Those hills are a killer if you're riding a bike, let alone a train!
If I really want to get the crayons out, how about a base tunnel from Northampton to Rushden underneath all the hills?
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
(Entirely) new railway lines
- Thread starter southern442
- Start date
- Status
If I really want to get the crayons out, how about a base tunnel from Northampton to Rushden underneath all the hills?
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Now you may have a point here, given that Mobberley station is closer to the west end of the runway at Manchester Airport, than the airport station is !
Those hills are a killer if you're riding a bike, let alone a train!
If I really want to get the crayons out, how about a base tunnel from Northampton to Rushden underneath all the hills?
You're not wrong.
And please don't come up with suggestions like that - the crayonista brigade are bad enough with their repetitive hankering for reopening Bedford - Northampton or the Northampton - Banbury lines, the former being a pre-Beeching one. Besides, haven't you heard about the alleged Northampton Underground ?
Don't get started on that one
gg1
Established Member
Much more than than just Leicester to Northampton. If this route was to reopen the most logical service provision would be an extension of the Oxford to MK services due to start when EWR is complete to Bletchley, and then on to at least Nottingham. You would then have direct service linking Leicester/Northampton with Oxford, MK and Northampton along with better connections from MK/Northampton to Yorkshire and from Nottingham/Leicester to the south.
The problem is that rail travel between Milton Keynes and Northampton, to Leicester and the towns north of it like Loughborough, Nottingham and further north is currently uncompetitive with the M1, rail journeys are long, slow and not a viable alternative. The M1 is the economic artery running through the East Midlands, with lots of development and growth along the route, all those towns and cities have seen massive growth yet you can't get a decent fast train between them.
We're not talking small market towns, Northampton and Milton Keynes are approaching 500,000 people in total, Leicester is over 350,000, Nottingham area is around 700,000+, all linked by one of the country's major motorways yet there's no competitive rail alternative along the route.
Also, forget Brixworth, that's a distraction, its not about adding a station to serve a small village, it's about linking two major towns with their economic neighbours.
Mikey C
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 7,585
Removing a shed load of shuttle buses from public roads is a modal shift
And having a whizzy elevated railway IS a step change in attractiveness over queuing up to stand on a bus
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 18,711
Something completely and radically different that I've been thinking about for a while.
505km/h Maglev metro, running from Penzance to Aberdeen(Dyce) via Plymouth, Cardiff Bay, Bristol Parkway, Old Oak Common, Toton, Leeds, Metrocentre, Edinburgh Park and Perth.
10+ trains per hour, journey time from end to end, all stops being about 2hr45.
Tube style frequencies (10tph is the design Chuo Shinkansen rate, and that has a mixed stopping pattern, so I assume but can't demonstrate that a metro style operation would manage more than that).
Probably don't have to build the section of HS2-East that bypasses Sheffield since nothing would use it. Combined with NPR it dramatically cuts the lengths of a huge number of journeys and fosters economic and social integration.
I've been thinking about floating it in it's own thread, but dunno if it would get a good response and here seems a place to just see what people think off the bat.
(Basically, maglev is so fast an all stopping pattern is still way faster than conventional rail, and a single stopping pattern allows very high frequencies, turning it into an ultra-tube. And the high speed means it doesn't even have to go in a straight line, and connections become tolerable)
505km/h Maglev metro, running from Penzance to Aberdeen(Dyce) via Plymouth, Cardiff Bay, Bristol Parkway, Old Oak Common, Toton, Leeds, Metrocentre, Edinburgh Park and Perth.
10+ trains per hour, journey time from end to end, all stops being about 2hr45.
Tube style frequencies (10tph is the design Chuo Shinkansen rate, and that has a mixed stopping pattern, so I assume but can't demonstrate that a metro style operation would manage more than that).
Probably don't have to build the section of HS2-East that bypasses Sheffield since nothing would use it. Combined with NPR it dramatically cuts the lengths of a huge number of journeys and fosters economic and social integration.
I've been thinking about floating it in it's own thread, but dunno if it would get a good response and here seems a place to just see what people think off the bat.
