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!
Do any of these produce sufficient volume to justify even 1 train per week to a single distribution centre? Or will it be cheaper for them to continue with road haulage to an existing railhead?
At which point you are facing completely the wrong way and would need to continue on to Water Orton, loop up via the Sutton Park Line, Aston and Stechford then run through Cov to get to Northampton.
1) The road haulage options in the southern direction are super limited. 1 train every couple of days of mixed goods is possible, but not one solely from one factory.
2) an oversight from me. Fair point.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Buxton, Chapel & New Mills already have access to the MML via Chinley, so that lack of access can not be the reason why these companies haven't put together a new freight route. New Mills has three rail lines running through it, with one running across Swizzels' back door - yet they've never applied to have a siding installed - what makes you think a rail head with MML access in Buxton would suddenly get them to consider rail distribution?
It's a long way round to the Midlands and South via Chinley, down the only south transpennine link (Woodhead being dead as a duck for decades at least means this is only going to get busier).
The rail line past Swizzels in New Mills is highly, highly unsuitable for a railhead because of the high line speed and position on the key InterCity south transpennine link. The others are hard to reach, because of New Mills' crap geography for transport.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
.....about 10 route miles....Chapel gets a proper station...lots of new journeys possible....Hazel Grove a delightfully direct way to Sheffield from Buxton...if you stop the fast trains at HAZ (along with their other stops), can they still be "fasts?"
Lots of new journeys possible - not really. Chapel gets a new station - good in an ideal world, but not feasible really. I would agree with you that it should be reopened at some point, but it's just not a priority and, yes, interesting thoughts!
They will still be fast services even if they stop at Hazel Grove; only slight issue would be keeping to existing paths, a further linespeed upgrade elsewhere would help (Stockport to HG was recently upgraded).
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
If the goal is to improve rail access to the Peak District, how about:
1) Build a station at the end of surviving section of the Ashbourne line. This would provide easy access to Tissington trail for rail passengers and a car park next to A515. A station could be built in the south of Buxton too.
2) Build a station around the site of Blackwell Mill, just off the freight line. This would provide easy access to Monsall trail for rail passengers and a car park next to A6.
3) Close current Buxton railway station and build a station at Charles Street to serve both lines.
If both the Hindlow (Ashbourne line) and Blackwell Mill stations were served by a 15 min frequency shuttle, it's possible - but relocating Buxton station is craziness, would cost tens of millions at least.
A through service is utterly infeasible - which limits the appeal of Hindlow/Blackwell Mill, and the unreliability plus snail-like pace of the Buxton service means that you're not going to get many customers coming from the north for over an hour to reach Buxton.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Just to add further remarks onto the comments about the TP service;
- Most of the passenger flow on this service is between Bakewell and Derby. I've known frequently Buxton-Bakewell to carry no more than a handful of passengers.
- There was once earlier and later buses along the full route back in the day, I'm assuming they were axed due to low passenger numbers.
- The long journey time between Buxton and Matlock is partly due to the indirect route into Buxton yes, but it's also timetabled rather conservatively. It's not uncommon to be waiting 5 minutes at Taddington, then another 3 at Ashford-in-the-Water, then another 5 at Bakewell, then be struggling to keep to time until somehow managing to be waiting in Belper for 10 minutes.
- The vehicles are unfortunately in poor condition, however they're fast approaching 600k miles on a chassis that is essentially a glorified Dennis Dart. They've been worked extremely hard, and as any Derbyshire resident or frequent visitor will tell you, the state of the roads (especially to the south of Buxton) are in incredibly poor condition.
Agreed with your remarks, problem is with the Transpeak is that the bus will never be an attractive option for most visitors, so it needs locals to take and therefore to be routed via Harpur Hill to get passengers into Buxton from there at least.
One thing that could increase any public transport patronage could be a PDNP visitor toll on the most congested roads, with park and rides just outside the beginning/end of visitor toll sections.
It'd be a lot cheaper to run the TP with two buses per hour, and services from 0530 to 2300. New high-spec vehicles and through ticketing too, of course. As it stands, the service is not much use for people wanting to get to and from Buxton and Derby, with a late start and early finish, infrequent and with knackered buses.
