• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!

Study to investigate re-opening Gobowen to Welshpool line

Status
Not open for further replies.

A0wen

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,468
When I first moved to Mid Wales in the late 70's/early 80's it was well known that Oswestry had declined after the railway had left. However back then road projects could be transformational on a scale that could make a difference. The work on the A483/A5 Oswestry Bypass and Chirk Bypass in the mid to late 80's was a massive leap forward in connectivity for the area as journey times northward were substantially slashed to start with at least until the road filled up with twice the traffic it was designed for and 2 miles tailback where the A483 intersects the A55 south of Chester appeared every morning. In 2018 everyone in the area who can afford a car already has one , dualling the A5 will not produce any seismic shift in connectivity unlike what the road did 30 years ago. Whereas in 1988 when you came off the road to access Chester, Wrexham and Shrewsbury etc you could mostly drive straight into them now the queues already out of town so shaving a fee seconds/maybe minutes off journey time to reach queue is somewhat futile. The basic problem is we now have c35 million vehicles on the road compared to c25 million 30 years ago.A little bit of extra road here and there really makes no difference.

Right.... so your approach is spend nothing on roads, lots on rail. Let the roads become completely gridlocked, yet we'll run trains which don't serve the journeys people actually want - because that's effectively what you're saying.

The problem in the UK is road capacity has *never* been increased in line with population increases and indeed in the last 20 years government actively tried to reduce capacity whilst overseeing a population boom led by immigration. The rail network's capacity issues aren't on the branchlines and byways along the England / Wales border - they are on the mainlines into and out of London, Manchester and Birmingham - and reinstating a branch line which serves a town of 17,000 people will make precisely no difference to that.

To be fair HS2 is trying to deal with that - much as I disagree with it as the approach. Though my issues with HS2 are threefold - (i) it means digging up a swathe of central London unnecessarily - terminating it at Old Oak Common or Paddington would be more sensible. (ii) many of the places blighted by it through rural Bucks and Northants will see precisely no benefit from it. (iii) Encouraging growth outside London would be preferable.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

transmanche

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
6,018
A possible case for a Shrewsbury - Birmingham link then, perhaps a new direct chord via a parkway station at Park Hall for the hospital.
I don't see any real advantage in building a direct chord versus reversing in the bay at Gobowen. You lose connectivity to the north just to save 3 or 4 minutes.
 

A0wen

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,468
A possible case for a Shrewsbury - Birmingham link then, perhaps a new direct chord via a parkway station at Park Hall for the hospital. All stations to Shrewsbury, then limited onwards to Birmingham.

Can I please have some of what you've been smoking?

Let's refresh the facts. Oswestry is a place of 17,000 people - i.e. it's a small town. Oswestry is less than 5 miles from a mainline railway station - Gobowen.

Taking a recent rail re-opening to compare - Corby, which was a bit further than Oswestry is to a main station (Kettering's about 9 miles away) with a population of 70,000 and an hourly service to / from London has a usage of about 275,000 / year.

That usage averages out at about 750 / day. So 750 people a day is about 1 % of the population using the train service.

Apply that to Oswestry and you're looking at 170 people a day.
 

Gareth Marston

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Messages
6,231
Location
Newtown Montgomeryshire
Can I please have some of what you've been smoking?

Let's refresh the facts. Oswestry is a place of 17,000 people - i.e. it's a small town. Oswestry is less than 5 miles from a mainline railway station - Gobowen.

Taking a recent rail re-opening to compare - Corby, which was a bit further than Oswestry is to a main station (Kettering's about 9 miles away) with a population of 70,000 and an hourly service to / from London has a usage of about 275,000 / year.

That usage averages out at about 750 / day. So 750 people a day is about 1 % of the population using the train service.

Apply that to Oswestry and you're looking at 170 people a day.

and at Welshpool and Newtown which are close to Oswestry we get 500 a day at each station on smaller populations...
 

A0wen

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,468
and at Welshpool and Newtown which are close to Oswestry we get 500 a day at each station on smaller populations...