(Basically, maglev is so fast an all stopping pattern is still way faster than conventional rail, and a single stopping pattern allows very high frequencies, turning it into an ultra-tube. And the high speed means it doesn't even have to go in a straight line, and connections become tolerable)
Last edited:
Once again, no justification.
There's no capacity to run more between MK and Northampton as has been explained by @The Planner on several occasions, usually when extending EWR or the Southern MK - Croydon service comes up.
Add in even if you got to Market Harborough there's no capacity between there and Leicester - EMR in the May timetable will be running 4 tph up there add in some freight and the paths don't exist.
Lastly, most of the journeys you're suggesting can already be achieved with a single change (Birmingham, Tamworth or Nuneaton) - and nobody has yet proven there is a huge demand to travel from Nottingham to Oxford.
Erm no - because the people who were travelling to the airport by train knew they would have to use the bus for the final mile or so.
What it *won't* do is persuade people to use the train to get to the airport to begin with. And that's because people often know the 'final' mile in an airport can be either a long walk or a shuttle bus.
But you haven't demonstrated there is the demand to travel from MK or Northampton to Leicester or Nottingham - that's the key.
Just because the M1 takes that line, doesn't automatically mean there's a justifiable or viable railway route there. You could equally argue that the M1 links London and Leeds, but the main rail route between the two goes nowhere near the M1 and the line which actually shadows the M1 has always struggled to justify a London - Leeds service on its route.
Last edited:
That's basically HS2 (Stage 3) which has been quietly dropped from any proposals regarding HS2 or NPR.
Personally, any new route north from Leeds/York should go as near as possible to Middlesbrough, if not even through Middlesbrough. Darlington and the ECML is a throw back to a time when Darlington was the main town between York & Durham/Newcastle and Middlesbrough was nothing more than a few farms. In the past 150 years Middlesbrough has over taken Darlington & Stockton as the main town of the Tees Valley.
If HS2 (Stage 3) hadn't been dropped, I would have been proposing:-
Church Fenton to North of Skelton Junc (York By-pass with connections to York from the North & South).
North of Skelton Junc towards Eaglescliffe, (east of Northallerton, west of Yarm).
Where the line would run parallel to the Eaglescliffe -Stockton line, I would put a Tees Valley Interchange Station (near where the A66 crosses the line).
(four track similar to TGV Valence)
Tees Valley interchange- Washington(East)area.
Washington to Killingworth Area. (Newcastle By-Pass with Connections to Newcastle from the North & South)
Killingworth area to Carstairs Area or some suitable area that links to a Edinburgh-Glasgow HS line.
Where the Killingworth area to Carstairs Area line crosses the Borders Line (Hawick Area) I would put a Station, and extend the Borders line to it (the idea being that a large town would develop around the station).
The above ideas, I was saving till the relevant of HS2 (stage3) discussions would take place. But I now realise the the mention of HS2 (Stage 3) in the report of 2012'ish was solely put in to bring on board the MP's of the North in order to get HS2 (Stage 1) through Parliament. In a similar way that Leamside is always mentioned in NPR papers.
The presence of a major motorway demonstrates there's significant passenger and freight transport along that corridor, and the existing transport infrastructure supports and promotes economic development, creating traffic flows along that route, encouraging establishment of business supply chains and commuting. You mention the London-Leeds route but the GNER route also follows a major road route - it follows the A1 down to London, the difference is that Leeds is at the end of two major rail routes and two major motorway or arterial road routes.
Are there any major rail routes which don't have a motorway or major road following the same corridor?
One which would never have been considered - Harlow - Chelmsford / Colchester or Harlow - Brentwood - Basildon - Southend.
Harlow was a small village in the days of the railway building - it's only grown since the 1960s as a new town - but links to the rest of Essex are somewhat poor.
But it doesn't follow that because that was the route the motorway took 60 years ago that there should now be a railway line built to shadow it.
Depending on your definition of 'major' road - I'd argue the GEML to Norwich, whilst it shadows the A12 to Ipswich, the A140 isn't a 'major' road and the main route from London to Norwich historically was by the A11.
Or Birmingham - Nuneaton - Hinckley - Leicester ? Direct by rail, but there isn't a direct Motorway or major A road linking the two.