1) The road haulage options in the southern direction are super limited. 1 train every couple of days of mixed goods is possible, but not one solely from one factory.
so no, there's not the volume of freight to make rail viable.
having 1 train every couple of days between 3 factories means a lot of extra handling and storage that will increase costs. If you stopped 3 times to pick up the first factory loses any speed advantage. If its all concentrated on one railhead by road then why bother with the train at all instead of going straight to East Mids by road?
It'd be a lot cheaper to run the TP with two buses per hour, and services from 0530 to 2300. New high-spec vehicles and through ticketing too, of course. As it stands, the service is not much use for people wanting to get to and from Buxton and Derby, with a late start and early finish, infrequent and with knackered buses.
But it comes back to how many people want to travel between Derby and Buxton ?
Derby - Buxton is 35 miles, for context Derby - Worksop is 38 miles, Derby - Stafford is 34 miles and Derby - Congleton is 39 miles - I don't see huge demand for travel between Derby and those places, so why between Derby and Buxton ?
The rail line past Swizzels in New Mills is highly, highly unsuitable for a railhead because of the high line speed and position on the key InterCity south transpennine link. The others are hard to reach, because of New Mills' crap geography for transport.
So Swizzels's can't transport goods to a siding somewhere in the New Mills area because of the crap geography, but could transport them to a siding somewhere in the Buxton area - but only if a route through to Matlock existed?
The line adjacent to the factory is 70MPH where is passes - not exactly high speed. The other line, about 100m away from the factory, is only 50MPH. But I guess that must be very hard to get to, unless you're on your way to Buxton.
The roads are shocking - the quarry lorries are obliterating them.
One pothole north of Buxton wrecked my front tyre, and I felt lucky it didn’t knacker the rear on that side too. Bit surprised the wheels stayed on it was such a massive thump.
Of course, removal of those southbound HGVs to rail would assist the situation immensely, but as a forum, we seem to have decided that will not happen.
Of course, removal of those southbound HGVs to rail would assist the situation immensely, but as a forum, we seem to have decided that will not happen.
Where are those lorries travelling to or from though? All of the quarries in the area which are able to be served by rail by a reopened Matlock - Buxton route are already served by rail, or are adjacent to an open line and could be served if they wished to be. It doesn't look like the lack of routing to Matlock is what is causing these quarries to use road transport - that's why people are doubtful that a reopened line will suddenly clear loads of HGV's from the roads.
Of course, removal of those southbound HGVs to rail would assist the situation immensely, but as a forum, we seem to have decided that will not happen.
Since the income from road fund licenes and fuel duties *vastly* outweighs the total transport budget, that should be a fairly easy thing to do. Providing we stop expecting motorists to subsidise everything else.
Plenty of road damage occurs because of ground movement, flooding, poorly executed/reinstated street works and so on. In my part of Derbyshire there are lots of minor and secondary roads that see virtually no HGVs but are still in an appalling state.
This subject has been occupying enthusiasts ever since the line was closed in June 1968 by Labour's Transport Minister Barbara Castle. She kept the Hope Valley line open. The 1963 Beeching report set the national back drop but not the specific justification used for both decisions. That was 60 years ago. The world has moved on, mostly into cars and HGVs.
Leisure users can't justify the massive expenditure to reopen the line.
In the immediate postwar period large numbers of ramblers would descend on the Peak District in special trains that could wait in sidings before return. The regular trains were being used but the services were not as frequent as some may think. By the late 1950s private cars were increasingly the preferred way for town dwellers to access the countryside. By the time this line closed that preference was very obvious and it's got bigger. 60 years later it's hard to imagine a significant swing back.
For a number of years I've worked as a volunteer in the Peak District engaging with visitors. They park as near as possible to their desired attraction. They come from many places across the nation. Chatsworth is the biggest individual draw with nearest stations Chesterfield, Matlock, Sheffield or Buxton. A very small proportion make use of connecting buses. A discount is offered for those arriving by public transport but is ineffective in attracting many visitors away from cars.
Yesterday I followed one of the open top buses in my car. Empty. It was raining, but there are many days when the weather's not very good. Most regular buses are also very lightly loaded. (Currently the stopping service between Sheffield and Manchester is being diverted via Hazel Grove and Stockport with an all but unused bus link between Chinley and New Mills.) Tourism is very weather dependent so those seeing the Peak District rammed with people probably won't often see it when it's very quiet, on the days a cafe may sell a pasty and a couple of cups of tea if they're lucky.