And have much bigger catchment areas - you don't have another station 4 miles away and parking at Caersws is far more limited which is a consideration for people.

They are also on a main 'through' route between Aberystwyth and the West Mids, whereas Oswestry would be a terminus.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,104
Location
SE London
Can I please have some of what you've been smoking?

Let's refresh the facts. Oswestry is a place of 17,000 people - i.e. it's a small town. Oswestry is less than 5 miles from a mainline railway station - Gobowen.

Taking a recent rail re-opening to compare - Corby, which was a bit further than Oswestry is to a main station (Kettering's about 9 miles away) with a population of 70,000 and an hourly service to / from London has a usage of about 275,000 / year.

That usage averages out at about 750 / day. So 750 people a day is about 1 % of the population using the train service.

Apply that to Oswestry and you're looking at 170 people a day.

I can see several problems with that analysis. Corby is much a much bigger town than Oswestry, but that will mean that a lot of the town is a long way from the station. The number of people within walking distance of a hypothetical Oswestry station is probably going to be quite similar to the number of people living or working within walking distance of Corby station. In fact it would probably be higher at Oswestry because - so far as I can see from Google maps - Corby station is very poorly located for most of the town, whereas Oswestry station would probably be much more central. Obviously Corby station will pick up many more people driving to the station. But even so, extrapolating in the way you've done is probably not valid.

Also, 750 people/day may well be 1% of the population of Corby, but it's certainly not going to be the same 750 people every day of the year! So I think we can assume that the proportion of Corby's population who make use of the railway at some point is going to be much more than 1%.

I wonder if a better comparison might be somewhere like Sheerness. It's a small town - actually, a smaller population than Oswestry (11K vs 17K, although that may be balanced by the station serving as a railhead for other places on the Isle of Sheppey). And, just like the proposed Oswestry-Gobowen shuttle, the train at Sheerness won't take to you anywhere very large without you having to change trains for most of the day - it's just served by a half-hourly shuttle to Sittingbourne. And Sheerness's usage? 0.433 million/year, well above that of Corby.

Ultimately, every town has its own unique situation, so we need to take a lot of care in comparing with any other single station. But I suspect the Corby comparison is particularly unfavourable because the station at Corby has several factors depressing its usage.

For what it's worth, I do agree with you that building a business case for linking Oswestry to the rail network is going to be hard. There are probably hundreds of other places in the UK where rail investment would see better returns. But I don't agree with you about directing investment towards roads instead - as that will just make an already bad problem (transport network far too focused on roads) even worse.
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,244
Location
Torbay
Whittington and Baschurch?
Good candidates, although a new parkway at Park Hall near the hospital on my new chord might be a bit close to Whittington for both to exist.

They are also on a main 'through' route between Aberystwyth and the West Mids, whereas Oswestry would be a terminus.
If you'd read it properly, my proposal was to run the new local trains from Oswestry, through Shrewsbury, and on to the West Mids limited stop. You yourself suggested that of the many employed people who reside in the Oswestry area, a considerable number are likely to be commuting to Shrewsbury, Telford and beyond, so a possible rail market.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,104
Location
SE London
For the sake of throwing something else out there... MUCH more expensive, and still probably a poor business case compared to numerous other potential rail improvements across the UK. But... If you really wanted to put Oswestry back on the rail network, perhaps in the long run this would be a more sensible way of doing it?

Oswestry.jpg
 

Gareth Marston

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Messages
6,231
Location
Newtown Montgomeryshire
For the sake of throwing something else out there... MUCH more expensive, and still probably a poor business case compared to numerous other potential rail improvements across the UK. But... If you really wanted to put Oswestry back on the rail network, perhaps in the long run this would be a more sensible way of doing it?

View attachment 49371

really what should have been done back in the day- the Shrewsbury and Chester Railway missed out the second largest settlement between the two county towns (Oswestry) but stopped seemingly at every farm gate with a huge number of tiny halts.
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,244
Location
Torbay
In fact it would probably be higher at Oswestry because - so far as I can see from Google maps - Corby station is very poorly located for most of the town, whereas Oswestry station would probably be much more central. Obviously Corby station will pick up many more people driving to the station. But even so, extrapolating in the way you've done is probably not valid.

