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

[yorksrob]

Just challenging your claim that the line serves "the entire West Riding of Yorkshire", which is optimistic to say the least.

It would be overly optomistic to say that the whole of West Yorkshire uses the route. However, I certainly wouldn't be surprised if a large proportion of passengers on the train North of Settle are from West Yorkshire. That's certainly the case from my anecdotal observation - most are on there from WYorks with a fair chunk getting on at Skipton and Settle as well.

I would say that my anecdotal observations hold rather more water than basing the claim that the route is a basket case on the size of the populations of Settle and Appleby (as one poster on here is trying to) thus ignoring the existance of passengers from South of Settle.

If you didn't personally use the line, would you make exactly the same arguments you've been using?

A lot of your assertions can't be disproven without access to the ticketing database (which is strictly controlled) and conducting a full piece of route analysis. That's a 5-figure fee from a consultant. It's not surprising people posting in their spare time aren't showing you the case. But just because you haven't been shown the data doesn't mean your experiences of personal travel are automatically the full and accurate story.

Well you haven't even defined what a "basket case" is, and as we don't know that and we don't know the detailed analysis anyway, we're not much further.

If your data is telling you that most of the trains on the route run around empty, your data is wrong. I'm not going to take vague assertions from unpublished consultants reports that the trains are empty when this contradicts my own experience.

If I didn't personally use the line I probably wouldn't have had the experience of sharing the train to back up my views. However, I would have more faith in the observations of regular passengers than of vague and unsubstantiated consultants reports for which we don't even know the terms of reference.

 

[daodao]

If I didn't personally use the line I probably wouldn't have had the experience of sharing the train to back up my views.

You seem to use the line on summer weekends, when it is likely to be busy. That is not representative of overall usage. Anecdotes are not evidence.

The justification for maintaining a rail line needs to be based on the population who actually live close to stations on the line, not occasional visitors from afar.

Objective assessment is likely to show that the S&C line is a basket case undeserving of regular public transport.

 

[yorksrob]

You seem to use the line on summer weekends, when it is likely to be busy. That is not representative of overall usage. Anecdotes are not evidence.

I do use the line on summer weekends.

I also use the line on summer weekdays, winter weekdays and winter weekends. The trains are less busy at these times than on summer weekends as you would expect. They are nowhere near empty though.

 

[Journeyman]

I do use the line on summer weekends.

I also use the line on summer weekdays, winter weekdays and winter weekends. The trains are less busy at these times than on summer weekends as you would expect. They are nowhere near empty though.

Does "nowhere near empty" equal "small number which could be much more economically transported by bus"?

I'd wager it does.

 

[yorksrob]

Does "nowhere near empty" equal "small number which could be much more economically transported by bus"?

I'd wager it does.

Then you'd lose (aside from whether the terrain and length of journey are suited to a bus in the first place).

I find that on summer saturdays a 2 carriage 158 is often crowded for some services. For other times of year, the 158 is perfectly adequate.

T

 

[NoMorePacers]

A question that doesn't seem to have really been answered yet:

What actually constitutes a "basket case"?

 

[billio]

"Plenty". More warm, vague words without actual numbers.

Is there an actual number to put to this - what proportion of the population of the West Riding actually use the S&C trains north of Skipton, say, at least once per year for any purpose?

It would be a shame to close a railway like the S&C where the local population is so keen on using the local railway. Garsdale has a population of around 200. I remember about 30 of them boarding a train one wet, extremely cold mid-October Thursday. Oh well, maybe they didn't all live in Garsdale.

 

[NorthOxonian]

It would be a shame to close a railway like the S&C where the local population is so keen on using the local railway. Garsdale has a population of around 200. I remember about 30 of them boarding a train one wet, extremely cold mid-October Thursday. Oh well, maybe they didn't all live in Garsdale.

I wouldn't have thought so - Garsdale seems to mainly serve as the railhead for Hawes. There is (was?) even a connecting community bus service - pretty remarkable considering how rural the area is!

 

[Taunton]

Being one of the few (possibly the only one on the train in question) who recently used the S&C for a mainstream business trip, it was instructive. Starting from London, I had a morning meeting in Doncaster, then moving on to one in Carlisle the next morning.

