Is the S&C a basket case undeserving of regular public transport?

[Starmill]

I'm not against changing trains at Skipton myself, but I fear that it would damage the product for some people who value the through journey.

It would risk some people not using the service because they don't wish to change trains at Skipton to reach Leeds. However, as I said, it would gain more in permitting 3tph all day between Skipton and Leeds, providing the rolling stock is available, which is likely.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

Am I the only one who thinks the views from the S&C are hugely over-rated?

I always think the beauty of the S&C lies in it's engineering rather than the scenery.

In the 70s it's core traffic was long distance passengers even if only offering three trains per day and not designated as an intercity route, but the current stopping train service makes it unattractive as a connecting route for through journeys. A few (very) limited stop trains might help generate through business.

 

[chorleyjeff]

You assume speed is the only criterion, of course. If it's one of those long distance journeys where you've basically allowed all day for it, that it not at all a given.

Agreed. But if you simply want to go from West side of England to Scotland or return then the easiest and quickest way is probably best. Of course staying on your electric train and being diesel powered from Preston/Lostock Hall to Carlisle seems the best solution for the passenger but seemingly not the cheapest option.

 

[Ianno87]

Agreed. But if you simply want to go from West side of England to Scotland or return then the easiest and quickest way is probably best. Of course staying on your electric train and being diesel powered from Preston/Lostock Hall to Carlisle seems the best solution for the passenger but seemingly not the cheapest option.

Or it's so long winded and tortuous people think "never again!" Or get put off anyway by an unattractive fare (due to lack of capacity) or losing half their weekend by having to set off on Sunday much earlier.

 

[chorleyjeff]

I always think the beauty of the S&C lies in it's engineering rather than the scenery.

In the 70s it's core traffic was long distance passengers even if only offering three trains per day and not designated as an intercity route, but the current stopping train service makes it unattractive as a connecting route for through journeys. A few (very) limited stop trains might help generate through business.

In L&Y and Midland Railway days it was their main route to Scotland but could not compete for speed so tried to compensate with a more pleasant ride. But was never a highly utilised through pasenger route.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Apr 2021 ==

Or it's so long winded and tortuous people think "never again!" Or get put off anyway by an unattractive fare (due to lack of capacity) or losing half their weekend by having to set off on Sunday much earlier.

Is it actually much further from Preston to Carlisle via Settle ?
Maybe it feels tortuous and long winded because the line speed is so low compared to the WCML It's been a long time since there was no speed limit ( for the then underpowered steam engines ) and no, or very few, speed restrictions between Settle and Carlisle.

 

[6Gman]

But not everything has to be looked at through an economic lens. The Settle and Carlisle line is valuable from a romantic standpoint and is a bit of a cultural landmark in the UK.

It's status as a "cultural landmark" surely only dates from it surviving the threat of closure?

Prior to that it was a railway through the middle of nowhere known to few.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Apr 2021 ==

This is not what I am saying at all. What I am saying is that, given the majority of passengers' well-documented preference for staying on a diverted train rather than transferring to a cramped, crowded bus which cannot convey cycles, prams or buggies, the S & C could be used a few times a year for long distance diversions, as it has been for many years past. If Avanti and TPE, quite understandably,don't wish to pay for their traincrews to maintain the relevant route knowledge, I am sure that Northern crews from Blackburn, Carlisle and Skipton depots would be quite happy to earn a little Sunday overtime on route conducting duties - paid for by Network Rail as part of their engineering works budget.

Given that most services along the WCML (north) are now Pendolinos don't forget the pool of diesel locos (and diesel-trained drivers) you would need for this. Where would they come from?

 

[ac6000cw]

Am I the only one who thinks the views from the S&C are hugely over-rated?

No, you're not.

It's quite pleasant (when it's not raining or shrouded in low cloud so you can actually see the hills properly) but no more than that really, IMO.

Personally, I think the Scottish Highland lines have way better scenery, but everyone has their preferences...

(It was only built in the first place because the Midland Railway lost their battle to get better 'running powers' handling by the LNWR over Shap).

 

[Ianno87]

No, you're not.

It's quite pleasant (when it's not raining or shrouded in low cloud so you can actually see the hills properly) but no more than that really, IMO.