Oswestry station would most likely be at its historic site right next to the bus station and a short walk from most of the town centre. Someone going shopping at Sainsburys or Morrisons could drop off or pick up a rail traveller easily. Those who wish to leave their car at the station might prefer to use Park Hall, my suggested parkway on the new curve, just off the A5 near the hospital.

Also, 750 people/day may well be 1% of the population of Corby, but it's certainly not going to be the same 750 people every day of the year! So I think we can assume that the proportion of Corby's population who make use of the railway at some point is going to be much more than 1%.

Corby's service history is complicated too. It ran (as a branch shuttle?) for a while, then shut down for a long time before starting up again with through trains to London. Soon the trains will be electric. Being a former heavy industrial settlement Corby was also fairly probably self sufficient employment-wise. Socio-economic factors take some time to change and the town to re-form perhaps with an additional commercial hub around the station. Probably needs a people-mover :)
 
Last edited:

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,714
Location
Leeds
Being a former heavy industrial settlement Corby was also fairly probably self sufficient employment-wise. Socio-economic factors take some time to change and the town to re-form perhaps with an additional commercial hub around the station. Probably needs a people-mover :)
Perhaps Corby needs a fast rail link to Scotland?
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,096
Perhaps Corby needs a fast rail link to Scotland?
That's not a joke. When Corby was built to service the new steelworks a lot of the workforce were redeployed from Scotland. Lots of family visits are made home by now-retired ex-steelworkers, but I guess the numbers will be dwindling soon.
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,244
Location
Torbay
Perhaps Corby needs a fast rail link to Scotland?
If the St Pancras - Corby trains were somehow extended to Peterborough, a convenient interchange with expresses heading north should be possible. It's likely with HS2 taking more of the longer distance demand, remaining trains on the ECML will likely make a few more stops at major interchanges like Peterborough, but we're getting a long way from Oswestry and the Welsh Borderlands!
 

ivanhoe

Member
Joined
15 Jul 2009
Messages
929
But you'll find that whereas those areas without a good rail link have declined further and faster than those with them, which have been able to build on their links with nearby cities for example.

The old argument of the railway being a "rich mans toy" is complete tripe in relation to the regional railway especially. Come and visit the railways around Leeds and Manchester on a Saturday and you will find all walks of life using the local railway to go about their local business, to the shops or visiting friends and relatives. Yet because they're not high powered businessmen, the value of these sorts of journeys aren't valued as much as part of society, hence why no one is prepared to invest in the regional railway.
Hell of a difference between local railways around the large metropolitan cities like Leeds ,Manchester ,Liverpool ,Sheffield et al than a reopening of a railway in rural North Shropshire and Mid Wales. By the way, I quite like tripe as well. You want to try it
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,369
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
really what should have been done back in the day- the Shrewsbury and Chester Railway missed out the second largest settlement between the two county towns (Oswestry) but stopped seemingly at every farm gate with a huge number of tiny halts.

But remember that when the Great Western Railway used a segment of the said line as part of its Birkenhead to London route, it would have looked at any improvements that could be an improvement in terms of connection to that line.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,104
Location
SE London
(Replying here to a post in the Carmarthen-Aberystwyth thread as this is more relevant to this thread)

Look - if you want to tell people that a journey which should take 30 mins in a car should take over an hour by train and can only be done when the trains are running then fine - you go right ahead. Just don't be surprised if people don't fall into line with your expectations.

Personally I think it's quite understandable if someone chooses to drive if doing so knocks their journey from over an hour to 30 minutes. But the key thing is to ask why driving is so much quicker in those cases. And in too many cases, the answer is: Partly because too much investment has gone on the road network and not enough on public transport, and partly because of idiotic planning policies that stick homes and industrial areas out in the sticks where the only practical way to get to them is to drive. There is no easy quick fix to that, but the only realistic long term solution is to reverse those mistakes by investing more in public transport and having more sensible planning policies.