Our corporate travel agent (it was a business trip, don't forget) couldn't find a sensible single transaction for this, and even when I asked for advice on this forum there were multiple and conflicting suggestions. In the end I was given three singles, which came to more than the previous week's plane trip from London to Aberdeen and back.

The elapsed timings were no different routing via Leeds than if I had gone via Newcastle, this was my backstop in cased I didn't make the sole afternoon S&C connection, in fact I wonder if that's how the Doncaster to Carlisle ticket revenue is actually split.

The S&C early afternoon was a two-car 158. One coach was wholly reserved for a coach trip, who were just doing Hellifield to Appleby, but of course the coach was reserved throughout. This was portrayed in their brochure as an "environmental" way to see the Pennines, but as their road coach drove empty in parallel there was no environmental contribution at all! There were standees in the remaining coach, who being above the windowline just got a view of the adjacent ballast. I doubt they'll be back.

One of the biggest disconnects the rail industry has is while there is huge spending on the infrastructure (how much did the S&C embankment collapse south of Carlisle cost to repair?) the TOC in contrast runs an absolute minimalist operation which has no relationship to the usage and provides a quite unwelcoming aura.

 

[zwk500]

Well you haven't even defined what a "basket case" is, and as we don't know that and we don't know the detailed analysis anyway, we're not much further.

If your data is telling you that most of the trains on the route run around empty, your data is wrong. I'm not going to take vague assertions from unpublished consultants reports that the trains are empty when this contradicts my own experience.

For me, a basket case is one where operating the service costs more than it gives to the communities (this is quite a vague standard to use) and the operational restrictions it places on connected lines have a negative total effect on the railway (e.g. by running a 2-car DMU in a path that could have a 4-car EMU).

I don't have access to the data. I'd love to know what it says. And you misunderstand my point about consultants' reports - there are no unpublished reports making vauge assertions without evidence, because if a consultant did so nobody would ever ask them to write another one. If they'd been written they would have the data in them, and then published to the relevant stakeholders.

If I didn't personally use the line I probably wouldn't have had the experience of sharing the train to back up my views. However, I would have more faith in the observations of regular passengers than of vague and unsubstantiated consultants reports for which we don't even know the terms of reference.

Unfortunately reports like that aren't matters of faith but of evidence. It's telling that you assume the consultant's reports would come back with negative results.

FWIW, here's a Rail Delivery Group-commissioned report (from 2015) that looks at the S&C in example 4 (Pdf page 14, numbered page 12):

https://communityrail.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2016-05_socially_enterprising_railway.pdf

3 key points from it:
- The S&C Rail development company (a community partnership to promote the S&C) had a turnover of £450,000pa
- Group travel totalled to 20,000 passengers a year
- Overall passenger growth in 2015 was +11%.

If you want to defend the S&C, a quick google would give you some defensible numbers to answer those who claim you can't stand on the specifics.

 

[yorksrob]

For me, a basket case is one where operating the service costs more than it gives to the communities (this is quite a vague standard to use) and the operational restrictions it places on connected lines have a negative total effect on the railway (e.g. by running a 2-car DMU in a path that could have a 4-car EMU).

I don't have access to the data. I'd love to know what it says. And you misunderstand my point about consultants' reports - there are no unpublished reports making vauge assertions without evidence, because if a consultant did so nobody would ever ask them to write another one. If they'd been written they would have the data in them, and then published to the relevant stakeholders.

Unfortunately reports like that aren't matters of faith but of evidence. It's telling that you assume the consultant's reports would come back with negative results.

FWIW, here's a Rail Delivery Group-commissioned report (from 2015) that looks at the S&C in example 4 (Pdf page 14, numbered page 12):

https://communityrail.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2016-05_socially_enterprising_railway.pdf

3 key points from it:
- The S&C Rail development company (a community partnership to promote the S&C) had a turnover of £450,000pa
- Group travel totalled to 20,000 passengers a year
- Overall passenger growth in 2015 was +11%.

If you want to defend the S&C, a quick google would give you some defensible numbers to answer those who claim you can't stand on the specifics.

It's not telling of any such thing - you were alluding to consultants reports being negative.

I've no doubt that any report giving proper weight to the community benefit of the route will come back positive.