Justifying a new railway line (or very much cheaper bus services) needs to bear in mind that all these people don't come from central Manchester, Sheffield, Nottingham, Birmingham or Derby. They come from all the different suburbs and surrounding towns. They may get together in small parties with 3 or 4 cars and drive to Dovedale or Mam Tor calling at favoured pubs or cafes en route. Car park operators may be able to monitor where visitors come from - National Trust certainly has that ability for its members using their membership card. What visitors have now is flexibility of time for starting and finishing from any starting point to any destination via any routes in between.
I know some still use trains and buses. I've met young people who've come by train from London to Sheffield to catch a bus out into the Peak for a day trip. They come by train from Manchester to Dore to catch a 218 bus to Chatsworth. On a lovely day that can be crowded, but far more services are almost empty.
The position witn freight is similar and has been discussed at length. After WW2 wagon load freight ebbed away, assisted no doubt by the ready availability of many cheap army surplus trucks and army trained drivers! We're left with train load freight and there are few opportunities to increase that from and to the Peak District. The current lines are coping well enough.
Any further investment needs to go towards improving connectivity and gauge clearances elsewhere - and maintaining what is still operational. We know there's major work currently starting to repair a slipping embankment on the normally stone carrying line between New Mills and Strines. That looks like costing £5-10m for a critical 160 metres on a railway that has been regularly monitored. The Peak District terrain is less than stable. Just walk the Monsal Trail through the tunnels and old stations noting the many rabbit warrens undermining embankments - and that challenging missing A6 bridge at Rowsley. Then follow the line down to Ambergate and imagine heavy freight lumbering through there to the detriment of tourists wanting to enjoy peaceful countryside.
Any cost benefit return for this project must be very much skewed towards the former and against the latter. It isn't on - and even if it were it would take 25 years to deliver.
. Then follow the line down to Ambergate and imagine heavy freight lumbering through there to the detriment of tourists wanting to enjoy peaceful countryside.
Any cost benefit return for this project must be very much skewed towards the former and against the latter. It isn't on - and even if it were it would take 25 years to deliver.
Erm, because tourists who've gone out into the countryside won't be walking along a main road? Whereas the Monsal Trail runs through remote and unspoiled countryside.
Perhaps the trains are also quieter in the rain ? Clearly people who live in or near the stations and use them to commute to Sheffield or Manchester will use them whatever the weather, but tourists planning on walking or visiting attractions will look at the weather forecast and poor weather does reduce the numbers who choose to go out.
Erm, because tourists who've gone out into the countryside won't be walking along a main road? Whereas the Monsal Trail runs through remote and unspoiled countryside.
Perhaps the trains are also quieter in the rain ? Clearly people who live in or near the stations and use them to commute to Sheffield or Manchester will use them whatever the weather, but tourists planning on walking or visiting attractions will look at the weather forecast and poor weather does reduce the numbers who choose to go out.
That compares poorly with, for example, the Cotswold Line where Evesham, Moreton in Marsh, Kingham, Charlbury and Hanborough all have usage figures of over 200k.
The average numbers using the country stations are increasing, that's true, but not so much ss to make a noticeable difference to road traffic, certainly not light vans. The trains receive a hefty subsidy. I'd certainly question contributions made to maintain roads.
On nice days in summer farmers can't get into fields for cars parked in gateways. Emergency services can't get to incidents quickly and buses get caught in gridlocked traffic.
I could be talking about the Lake District, Snowdonia or Cornwall! Railways won't solve that problem, existing or restored.
Out of curiosity, is there anywhere else in the UK, where there is a public footpath that runs through a tunnel, with a railway alongside it in the UK, like what is being proposed to reopen this line? I know there are bridges with a footpath on the side, but I can’t think of any tunnels off the top of my head
This subject has been occupying enthusiasts ever since the line was closed in June 1968 by Labour's Transport Minister Barbara Castle. She kept the Hope Valley line open. The 1963 Beeching report set the national back drop but not the specific justification used for both decisions. That was 60 years ago. The world has moved on, mostly into cars and HGVs.
Leisure users can't justify the massive expenditure to reopen the line.
In the immediate postwar period large numbers of ramblers would descend on the Peak District in special trains that could wait in sidings before return. The regular trains were being used but the services were not as frequent as some may think. By the late 1950s private cars were increasingly the preferred way for town dwellers to access the countryside. By the time this line closed that preference was very obvious and it's got bigger. 60 years later it's hard to imagine a significant swing back.