Ribblehead viaduct is a highlight, but the rest just perfectly pleasant and lovely. Not a patch of the likes of the West Highland lane.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

Ribblehead viaduct is a highlight, but the rest just perfectly pleasant and lovely. Not a patch of the likes of the West Highland lane.

That's it in a nutshell for me.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ribblehead viaduct is a highlight, but the rest just perfectly pleasant and lovely. Not a patch of the likes of the West Highland lane.

I'd probably say Shap is more spectacular, to be honest (it still takes my breath away, to be honest, and I do have a soft spot for spectacular proper mainlines like the classic Rhein route or the Montreux Riviera), as are a few bits of the south WCML at the right time of day, and there's little to beat emerging from the long tunnel into the moonscape of Blaenau Ffestiniog. But the S&C is just nice, ideal railtour or day out territory.

 

[yorksrob]

I think the section around Ais Gill following the valley is quite spectacular, as is the view down the valley towards Dent.

If you walk down from Dent station, the view of the route high above with the two viaducts in the distance is also quite breathtaking.

Waiting at Ribblehead at night and looking into the pitch black of Wernside is also quite moving.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

But the S&C is just nice, ideal railtour or day out territory.

The central section (between Skipton and Appleby) wins hands down for me. Would be ideal for a tourist rail charter service, IMHO.

 

[37424]

The S&C does have reasonable scenery and during last summer when I visited Ribblehead to get photo's of the staycation express there seemed to be plenty visiting just to see the viaduct, so it is a reasonable attraction, the scenery in the Highlands is much better but the S&C is much more accessable to a wide population in Northern England and the Midlands. If was up to me I would take a long hard look at its costs along with some other Northern routes and possibly close it, but that isn't going to happen as any attempt to close would no doubt attract every Rail Enthusiast and Tree hugger in the country along with the locals, and of course would be at odds with plans to reopen lines although some of them I don't agree with.

 

[yorksrob]

The S&C does have reasonable scenery and during last summer when I visited Ribblehead to get photo's of the staycation express there seemed to be plenty visiting just to see the viaduct, so it is a reasonable attraction, the scenery in the Highlands is much better but the S&C is much more accessable to a wide population in Northern England and the Midlands. If was up to me I would take a long hard look at its costs along with some other Northern routes and possibly close it, but that isn't going to happen as any attempt to close would no doubt attract every Rail Enthusiast and Tree hugger in the country along with the locals, and of course would be at odds with plans to reopen lines although some of them I don't agree with.

Out of interest, is it just Northern routes you would look at. What sort of network nationally would you envisage ?

 

[37424]

Out of interest, is it just Northern routes you would look at. What sort of network nationally would you envisage ?

No I would look at all routes and I wouldn't have set figure for the size of network but I would try and take a good look at the heaviest loss makers and the benefit verses cost they bring, and other than the East West rail link I'm not overly convinced of the need to reopen any other lines at this time, I would rather see money spent on electrification of the major routes rather than opening new lines and any saving made by closing high loss makers.

 

[yorksrob]

No I would look at all routes and I wouldn't have set figure for the size of network but I would try and take a good look at the heaviest loss makers and the benefit verses cost they bring, and other than the East West rail link I'm not overly convinced of the need to reopen any other lines at this time.

That's a view.

I would personally prefer them to look at the overall cost of the railway industry, rather than trying to find services/lines to prune.

It's worth noting that the network was more or less the same size as it is now when the cost of running it was much lower 30 - 40 years ago, so the high fixed costs of the railway are not as a result of individual lines.

 

[gerryuk]

I am sure Michael Portillo said that his biggest achievement when he was a minister, was to save the S&C from closure. Was there a plan during the Thatcher years to close it?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

I am sure Michael Portillo said that his biggest achievement when he was a minister, was to save the S&C from closure. Was there a plan during the Thatcher years to close it?

Wasn't that c. 1984, one of the justifications for closure being the supposed cost of repairing/renovating Ribblehead viaduct? (Later demonstrated to be significantly over inflated).

 

[Bletchleyite]

No I would look at all routes and I wouldn't have set figure for the size of network but I would try and take a good look at the heaviest loss makers and the benefit verses cost they bring, and other than the East West rail link I'm not overly convinced of the need to reopen any other lines at this time, I would rather see money spent on electrification of the major routes rather than opening new lines and any saving made by closing high loss makers.