As I've said previously, I'm a mere passenger on the route and have no need to read reports because I see the benefit that it brings with my own eyes. It's for the naysayers supporting the central assertion of this thread to prove otherwise and they've not come up with anything substantial so far.

 

[BayPaul]

A question that doesn't seem to have really been answered yet:

What actually constitutes a "basket case"?

It has been suggested above that it's a Line where the passenger loadings are such that the rail service could be replaced by a bus. This seems a sensible definition to me. A loss making line that carries lots of passengers (eg Merseyrail) really isn't a basket case, but a rural line with a bigger environmental footprint per passenger than a bus is hard to justify.
Not sure whether S+C is in this category.

 

[Glenn1969]

Trouble is by Southern based people ALL of Northern's area is viewed as a financial basket case because of the high level of subsidy required

Which is why we have spent the last 30 years with no growth franchises and infrastructure that is increasingly known to be not fit for purpose

So yes in their eyes S&C probably is a basket case. Remember how close it came to closure in the mid 80s

 

[52290]

Trouble is by Southern based people ALL of Northern's area is viewed as a financial basket case because of the high level of subsidy required

Which is why we have spent the last 30 years with no growth franchises and infrastructure that is increasingly known to be not fit for purpose

So yes in their eyes S&C probably is a basket case. Remember how close it came to closure in the mid 80s

I know Mr Portillo thinks he saved the S & C from closure but I think I saved it. When the closure proposal was announced I went to see my local MP at his surgery in Leyland. This was held in the Conservative Club and my dad was a member. The minder who let me in was a local headmaster, and a drinker in the Tory club. I think he whispered in the MP's ear, " It's Walter's lad on about railways". The MP, by the way, was Robert Atkins, a friend of John Major who was PM. So I told Atkins how people came from all over the world to travel on the S & C and how BR were purposely running the line down. He totally agreed with me and said he would have a word with John about it ( they used to go watching cricket together).
That's the only time I've ever been to see my MP.

 

[6Gman]

It has been suggested above that it's a Line where the passenger loadings are such that the rail service could be replaced by a bus. This seems a sensible definition to me. A loss making line that carries lots of passengers (eg Merseyrail) really isn't a basket case, but a rural line with a bigger environmental footprint per passenger than a bus is hard to justify.
Not sure whether S+C is in this category.

A definition I would challenge.

The Crewe-Shrewsbury stopper, normally a 153, rarely carries more than 30 passengers in my experience. However a bus alternative would be painfully circuitous and slow.

(I appreciate that this is a service rather than a route, but the general point stands. The people from Llandeilo on a shopping trip to Shrewsbury I met would still be on their way home by bus! *)


* Exaggeration for effect.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Does "nowhere near empty" equal "small number which could be much more economically transported by bus"?

I'd wager it does.

Because of the railway's high cost base, any number can be more economically transported by bus.

 

[zwk500]

It's not telling of any such thing - you were alluding to consultants reports being negative.

I've no doubt that any report giving proper weight to the community benefit of the route will come back positive.

What's 'proper weight'? Asking out of interest, because it seems fairly fundamental to the whole question of what is and isn't a basket case

As I've said previously, I'm a mere passenger on the route and have no need to read reports because I see the benefit that it brings with my own eyes. It's for the naysayers supporting the central assertion of this thread to prove otherwise and they've not come up with anything substantial so far.

Is this substantive enough for you?

From the 2008 Network Rail Route Utilisation Study: https://www.ribblevalley.gov.uk/cor...d_cumbria_Route_Utilisation_Strategy_2008.pdf

Of 32,400 daily trips within the Lancs & Cumbria Area only 2,200 used the S&C. Of course, that means that every day 2,200 passengers would need to be accomodated by other means if it were to close (or wouldn't travel at all). Of course this was 15 years ago, so how the market has grown and changed is still to be precisely determined.

I repeat - I'm not spending long Googling these publicly available documents. The data is available to put together a case for the S&C.

 

[yorksrob]

What's 'proper weight'? Asking out of interest, because it seems fairly fundamental to the whole question of what is and isn't a basket case

Is this substantive enough for you?