Harlow was a small village in the days of the railway building - it's only grown since the 1960s as a new town - but links to the rest of Essex are somewhat poor.
But it doesn't follow that because that was the route the motorway took 60 years ago that there should now be a railway line built to shadow it.
Depending on your definition of 'major' road - I'd argue the GEML to Norwich, whilst it shadows the A12 to Ipswich, the A140 isn't a 'major' road and the main route from London to Norwich historically was by the A11.
Or Birmingham - Nuneaton - Hinckley - Leicester ? Direct by rail, but there isn't a direct Motorway or major A road linking the two.
Last edited:
How about a new railway that happens to be 125mph but only carries one type of traffic? (As that’s what the new bits of NPR across the Pennines are likely to be!)
I’ll have that bet. There’s a lot of people who drive to short stay, or get taxis or a lift to Luton airport that could get the train, but don’t simply because of the hassle of getting from train to bus, the 10 minute wait for the bus (often longer), and the bus being, frankly, uncomfortable. I’m one of them! (Accepting that one example doesn’t prove a point). The net 15 minute journey time reduction will make it quicker than the car for many trips, so I expect it to take share from the roads, and not just the existing buses.
3 or 4 buses, within only 2 actually rolling at any one point (normally). It is modeal shift, but not many buses.
That was the only one I could think of. Somethigto get from the Southend / Tilbury area to the north without going via London.
InTheEastMids
Member
- Joined
- 31 Jan 2016
- Messages
- 1,002
Good points here...
I notice that when Northampton's rail links come up, there's a lot of pivoting between a ideas built on commuting into Northampton and long-distance inter-regional strategic links
Assuming that conventional upgrades 'solves' the Leicester/MML capacity questions in any scenario, and making an assumption that Northampton-Harborough would be about 18 minutes for 18 miles
then times from MK would be something like 50 mins for Leicester, 1h15 for Nottingham and 1h25 for Derby (all assumed direct).
MKC-Derby is already 1h21 with a change at Tamworth
MKC-Leicester could be 1h5-1h10 with no new railway, and MKC-Nottingham would be 1h30-1h35
Add a South to East chord at Nuneaton and you'd make Leicester <1h and Nottingham 1h20-1h25 at a fraction of the cost of about 16 miles of essentially brand-new railway (I'm not saying this has a good case, only that it's an option that could be considered)
The issue with commuting into Northampton is that the station is badly located vs employment - it's a very sprawly place with lots of people working at places like Brackmills that are out of town.
So rail links to facilitate commuting probably make no sense unless combined with a concerted redevelopment around the station; essentially migrating those Barclaycard jobs from Brackmills back into town - i.e. transport infrastructure becomes one part of a much bigger investment. On that note, the big opportunity for Northampton is how to pull itself more into the Oxford-Cambridge arc.
All the plans for new lines tend to group large areas together, like Midlands Connect, EWR, and NPR. There's definitely big towns and cities close together that form similar "arcs".
Something to better connect the affluent north/west of London towns together? Welwyn/St Albans/Watford/High Wycombe appear to be an arc of poor east-west connectivity. Coxely rail link, plus a grade separated Watford, plus St Albans to Hatfield, plus something to follow the route of the A404 (or Chorleywood to Beaconsfield).
And my final (much worse) suggestion is Luton and the Bees - Luton/Buzzard/Bletchley/Buckingham/Brackley/Banbury. I think that wins far more points on alliteration than sensibility!
Something to better connect the affluent north/west of London towns together? Welwyn/St Albans/Watford/High Wycombe appear to be an arc of poor east-west connectivity. Coxely rail link, plus a grade separated Watford, plus St Albans to Hatfield, plus something to follow the route of the A404 (or Chorleywood to Beaconsfield).
Perhaps Northampton/Wellingborough/Corby/Peterborough? Perhaps straight from Northampton to Kettering if there's no alignment for Wellingborough. Join the MML on the slows and add an Oakham avoiding curve north of Corby.
What about Liverpool/Skelmersdale/Wigan/Bolton/Bury/Rochdale? Branch just after Ormskirk and pass across the top of Skelm, then rejoin at Gathurst, followed by a new Bolton to Bury alignment and some Caldervale enhancement works. Something will have to be done about Merseyrail and some Liverpool terminus, but...