The A5 is a major trunk route even now. That it's not been invested in and is now congested is not acceptable, but trying to claim that reinstating a long closed railway line to a town of 17,000 people will solve this is deluded. And therein lies the problem -

That the A5 is congested is crap - and no doubt frustrating for all who are caught in it. But investing in it to increase capacity is not the solution. And unfortunately, there probably is no easy and quick solution. Doing something like duelling the A5 will just pull more people into cars and lead (after a couple of years) to more congestion in the towns etc. that people are driving to/from: It won't solve the jams, it'll just shift them to other places along people's routes. Reinstating the line to Oswestry also will make not much difference. But the key point is that: It will make some small difference by allowing a few people to avoid driving - and it will do so without simply moving the congestion elsewhere. Sorting out full doubling of the Chester-Shrewsbury line so you can run a clockface half-hourly service on it would probably help more (although even that will only make a small difference).

As I've said before, I don't think opening to Oswestry is a particularly good rail investment: If you could spend money anywhere in the country, then there are loads of places that would see a much better return for the investment. But if you had some money to spend, and you had to spend it in the Oswestry area, then reopening the rail link would be a good deal more sensible (if you prefer, less silly) than doubling the A5.

you want to force people to behave in the way you think they should and they should pay for the privilege, unless you think there is this mythical group of "rich" people who will just pay for all your mad whims.

That's an ironic thing to say when earlier in the same post you gave a (hypothetical, but typical) example of someone having been, for all practical purposes, forced to drive because the public transport options take so long. In the UK, far too often, the problem isn't people being forced to use public transport, it's people being forced to drive whether they want to or not, because of decades of transport and planning policies that favoured roads and driving over all other travel options (thankfully, over the last 20 years or so, the focus on motoring has become a lot less)
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,939
Location
Yorks
But remember that when the Great Western Railway used a segment of the said line as part of its Birkenhead to London route, it would have looked at any improvements that could be an improvement in terms of connection to that line.
Hell of a difference between local railways around the large metropolitan cities like Leeds ,Manchester ,Liverpool ,Sheffield et al than a reopening of a railway in rural North Shropshire and Mid Wales. By the way, I quite like tripe as well. You want to try it

The only difference is that the railways around Manchester and Leeds tend to be better funded from PTE's. You could see the same mix of people on the East Yorkshire coast, on the railways around Barrow, the branches of East Anglia etc.

There is a tripe stall in Leeds market, although I've never been tempted by it.
 

muddythefish

On Moderation
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
1,575
Your attitude is soundly stuck in the 60s or 70s - the state "tells" people how they will travel, when they will travel, where they can travel to, yet that's not what people want.


.

Nonsense (as usual). Your stance of constant road building to the detriment of public transport investment is straight out of the 1960s government handbook. And when (in this country at least) has the state ever told people how will they travel ? And just because you want to travel everywhere by car doesn't mean that's "what people want".

Transport problems need modern solutions and clearer, wide-ranging thinking - not a knee-jerk response from the Ernest Marples road-building manual.
 

Matt P

Member
Joined
15 Jun 2018
Messages
95
When I first moved to Mid Wales in the late 70's/early 80's it was well known that Oswestry had declined after the railway had left. However back then road projects could be transformational on a scale that could make a difference. The work on the A483/A5 Oswestry Bypass and Chirk Bypass in the mid to late 80's was a massive leap forward in connectivity for the area as journey times northward were substantially slashed to start with at least until the road filled up with twice the traffic it was designed for and 2 miles tailback where the A483 intersects the A55 south of Chester appeared every morning. In 2018 everyone in the area who can afford a car already has one , dualling the A5 will not produce any seismic shift in connectivity unlike what the road did 30 years ago. Whereas in 1988 when you came off the road to access Chester, Wrexham and Shrewsbury etc you could mostly drive straight into them now the queues already out of town so shaving a fee seconds/maybe minutes off journey time to reach queue is somewhat futile. The basic problem is we now have c35 million vehicles on the road compared to c25 million 30 years ago.A little bit of extra road here and there really makes no difference.