From the 2008 Network Rail Route Utilisation Study: https://www.ribblevalley.gov.uk/cor...d_cumbria_Route_Utilisation_Strategy_2008.pdf
View attachment 94584
Of 32,400 daily trips within the Lancs & Cumbria Area only 2,200 used the S&C. Of course, that means that every day 2,200 passengers would need to be accomodated by other means if it were to close (or wouldn't travel at all). Of course this was 15 years ago, so how the market has grown and changed is still to be precisely determined.

I repeat - I'm not spending long Googling these publicly available documents. The data is available to put together a case for the S&C.

You ask "what's a proper weight" I ask "what's a basket case".

What exactly does it matter if only "2,200 daily trips in Cumbria and Lancashire out of 32,400" are on the S&C ?

If a smaller arbitrary boundary than Lancashire & Cumbria were chosen, the figure would look better. If Lancashire &Cumbria had more railways, the figure would look worse.

It's hard to express just how meaningless that statistic is when trying to establish the value of the S&C to the community or the wider economy.

 

[zwk500]

You ask "what's a proper weight" I ask "what's a basket case".

I'm trying to work out what a basket case is!

What exactly does it matter if only "2,200 daily trips in Cumbria and Lancashire out of 32,400" are on the S&C ?

It matters because the railway has only finite resources, and the S&C is being compared to other, equally community-based lines in that table.

If a smaller arbitrary boundary than Lancashire & Cumbria were chosen, the figure would look better. If Lancashire &Cumbria had more railways, the figure would look worse.

It wouldn't make the figure any more or less than 2,200.

It's hard to express just how meaningless that statistic is when trying to establish the value of the S&C to the community or the wider economy.

The funny thing is I thought 2,200 daily trips would be taken by you as evidence that the train service is good value against alternative provision like a bus. It's far from meaningless, it demonstrates that 75% of traffic on the S&C originates outside the Local area (e.g. West Yorkshire, which you were pressed for evidence on - well here it is, provided for you!). This is very informative, because we can surmise that this traffic is people coming for leisure travel (the key attraction of the S&C), therefore potentially spending money in the local area such as Kendal, Settle and Appleby. It enables other work to establish the value of the tourist market to the area, and the train to the tourist market.

You challenged me for data. I provided 2 tables of easily accessible data that told a far more positive story than I expected. I did not conceal this, but instead posted it to help you answer some of your critics. There are cases to be made for the S&C out of this data. You have instead buried your head in your own image of the line and been extremely dismissive and rude towards somebody who did as you asked and ended up, to their surprise, supporting your case! It is pointless to engage with you any further.

 

[Peterthegreat]

The S & C needs to be put into perspective. According to ORR's latest (pre Covid) figures some 350,000 annual journeys were made to/from intermediate stations between Settle (inc) and Armathwaite (inc).
This is more than:-
The whole network north of Inverness
The West Highland between Crianlarich and Mallaig
All stations west of Carmarthen
The Newquay, Looe and Gunnislake branches COMBINED.
The Cambrian north of Dovey Jn

 

[BayPaul]

A definition I would challenge.

The Crewe-Shrewsbury stopper, normally a 153, rarely carries more than 30 passengers in my experience. However a bus alternative would be painfully circuitous and slow.

(I appreciate that this is a service rather than a route, but the general point stands. The people from Llandeilo on a shopping trip to Shrewsbury I met would still be on their way home by bus! *)


* Exaggeration for effect.

Fair point. What if we made it 'a single bus with a similar journey time'?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Fair point. What if we made it 'a single bus with a similar journey time'?

That's not realistic, though. Even a 50mph railway will usually give you a faster journey time than a bus, because (even if you have the same number of stops) the bus has to speed up and slow down to negotiate things on the road.

I don't know what it is now but the linespeed of Ormskirk-Preston was long 40mph. The train takes about half an hour, the bus takes an hour or thereabouts.

To be fair, though, you'd not run a bus from Leeds to Carlisle via Settle and Appleby. On the assumption that we'd not be closing the commuter EMU service to Skipton, you'd probably be running one Skipton-Settle-Ingleton-Lancaster, and another Kirkby Stephen-Appleby-Penrith or somesuch. Horton, Ribblehead, Dent and the 3 northernmost stations probably wouldn't justify anything on two bases - Ingleton would become the public transport place to start/finish the Three Peaks rather than Horton (no reason to prefer Horton now the cafe has closed so you can't stamp your card, and in any case people record it on Strava now, not punch cards), Ribblehead would be nothing without trains to gawp at on the viaduct, Dent is in the middle of nowhere half way up a mountain, and the 3 northernmost stations are about as big as the population around New Lane and Bescar Lane and so barely justify any public transport at all.