And my final (much worse) suggestion is Luton and the Bees - Luton/Buzzard/Bletchley/Buckingham/Brackley/Banbury. I think that wins far more points on alliteration than sensibility!
The M1 corridor south of Leicester was effectively created by the motorway - when it opened Northampton was the only significant town before Luton (though obviously MK was being planned).
But sending it that way (rather than the traditional road which the MML parallels) allowed it to fulfil several purposes, in particular access NW/West Mids-London; a bit like HS2, or even the original London and Birmingham, as THE way in and out of London.
I wonder if MK was a significant factor? - without it, the new town would have had much poorer access to the East Mids and beyond.
I agree that MK could do with equivalent rail access, but I wonder if a new curve at Tamworth would do most of the job (once there is room on the WCML for a service towards Derby).
I see InTheEastMids has made a similar suggestion.
There's limited demand for travel from St Albans to High Wycombe for example. St Albans - Hatfield is more than adequately served by buses, not least because the stations in both Hatfield and St Albans are relatively poorly sited being a distance from both the town centre(s) and most of the housing.
Perhaps 5 minutes perusal of an OS map will show you why that *really* isn't a good idea ? Start with where the railway runs through Northampton and work from there.
There's a reason why even in Victorian railway mania there wasn't a line between Northampton and Kettering - though it would arguably have made more sense than Market Harborough.....
Unsurprisingly I don't disagree with much of what you've put !
The only bit I would question is about the impact Oxford - Cambridge for Northampton. It's easy to forget that Northampton is 40 miles from Oxford and 60 to Cambridge. London Euston is 65 miles, Birmingham New Street is 50 miles.
That to my mind is the challenge with this whole Oxford - Cambridge 'arc' which keeps getting peddled - there are other places which already have a far greater economic pull with decent transport links for places like Northampton.
Last edited:
I've looked at the map - that's how I formulated the idea to begin with. I don't disagree that the topology is prohibitive, and the "route options" shortlist might be somewhat more limited than, say, the options for EWR approach to Cambridge. It might well be a list of zero routes!
But we're talking new lines here, potentially on the NPR sort of "not using current infrastructure" scale. Who says it even has to use the current Northampton station?
southern442
Established Member
Then that's a high speed spur. The (intended) point of this thread is railway connections that warrant a new line, or where it would make more sense to build a new line than re-open a closed one. As I said, something that's a dedicated high-speed rail link does warrant a new line, but that sort of goes without saying, which is why I decided initially to exclude these types of line. A line that's 125mph+ but carries slower, local traffic too is not a dedicated high-speed spur/bypass, but is a new rail corridor entirely (that also happens to carry high speed trains too).
It's unlikely that NPR, for example, would ever use old Beeching closures (woodhead anyone?
), however in a more general sense, the railway industry sometimes seems to limit its aspirations to simply re-opening old lines, where instead there might be a stronger case for building some new lines from scratch.
Class465pacer
Member
How about a DLR extension northbound from Stratford/Stratford Intl?
To where though ? You've already got the Central line heading north from Stratford - Walthamstow would be about the only possible but I'm not sure it would be easy or viable and the current connection via Tottenham Hale isn't bad.
Class465pacer
Member
I was thinking Walthamstow. Maybe an intermediate stop or two where there aren’t any tube or rail stations near to make it more viable?
I think if Lea Bridge on the Tottenham Hale - Stratford hadn't reopened, you may have had a point, but that sort of covers the areas a DLR extension to Walthamstow would.
The only London one I can think of is something which links North West with South East.
You've got North > South with Thameslink, soon have Nort East and South East with West - with Cross rail, and NW - SW with the West London Line. That or something from Heathrow heading North East - because getting to Heathrow from places like Harrow or Edgware is protracted and slow.
Some that others said (in some cases) that I like
- Heathrow going out west
- Bedford to Cambridge (EWR)
- HS2 225mph and NPR 140mph (both in full)
- DLR towards Walthamstow calling at Stratford Int, Maryland, Cathall, Leytonstone, Whipps Cross and Walthamstow Central.