Best shut some city commuter routes, then. Because of the high level of service required for only a short period of the day, and because of the deep discount season tickets provide, these tend to lose an awful lot more overall than branch lines and the likes, give or take the annual rebuild of the Conwy Valley. (The S&C has required such a thing once of course).

 

[37424]

Best shut some city commuter routes, then. Because of the high level of service required for only a short period of the day, and because of the deep discount season tickets provide, these tend to lose an awful lot more overall than branch lines and the likes, give or take the annual rebuild of the Conwy Valley. (The S&C has required such a thing once of course).

Obviously it likely isnt practical to shut commuter routes into many major cities, and if there long term adoption of work from home then having to cater for less of a peak may reduce the costs of some of these lines.

As far the S&C goes I have never been really convinced that both the S&C and the Carnforth route are needed and one or the other ought to go.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Obviously it likely isnt practical to shut commuter routes into many major cities, and if there long term adoption of work from home then having to cater for less of a peak may reduce the costs of some of these lines.

It wasn't a serious suggestion, just to point out that the lines that get blamed for frittering away money don't really fritter away that much money because they mostly just require a unit, driver and guard, maybe a signaller or two and a bit of fettling once every few years. In railway terms they are very cheap operations.

As far the S&C goes I have never been really convinced that both the S&C and the Carnforth route are needed and one or the other ought to go.

I would say that (because of the relative lack of tourist traffic due to the scenery being less good and it being less well-known) the Bentham line is a lot less useful. But why close either? It doesn't cost an awful lot to keep it running in the scheme of railway things.

 

[yorksrob]

I am sure Michael Portillo said that his biggest achievement when he was a minister, was to save the S&C from closure. Was there a plan during the Thatcher years to close it?

Wasn't that c. 1984, one of the justifications for closure being the supposed cost of repairing/renovating Ribblehead viaduct? (Later demonstrated to be significantly over inflated).

Yes and yes. There was a long wrangle over closure in the 1980's.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Apr 2021 ==

It wasn't a serious suggestion, just to point out that the lines that get blamed for frittering away money don't really fritter away that much money because they mostly just require a unit, driver and guard, maybe a signaller or two and a bit of fettling once every few years. In railway terms they are very cheap operations.



I would say that (because of the relative lack of tourist traffic due to the scenery being less good and it being less well-known) the Bentham line is a lot less useful. But why close either? It doesn't cost an awful lot to keep it running in the scheme of railway things.

Indeed, why close either.

As a passenger and regular user of both routes, I don't believe that I should be penalised by having my service closed, because the railway industry hasn't kept control of costs. The industry needs to adress its overall cost base, rather than shutting routes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

FWIW, the two routes with the highest subsidy per passenger mile, last time I checked, were by a quite substantial margin Island Line (OK, that is a classic basket case branch line), but more notably Merseyrail, which "fritters away" far, far more money than any of the branch lines connecting to it (and because it has many more passengers, a far larger actual sum than Island Line, let alone the S&C or Little North Western or whatever).

 

[daodao]

Obviously it likely isnt practical to shut commuter routes into many major cities, and if there long term adoption of work from home then having to cater for less of a peak may reduce the costs of some of these lines.

As far the S&C goes I have never been really convinced that both the S&C and the Carnforth route are needed and one or the other ought to go.

If a curve is built near Carnforth to join the WCML and little NW lines, through traffic from the West Riding to Carlisle (and beyond) could be catered for, and stops at Oxenholme and Penrith would be more useful than calls at existing stations on the S&C line, which serve tiny communities. While I do not wish the S&C line to close, its retention is not essential, nor is retention of the Clitheroe-Hellifield line. A stub siding could be kept to serve Arclow quarry.

Sadly from a rail perspective, over the last 12 months (with full Brexit and the financial consequences of the Covid crisis) railway finances have become much more challenging and some pruning may be unavoidable. In such a climate, expensive-to-maintain lightly used (often rural) lines, not serving significant populations, are particularly vulnerable. The West Highland extension, Kyle of Lochalsh and Conwy valley lines are similarly at risk.

