the journey rather than a quicker overall journey using train and bus.

 

[Bantamzen]

Agreed.

Leeds - Glasgow is currently just over four hours on XC - the service runs bi-hourly.

Leeds - Carlisle is currently around two and a half hours, and you'd need to add over an hour to get up to Glasgow (but that's basing the WCML section on diagrams pathed for a 125mph tilting train, rather than trying to find a path for a Sprinter like Northern Spirit used to).

So even if there were paths on the WCML for a Sprinter, or we found a few spare 125mph DMUs down the back of the sofa (and decided that it'd be a good idea to use them to spend most of their time trundling along the S&C at half their top speed) then it's not going to be much faster than running via Edinburgh...

...and you'd be running a service that has intermediate stops at Skipton/ Settle/ Carlisle rather than York/ Darlington/ Durham/ Newcastle/ Edinburgh...

...so there's not much of a time saving for inter-city journeys and you'd be serving relatively smaller places... it seems a pretty thin business case.

Whereas, one Voyager is all you'd need to increase the Leeds - Glasgow service to hourly during the daytime (i.e. extend the current XC services that terminate in Edinburgh).

(this is all assuming that there's spare paths from Leeds to Skipton, given that the line is already so busy that 331s are being built to permit six coach EMUs to run, and two stations have been built on the line from Leeds to Shipley in recent years)

Feels like, if the S&C had closed in the '80s, it'd be a great cause celebre now, enthusiasts suggesting this amazing future for it, if only we'd re-open it - just think of the untapped demand etc. Whereas, it stayed in operation and (despite record passenger numbers on most lines in the UK) is still just a Sprinter every couple of hours with unremarkable passenger numbers at stations north of Skipton (despite the Leeds commuter market having changed considerably over the past generation). A bit like a rockstar who turned out to be a racist middle aged nonentity, rather than being remembered as a talented hero who died in the "27 club".

The problem with the XC services is that they are often full to bursting through Leeds, and a four hour slog when at least part of it involves being rammed into XC's famous "fragrant" Voyager vestibules means that many people travelling from Yorkshire to Glasgow / West Scotland simply don't bother, or as I have done on a few occasions (and I have noticed others doing it too) go via the S&C, even with a long connection at Carlisle. In fact in the last few years the National Rail engine started offered Leeds-Glasgow via Carlisle as an option when previously it did not, at least from what I have observed. So someone, somewhere recognises that the XC option might not be the only one.

Personally I don't see any reason for Northern or perhaps TPE in the future to consider a Leeds-Glasgow direct as an option, given that both will have stock at a higher level than sprinters. If this proved to be viable, it might even mean that XC could drop their bi-hourly services, terminating more realistically at Edinburgh or even Newcastle to give themselves a bit more flexibility and resilience in their pathing & timetables. Goodness knows when it goes wrong on XC, it goes really wrong & having them have to weave through Scotland even before making their way across much of England comes with some serious overheads & risk. If a more direct service could shave even 20-30 minutes off the journey time, which is clearly possible then it must be worth at least thinking about if it means the XC services aren't quite so jammed.

 

[yorksrob]

True (subject to HSTs being able to cope with Voyager timings, without removing some intermediate stops further south) - or a cascaded 222 from the East Midlands - but much easier than finding sufficient 125mph self powered trains to run regular Leeds - Settle -Carlisle - Glasgow services (i.e. capable of keeping pace on the WCML)



Sounds nice in theory, but this is an example where road transport will generally be a lot faster - a coach can nip straight up the M6 from Preston/ Lancaster, whilst a "drag" is going to mean a slow route through Blackburn and up to Hellifield

Even when TOCs run services on the parallel route they often decide that diversions aren't worth the candle, which is why it's odd that some people still try to use occasional diversions as one of the main justifications for re-opening some rural lines.



A two carriage Sprinter every couple of hours, sometimes busy... but that's fairly unremarkable in northern England - there are plenty of lines with much bigger capacity problems - plenty of lines that are bigger priorities (despite the rural charm of the S&C meaning it becomes a much bigger obsession for some).

It'd be hard to justify putting the S&C high up the list of routes in northern England needing significant additional capacity, IMHO.

Or, in other terms, any spare stock that people want to throw at the S&C is stock that could be used on crowded lines into Manchester/ Leeds/ Sheffield/ Liverpool etc. Opportunity cost.

The route doesn't need a lot of additional capacity now that coal has released a lot of it.

There's a whole leisure market in the North West which could access the Dales, even if it's only by extending the Clitheroe service to connect at Hellifield.

Yes, passenger numbers aren't as high as the main inter-urban routes (which need wiring and 4-8 carriage trains, not ageing DMU's anyway.) but the route already demands 3 and 4 carriages a lot of the time.

If Government were spending what it should on the main routes into the Northern cities as you say, plenty of cascaded stock would become available anyway. Instead we'll be twiddling our thumbs doing nothing for twenty years, waiting for a new line.

 

[yorksrob]

Basically an overhyped railway line, which in reality is fairly insignificant. The train service atm is very adequate for the line IMO

Many of the two carriage services are overcrowded. Even extending these with a 153 would be an improvement in many cases.

 

[Esker-pades]

I was knocking about with a concept Simsig timetable in which there was a two-hourly 'Express' from Leeds to Glasgow Central, part-operated by each of Northern and ScotRail. It was a 4/158 and took advantage of 75mph line speeds on the S&C as the old argument of 'passenger services will just catch up with freight' hardly exists now thanks to the loss of coal.