- HS3/4/5 (you choose) 140/186mph PBO - CBG - SSD - SFA - Euston Cross - OOC - Heathrow - RDG - BRI - CDF
Some suggested by HSUK which I’d like to see as parts of HS2 Phase 3a/b - 186mph?
- Beaumont Hill (Darlington) to Ferryhill, completelt straight
- Tursdale to Birtley using first bit of Leamside then new route across to Birtley
- Gateshead to Glasgow, via Underground High Speed NCL, EDB and GLC stations. Segregated from everything else, for HS2 and NPR.
- Heathrow going out west
- Bedford to Cambridge (EWR)
- HS2 225mph and NPR 140mph (both in full)
- DLR towards Walthamstow calling at Stratford Int, Maryland, Cathall, Leytonstone, Whipps Cross and Walthamstow Central.
- HS3/4/5 (you choose) 140/186mph PBO - CBG - SSD - SFA - Euston Cross - OOC - Heathrow - RDG - BRI - CDF
Some suggested by HSUK which I’d like to see as parts of HS2 Phase 3a/b - 186mph?
- Beaumont Hill (Darlington) to Ferryhill, completelt straight
- Tursdale to Birtley using first bit of Leamside then new route across to Birtley
- Gateshead to Glasgow, via Underground High Speed NCL, EDB and GLC stations. Segregated from everything else, for HS2 and NPR.
I would second some form of light rail link Bolton-Bury-Rochdale.
The motorway routes reflect the major transport flows between towns, cities and regions. Business activities and housing growth has been shaped by them over the past 60+ years, so if there isn't a rail service mirror of that route then that points to a deficiency with the rail network.
Regarding Norwich, well that reflects the population density and traffic levels in that area being insufficient to justify a motorway, indeed if the railway wasn't already there it probably wouldn't justify being built. There's lot of the current rail network for which you'd struggle to build a business case today, it exists only because it's already there.
As for Birmingham - Nuneaton - Hinkley - Leicester rail route, that's M6 and M69, M6 from Birmingham heading east to Coventry area, then the M69 from Coventry, past Nuneaton, Hinkley and onto Leicester.
Greengauge (the High Speed lobbying organisation) was recommending a new line from central London - Stratford - Stansted Airport - over to the GEML, which would speed up journeys to the airport and on to East Anglia and provide an alternative route towards London south of Colchester.If we're getting crayons out, then a major City which seems very poorly connected is Norwich. Yes it has trains to most places, but they are very slow - new lines aren't just about connecting places without railway stations to the network, but also about catering for modern travel requirements
Thus I'd build a new 125mph mainline from Cambridge to Norwich, directly linking Norwich to the most important commercial and technological City, possibly outside of London. Just one stop (Bury St Edmunds) and a drastically reduced journey time over the pitiful existing one via Ely
This also gives the possibility of reducing journey times from Norwich to London, by having express trains from Norwich to Kings Cross, especially if HS2 takes takes over some of the existing ECML services to give some spare capacity. The Hitchin to Cambridge line would need to be heavily upgraded too or possibly bypassed, plus Cambridge station would probably need expanding
Give me £20bn, and I'll get on with it
Not sure if it would work, but what about an "M25" London loop line (Crossrail or Underground) -
Heathrow Airport - Sunbury - Kingston - Sutton - Croydon - Bromley - Lewisham - Greenwich - Barking - Walthamstow - Enfield - Barnet - Edgware - Harrow - Ruislip - Heathrow?
With branches to Epsom/Leatherhead, Dartford, Romford and Watford, as well as links to the major main lines out of London.
Heathrow Airport - Sunbury - Kingston - Sutton - Croydon - Bromley - Lewisham - Greenwich - Barking - Walthamstow - Enfield - Barnet - Edgware - Harrow - Ruislip - Heathrow?
With branches to Epsom/Leatherhead, Dartford, Romford and Watford, as well as links to the major main lines out of London.
Did it ever explain how it got into central London? I thought it didn’t come further in than Stratford, and anyone who knows Stratford knows that to build a new station there means demolishing a very large amount of real estate.
- Status