For a number of years I've worked as a volunteer in the Peak District engaging with visitors. They park as near as possible to their desired attraction. They come from many places across the nation. Chatsworth is the biggest individual draw with nearest stations Chesterfield, Matlock, Sheffield or Buxton. A very small proportion make use of connecting buses. A discount is offered for those arriving by public transport but is ineffective in attracting many visitors away from cars.
Yesterday I followed one of the open top buses in my car. Empty. It was raining, but there are many days when the weather's not very good. Most regular buses are also very lightly loaded. (Currently the stopping service between Sheffield and Manchester is being diverted via Hazel Grove and Stockport with an all but unused bus link between Chinley and New Mills.) Tourism is very weather dependent so those seeing the Peak District rammed with people probably won't often see it when it's very quiet, on the days a cafe may sell a pasty and a couple of cups of tea if they're lucky.
Justifying a new railway line (or very much cheaper bus services) needs to bear in mind that all these people don't come from central Manchester, Sheffield, Nottingham, Birmingham or Derby. They come from all the different suburbs and surrounding towns. They may get together in small parties with 3 or 4 cars and drive to Dovedale or Mam Tor calling at favoured pubs or cafes en route. Car park operators may be able to monitor where visitors come from - National Trust certainly has that ability for its members using their membership card. What visitors have now is flexibility of time for starting and finishing from any starting point to any destination via any routes in between.
I know some still use trains and buses. I've met young people who've come by train from London to Sheffield to catch a bus out into the Peak for a day trip. They come by train from Manchester to Dore to catch a 218 bus to Chatsworth. On a lovely day that can be crowded, but far more services are almost empty.
The position witn freight is similar and has been discussed at length. After WW2 wagon load freight ebbed away, assisted no doubt by the ready availability of many cheap army surplus trucks and army trained drivers! We're left with train load freight and there are few opportunities to increase that from and to the Peak District. The current lines are coping well enough.
Any further investment needs to go towards improving connectivity and gauge clearances elsewhere - and maintaining what is still operational. We know there's major work currently starting to repair a slipping embankment on the normally stone carrying line between New Mills and Strines. That looks like costing £5-10m for a critical 160 metres on a railway that has been regularly monitored. The Peak District terrain is less than stable. Just walk the Monsal Trail through the tunnels and old stations noting the many rabbit warrens undermining embankments - and that challenging missing A6 bridge at Rowsley. Then follow the line down to Ambergate and imagine heavy freight lumbering through there to the detriment of tourists wanting to enjoy peaceful countryside.
Any cost benefit return for this project must be very much skewed towards the former and against the latter. It isn't on - and even if it were it would take 25 years to deliver.
But it comes back to how many people want to travel between Derby and Buxton ?
Derby - Buxton is 35 miles, for context Derby - Worksop is 38 miles, Derby - Stafford is 34 miles and Derby - Congleton is 39 miles - I don't see huge demand for travel between Derby and those places, so why between Derby and Buxton ?
The average numbers using the country stations are increasing, that's true, but not so much ss to make a noticeable difference to road traffic, certainly not light vans. The trains receive a hefty subsidy. I'd certainly question contributions made to maintain roads.
On nice days in summer farmers can't get into fields for cars parked in gateways. Emergency services can't get to incidents quickly and buses get caught in gridlocked traffic.
I could be talking about the Lake District, Snowdonia or Cornwall! Railways won't solve that problem, existing or restored.
Have you ever visited St Ives ? The railway makes a great contribution to alleviating congestion. Similar is probably true for the Hope Valley service.
You're making the classic assumption that just because you can't see what traffic would be like without the railway, it would be the same.
And those of us without motor transport who might need to go somewhere are completely left out of the discussion.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
That compares poorly with, for example, the Cotswold Line where Evesham, Moreton in Marsh, Kingham, Charlbury and Hanborough all have usage figures of over 200k.
I don't tend to use the Cotswold line so can't comment on those stations as a comparitor, however I can tell you that those trains are never quiet.
However I note that the two stations you've quoted for the route under discussion have much higher figures. This supports my theory that the area served by this line if reinstated would generate much more rail usage, including between Matlock and Buxton as well as those places and the North West/East Midlands.
Have you ever visited St Ives ? The railway makes a great contribution to alleviating congestion. Similar is probably true for the Hope Valley service.