 

[yorksrob]

If a curve is built near Carnforth to join the WCML and little NW lines, through traffic from the West Riding to Carlisle (and beyond) could be catered for, and stops at Oxenholme and Penrith would be more useful than calls at existing stations on the S$C line, which serve tiny communities. While I do not wish the S&C line to close, its retention is not essential, nor is retention of the Clitheroe-Hellifield line. A stub siding could be kept to serve Arclow quarry.

Sadly from a rail perspective, over the last 12 months (with full Brexit and the financial consequences of the Covid crisis) railway finances have become much more challenging and some pruning may be unavoidable. In such a climate, expensive-to-maintain lightly used (often rural) lines, not serving significant populations, are particularly vulnerable. The West Highland extension, Kyle of Lochalsh and Conwy valley lines are similarly at risk.

The fact remains that if passenger numbers return to the levels expected post pandemic, the railway will still have more passengers than in the mid 1980's/early 1990's when the network was largely as it is now. That means that it is the railway industry's overall cost base that needs to be improved, not individual route pruning.

 

[Wolfie]

The fact remains that if passenger numbers return to the levels expected post pandemic, the railway will still have more passengers than in the mid 1980's/early 1990's when the network was largely as it is now. That means that it is the railway industry's overall cost base that needs to be improved, not individual route pruning.

Your last sentence represents a mealy-mouthed way of demanding continued cross-subsudies for economically unviable parts of the network. It also embeds previous decisions, no matter how flawed, and indeed in my view makes future reopenings less likely. If you know that if you try and it doesn't work you will be lumbered forever then not trying looks a better option.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Your last sentence represents a mealy-mouthed way of demanding continued cross-subsudies for economically unviable parts of the network. It also embeds previous decisions, no matter how flawed, and indeed in my view makes future reopenings less likely. If you know that if you try and it doesn't work you will be lumbered forever then not trying looks a better option.

So you're up for Serpell? There are parts of the network, e.g. Merseyrail, that lose far, far more money than the odd branch line.

The Conwy Valley I get because of the costly annual rebuild, but that doesn't happen to most branches.

 

[Wolfie]

So you're up for Serpell? There are parts of the network, e.g. Merseyrail, that lose far, far more money than the odd branch line.

The Conwy Valley I get because of the costly annual rebuild, but that doesn't happen to most branches.

I'm not. I was deliberately positing the quite likely response to any attempt to ignore economic realities. It certainly should never be easy to close a line but the option to do so subject to procedures must remain.

 

[A0]

So you're up for Serpell? There are parts of the network, e.g. Merseyrail, that lose far, far more money than the odd branch line.

The Conwy Valley I get because of the costly annual rebuild, but that doesn't happen to most branches.

With Merseyrail there is a valid question as to why the Liverpool area should receive such a heavy subsidy when compared to other, similar sized, cities.

Even if you take the wider "Metropolitan County" populations, Merseyside's only fractionally bigger than South Yorks and is much smaller than West Yorks, Gtr Manchester or West Mids.

 

[37424]

If a curve is built near Carnforth to join the WCML and little NW lines, through traffic from the West Riding to Carlisle (and beyond) could be catered for, and stops at Oxenholme and Penrith would be more useful than calls at existing stations on the S&C line, which serve tiny communities. While I do not wish the S&C line to close, its retention is not essential, nor is retention of the Clitheroe-Hellifield line. A stub siding could be kept to serve Arclow quarry.

Sadly from a rail perspective, over the last 12 months (with full Brexit and the financial consequences of the Covid crisis) railway finances have become much more challenging and some pruning may be unavoidable. In such a climate, expensive-to-maintain lightly used (often rural) lines, not serving significant populations, are particularly vulnerable. The West Highland extension, Kyle of Lochalsh and Conwy valley lines are similarly at risk.

I suspect a curve would be highly expensive to build for such a rural route, the whole thing is academic anyway it would be very difficult for any government to propose a significant closure of the rail network while at the same time proposing to reopen other parts of the Rail Network. I have my doubts Okehampton will be much more viable than the S&C so you can not really reopen one while at the same time proposing to close the other.

While the Scottish routes will come under the Scottish Government anyway and I doubt they will be wanting to close any lines while they are pushing for Independence.