(As an aside I wonder why those three got stations reopened and Long Marton not, it's the same size)

 

[BayPaul]

That's not realistic, though. Even a 50mph railway will usually give you a faster journey time than a bus, because (even if you have the same number of stops) the bus has to speed up and slow down to negotiate things on the road.

I don't know what it is now but the linespeed of Ormskirk-Preston was long 40mph. The train takes about half an hour, the bus takes an hour or thereabouts.

A similar journey time, not necessarily equal. I think you have previously mentioned the Conwy Valley line as being in this situation, Liskeard - Looe is only 15 minutes by road, and the Far North line is considerably slower than the bus as far as I remember, so these could all potentially qualify for this definition. OK if the bus went via every intermediate stop it might be slower than the train, but most of these stops could be most economically served by taxis, so I don't think that needs to be part of the bus routing.

 

[D6130]

That's not realistic, though. Even a 50mph railway will usually give you a faster journey time than a bus, because (even if you have the same number of stops) the bus has to speed up and slow down to negotiate things on the road.

I don't know what it is now but the linespeed of Ormskirk-Preston was long 40mph. The train takes about half an hour, the bus takes an hour or thereabouts.

To be fair, though, you'd not run a bus from Leeds to Carlisle via Settle and Appleby. On the assumption that we'd not be closing the commuter EMU service to Skipton, you'd probably be running one Skipton-Settle-Ingleton-Lancaster, and another Kirkby Stephen-Appleby-Penrith or somesuch. Horton, Ribblehead, Dent and the 3 northernmost stations probably wouldn't justify anything on two bases - Ingleton would become the public transport place to start/finish the Three Peaks rather than Horton (no reason to prefer Horton now the cafe has closed so you can't stamp your card, and in any case people record it on Strava now, not punch cards), Ribblehead would be nothing without trains to gawp at on the viaduct, Dent is in the middle of nowhere half way up a mountain, and the 3 northernmost stations are about as big as the population around New Lane and Bescar Lane and so barely justify any public transport at all.

(As an aside I wonder why those three got stations reopened and Long Marton not, it's the same size)

By the time the intermediate stations were reopened for the DalesRail services in the mid-'seventies, Long Marton's platforms had unfortunately been demolished, whereas those at the reopened stations were still intact - although very much substandard. However Little Salkeld and Cumwhinton also still retained their platforms, but were not reopened. However there was the, possibly apocryphal, tale of a Leeds driver who got slightly lost returning from Carlisle one night in the late 'eighties and accidentally stopped at Little Salkeld thinking that it was Langwathby!

 

[yorksrob]

I'm trying to work out what a basket case is!

It matters because the railway has only finite resources, and the S&C is being compared to other, equally community-based lines in that table.

It wouldn't make the figure any more or less than 2,200.

The funny thing is I thought 2,200 daily trips would be taken by you as evidence that the train service is good value against alternative provision like a bus. It's far from meaningless, it demonstrates that 75% of traffic on the S&C originates outside the Local area (e.g. West Yorkshire, which you were pressed for evidence on - well here it is, provided for you!). This is very informative, because we can surmise that this traffic is people coming for leisure travel (the key attraction of the S&C), therefore potentially spending money in the local area such as Kendal, Settle and Appleby. It enables other work to establish the value of the tourist market to the area, and the train to the tourist market.

You challenged me for data. I provided 2 tables of easily accessible data that told a far more positive story than I expected. I did not conceal this, but instead posted it to help you answer some of your critics. There are cases to be made for the S&C out of this data. You have instead buried your head in your own image of the line and been extremely dismissive and rude towards somebody who did as you asked and ended up, to their surprise, supporting your case! It is pointless to engage with you any further.

Apologies - I'm not sure how the statistic quoted demonstrates that 75% of traffic on the S&C is from outside the area. It certainly seems like realistic level from my observations.