You're making the classic assumption that just because you can't see what traffic would be like without the railway, it would be the same.
And those of us without motor transport who might need to go somewhere are completely left out of the discussion.
I have been to St Ives by rail and bus and used the half hourly 11 minute 4 car 150 shuttle to/from St Erth. I accept the point that rail does reduce road congestion to that specific destination.
The Hope Valley hourly stopping service between Manchester and Sheffield is normally a 3 car 195 serving many stops and different markets. I'd love to see it half hourly and 4 car. That could come relatively easily on existing infrastructure but is currently hard to justify economically even with the through traffic. Building an entire new line is a challenge of much greater magnitude.
(I first visited Cornwall using Motorail to Newton Abbor over 50 years ago and most recently last month by train and bus to walk the coast,)
However I note that the two stations you've quoted for the route under discussion have much higher figures. This supports my theory that the area served by this line if reinstated would generate much more rail usage, including between Matlock and Buxton as well as those places and the North West/East Midlands.
It really, really doesn't support your "theory". Quite the opposite. It shows that the uptake of *existing* rail public transport in the Peak Disttict is low, despite the fact the trains on that route are linking 2 major cities.
Whereas a similarly rural line in the Cotswolds attracts a far higher usage. If the Hope Valley line stations attracted a similar usage to the Cotswold line, you might, just might be onto something. As it stands you're miles off.
It's a little out of date now (2011) but there is this report on the Travel To Work Area in Derby / Derbyshire - I assume an updated one was delayed due to the pandemic.
But it does show demand for travel out of area at least for work - the main reason people travel - to the areas I mentioned is quite low. And within the Derbyshire Dales most people wllive and work in the area.
Have you ever visited St Ives ? The railway makes a great contribution to alleviating congestion. Similar is probably true for the Hope Valley service.
Really not comparable - people go to St Ives to visit St Ives, whereas the attractions in the Peak District are all over the place and none of the towns get St Ives busy.
Since the income from road fund licenes and fuel duties *vastly* outweighs the total transport budget, that should be a fairly easy thing to do. Providing we stop expecting motorists to subsidise everything else.
The first thing to stop expecting the PRIVATE motorist to do, is subsidising commercial road haulage which receives a massive cross subsidy from private cars. Ask any motorist if he would prefer at least some of that cross subsidy to go to railfreight instead, to reduce HGVs on the roads and you would receive an unsurprising answer.
The first thing to stop expecting the PRIVATE motorist to do, is subsidising commercial road haulage which receives a massive cross subsidy from private cars. Ask any motorist if he would prefer at least some of that cross subsidy to go to railfreight instead, to reduce HGVs on the roads and you would receive an unsurprising answer.
It really, really doesn't support your "theory". Quite the opposite. It shows that the uptake of *existing* rail public transport in the Peak Disttict is low, despite the fact the trains on that route are linking 2 major cities.
Whereas a similarly rural line in the Cotswolds attracts a far higher usage. If the Hope Valley line stations attracted a similar usage to the Cotswold line, you might, just might be onto something. As it stands you're miles off.
Really not comparable - people go to St Ives to visit St Ives, whereas the attractions in the Peak District are all over the place and none of the towns get St Ives busy.
The first thing to stop expecting the PRIVATE motorist to do, is subsidising commercial road haulage which receives a massive cross subsidy from private cars. Ask any motorist if he would prefer at least some of that cross subsidy to go to railfreight instead, to reduce HGVs on the roads and you would receive an unsurprising answer.
Only because it would be the perception of getting their foot down, 99.9% of drivers wouldn't care less how the freight was moved as long as it emptied the roads.
I think comparing (as a destination) Buxton with Worksop is probably flawed - Worksop being a place that for the most part is dead but just hasn't lied down yet.
Whilst I can't speak at all for the suggested Peak Rail resurrection, it does seem generally to be the case that where a passenger service is resurrected (whether over extant freight routes - Okehampton recently - or over total reconstruction - Borders recently) the actual usage far exceeds all the predictions, with initial service patterns quickly being improved. I will go back to Worksop, though, as an example of a part of a resurrected passenger service that doesn't really draw the crowds - and that's the northern half of the Robin Hood (Nottingham / Mansfield / Worksop). But then, it's Worksop.
RailUK was launched on 6th June 2005 - so we've hit 20 years being the UK's most popular railway community! Read more and celebrate this milestone with us in this thread!