In short, services leave Leeds at the same time each hour. They stop at Shipley (Bradford connections) and Skipton; with a two-hourly service calling forward to Settle, Kirkby Stephen, Appleby and Carlisle thence Dumfries, Kilmarnock, Stewarton, Barrhead and Glasgow Central. The proposed journey time would be around 2h20 from Leeds to Carlisle and a further 2h00 from Carlisle to Glasgow.

A two-hourly service from Leeds to Lancaster would also be provided; as well as a two-hourly service (stopping) from Skipton to Carlisle.

A two-hourly service 'flighted in' from Carlisle to Glasgow Central with local stop (such as Gretna and Sanquhar) would depart around 35/40 minutes after the Leeds - Glasgow express from Carlisle to gain the same path from Barrhead to Glasgow; and some peak additional Carlisle - Dumfries services would be provided in the peak direction.

Of course, it is highly unlikely that the Government would get behind such a thing although the reality is that with a two-hourly express from Leeds to Carlisle there is certainly an ability not only to provide a decent through service using Sprinter-ish stock via Kilmarnock but also to get decent connections on Intercity services.

In the current timetable, the 15 minute frequency of stopping services between Shipley and Skipton precludes any kind of skip-stop running as you have proposed. Most of the reasons for the stops at Keighley, Bingley etc. are because the train would otherwise have loads of additional pathing minutes. Might as well use those to stop at the more popular stations.

 

[The Planner]

I would argue it should become a franchise requirement that where the track exists it should be used and that resorting to road transport should be minimised where possible.

How far do you take that though? On obvious diversionary routes or more obscure ones? What will happen is that DfT will see that as a cost that isnt quantifiable or will see the TOC over inflating the expected cost. What will happen in reality, as it does now in a lot of cases, will be "if you want us to divert that way NR, you pay for the route learning and find us the paths"

 

[Harpers Tate]

The S&C is (as I believe we touched on elsewhere) a classic example of a railway which, in passenger terms, has a specific (potential) purpose beyond the standard means of transporting people who are at A and want to get to B. That purpose is as a destination, an attraction if you will, in its own right. Riding the scenic S&C is already the true destination for a good proportion of its users, alongside the true "travellers".

Preserved railways operate more or less entirely on this basis; they aren't transporting people to a destination - they are taking them for a ride (in the literal sense). The NYMR, before it reached Whitby, loaded hourly trains often of 8 coaches in Pickering, and took people to Grosmont (which has practically no appeal as a destination) and back, and made a (successful) business out of doing so.

I think that here (and probably in other odd locations on the network) there is a huge opportunity missed - to do the exactly same thing; to market and run the route as a tourist attraction primarily, whilst nevertheless maintaining provision for "ordinary" travellers. It need not necessarily be by the use of heritage rolling stock or traction; but to work like this, it certainly needs something better than a badly overcrowded 2-car sprinter every couple of hours - in the season.

 

[Llandudno]

Is the scope in looking to increase the leisure market?

Observational saloons or even proper dining car services like many preserved lines operate.

Perhaps, regular, scheduled steam services like the Jacobite in Scotland?

 

[underbank]

Sounds nice in theory, but this is an example where road transport will generally be a lot faster - a coach can nip straight up the M6 from Preston/ Lancaster, whilst a "drag" is going to mean a slow route through Blackburn and up to Hellifield

However, the M6 around Preston/Lancaster is notoriously busy and has a high incidence of accidents causing long delays as there is no alternative motorway, so when it's closed for a few hours, the surrounding town and country roads quickly grid lock. We had queues of 2 hours this weekend just gone! It's a weekly event, sometimes, a few times in a week. People stuck in a queue on a coach won't be happy when they've actively booked a journey by train! I'm sure most people would prefer a delay but staying on the same train rather than having to trudge off the train, onto a coach, then back onto a different train later. Is there really that much difference in time anyway - surely it must add an hour or so to a journey if you have to coach it from say Preston to Carlisle, even if the motorway is fully open?

Anything to reduce vehicles on the M6 must be a good thing. To actively encourage more vehicles due to reluctance to use a perfectly valid alternative railway route simply shouldn't be even considered. Using alternative rails where possible should be a non negotiable part of the franchise process.

 

[thejuggler]

The S&C is (as I believe we touched on elsewhere) a classic example of a railway which, in passenger terms, has a specific (potential) purpose beyond the standard means of transporting people who are at A and want to get to B. That purpose is as a destination, an attraction if you will, in its own right. Riding the scenic S&C is already the true destination for a good proportion of its users, alongside the true "travellers".

Preserved railways operate more or less entirely on this basis; they aren't transporting people to a destination - they are taking them for a ride (in the literal sense). The NYMR, before it reached Whitby, loaded hourly trains often of 8 coaches in Pickering, and took people to Grosmont (which has practically no appeal as a destination) and back, and made a (successful) business out of doing so.

I think that here (and probably in other odd locations on the network) there is a huge opportunity missed - to do the exactly same thing; to market and run the route as a tourist attraction primarily, whilst nevertheless maintaining provision for "ordinary" travellers. It need not necessarily be by the use of heritage rolling stock or traction; but to work like this, it certainly needs something better than a badly overcrowded 2-car sprinter every couple of hours - in the season.

Similar to Fort William - Mallaig - how many who won't pay the Jacobite price and use the local service are actually going to Mallaig for any length of time?

I seem to remember about 10 years ago there was a loco hauled service once a day over the summer on the S&C which was popular for those just using it for a day out. Far more pleasant than any form of DMU over the trip.

 

[Harpers Tate]

I took a ride on one of the loco hauled services on the Cumbrian Coast last year. Let's be clear - this isn't any specific kind of enthusiasm for the vintage traction and rolling stock per se - but the interior environment of the Mk2 (?) - space, windows aligned with seats, general comfort etc. - made for an ideal sightseeing trip.