The statistic seems to be saying that of the 32,400 trips in Cumbria and Lancashire only 2,200 were on the S&C, with the remainder presumably being on other routes such as the WCML and the Cumbrian Coast etc. I just don't see the relevance of that - there isn't a proportion of journeys in Lancashire and Cumbria that the S&C ought to be carrying to my knowledge.

That said, a statistic that 75% of traffic on the S&C originates from elsewhere would indeed tell us rather more and would be more positive than the station statistics quoted previously. I just don't see how you get that from what you've quoted.

Apologies for being dismissive - I'm naturally suspicious of the motivations of someone setting out to prove the proposition of the original post, even if they do decide that the argument doesn't add up.

Further apologies - I didn't see the table last night as I was on my mobile phone. It does indeed provide the 75% statistic you mention and it is quite useful.

 

[zwk500]

Apologies for being dismissive - I'm naturally suspicious of the motivations of someone setting out to prove the proposition of the original post, even if they do decide that the argument doesn't add up.

Further apologies - I didn't see the table last night as I was on my mobile phone. It does indeed provide the 75% statistic you mention and it is quite useful.

Thank you for looking a second time.

 

[yoyothehobo]

My personal experience on the S and C varies from getting summer sunday trains that are standing room only at Ribblehead, to getting the first train out of Leeds to Carlisle at around 6am and being one of 3 people on it (to get to Carlisle for 9am). I must note that the early train did cater for school children at the stations north of Appleby presumably going to a high school in Carlisle.

Living in Leeds, the only time I would use the S and C would be to go to Carlisle (or hiking). If i am getting the train to Scotland i will use the ECML, as i would suspect most people from South of Leeds. It is actually quicker for me to get to Carlisle at most times by getting the train to Preston and changing there. The only reason i do use the S and C is that it is generally considerably cheaper than using either the WCML or ECML with regards to getting advance singles etc...

What is a plus about the line is the friends of the S and C who provide a trolley service on some services between Hellifield and Appleby.

I honestly don't think it is quite a basket case, it would make very little to the majority of travellers except those between Skipton and Carlisle should the line ever close, but it is as much part of the landscape and that part of the dales and lets be honest, anyone who says they prefer driving along the A65 to sitting on the train is a masochist.

I guess the main proof of the pudding would be if there was say a major infrastructure failure, such as the complete collapse of Blea Moor Tunnel which would require a full rebore, which be at a guess the best part of £1 billion to do, would it be rebuilt, or would the line be curtailed and thats the mystery of it all.

 

[Neptune]

anyone who says they prefer driving along the A65 to sitting on the train is a masochist.

The A65 is a fantastic driving road. I love it.

To be fair it only follows the S&C from Skipton to Settle so it isn’t really a decent comparison.

 

[paul1609]

For us Marshlink users its interesting to see the investment lavished on these rural lines in the North, Wales and Scotland when all we on the south coast suffer is broken promises on electrification, more coaches and line speed increases:
Marshlink ORR station figures;
Rye 474,000
Ham St 92,000
Appledore 40,000
Three Oaks 12,600
Winchelsea 9,000

 

[D6130]

I guess the main proof of the pudding would be if there was say a major infrastructure failure, such as the complete collapse of Blea Moor Tunnel which would require a full rebore, which be at a guess the best part of £1 billion to do, would it be rebuilt, or would the line be curtailed and thats the mystery of it all.

There was a major infrastructure failure five or six years ago when a large section of the hillside below the line collapsed at Eden Brows, North of Armathwaite and it was repaired at huge expense. If there were to be another major infrastructure failure in the future, it would almost certainly occur on the Kirkby Stephen-Carlisle section, where the soft red Cumbrian sandstone - which can almost become liquid after heavy rain - has caused numerous landslips, both above and below the line, since its opening in 1876. At least three of those landslips - at Mallerstang, Crosby Garrett and Little Salkeld, have caused train derailments and/or collisions - the former sadly involving a staff fatality. The main point of vunerability on the Southern Section of the line is, of course, Ribblehead Viaduct, which will need regular heavy maintenance due to its size, position and the prevailing weather conditions. Despite all these potential problems and the undoubted financial losses that the line's passenger services incur, I can't help but feel that the government (DfT) and therefore, by default, Network Rail regard the line as a long-term strategic neccessity to be maintained in case of a major blockage of either the ECML or WCML.