Despite having been born and grown up in Oswestry (late 1970s onwards) and lived there until my late 20's I cant comment on whether the town declined after the railway had left. However if it is true, then it may be a coincidence that any decline followed the loss of the branch shuttle to Gobowen, although the cause may be due to a different railway related reason.

Oswestry works closed in 1966 - a major source of employment, probably in the surrounding villages as well as the town. You also have to remember that Ifton Colliery closed in 1968, another major local employer. Many people who worked there lived in the villages surrounding Oswestry, particularly St Martins, Weston Rhyn and Gobowen. Oswestry likely being the main shopping destination for the residents of those villages.

I have no evidence to support this, but my guess is that the loss of two major employers would have had more of an impact upon the town than the loss of the rail service.
 
Last edited:

Gareth Marston

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Messages
6,231
Location
Newtown Montgomeryshire
Despite having been born and grown up in Oswestry (late 1970s onwards) and lived there until my late 20's I cant comment on whether the town declined after the railway had left. However if it is true, then it may be a coincidence that any decline followed the loss of the branch shuttle to Gobowen, although the cause may be due to a different railway related reason.

Oswestry works closed in 1966 - a major source of employment, probably in the surrounding villages as well as the town. You also have to remember that Ifton Colliery closed in 1968, another major local employer. Many people who worked there lived in the villages surrounding Oswestry, particularly St Martins, Weston Rhyn and Gobowen. Oswestry likely being the main shopping destination for the residents of those villages.

I have no evidence to support this, but my guess is that the loss of two major employers would have had more of an impact upon the town than the loss of the rail service.

To clarify by railway leaving I include the works as well as the other areas.
 

ruthtom010

Member
Joined
28 Apr 2012
Messages
15
Nonsense (as usual). Your stance of constant road building to the detriment of public transport investment is straight out of the 1960s government handbook. And when (in this country at least) has the state ever told people how will they travel ? And just because you want to travel everywhere by car doesn't mean that's "what people want".

Transport problems need modern solutions and clearer, wide-ranging thinking - not a knee-jerk response from the Ernest Marples road-building manual.

DfT spends over half its budget on rail. Rail accounts for around 10% of surface travel.
 

ruthtom010

Member
Joined
28 Apr 2012
Messages
15
But rail is likely to provide a much larger proportion of trunk surface transport, which is what the DfT funds.
Not quite. Network Rail covers a lot more than trunk surface transport (lots of commuting). And the 10% or so of surface travel accounted for by rail includes London Underground and Light Rail. Network Rail 's budget is around 3 times that of Highways England. Highways England fund Motorways and "Strategic" A roads, accounting for around 1/3 of "trunk" road traffic, so probably about 5 or 6 times more than travel on Network Rail.

On average, rail travelers are more affluent than road users but benefit from much larger taxpayer support.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,104
Location
SE London
On average, rail travelers are more affluent than road users but benefit from much larger taxpayer support.

Road users get to pollute the air, cause noise pollution and nuisance to other people to a far greater extent than rail users without having to pay for it (before you say, fuel duties an road tax, there have been quite a few estimates that suggest revenue from fuel duties etc. does not cover anything like the full cost of the 'collateral damage' that cars cause). There are also things like the cost of policing roads, pressure on the health service because of the lack of exercise associated with driving everywhere and so on.

I don't doubt that rail receives a considerable operating subsidy, but to get the full picture you probably need to take into account these kinds of 'hidden subsidies' to motorists that don't register on the DfT budget.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,939
Location
Yorks
Not quite. Network Rail covers a lot more than trunk surface transport (lots of commuting). And the 10% or so of surface travel accounted for by rail includes London Underground and Light Rail. Network Rail 's budget is around 3 times that of Highways England. Highways England fund Motorways and "Strategic" A roads, accounting for around 1/3 of "trunk" road traffic, so probably about 5 or 6 times more than travel on Network Rail.

On average, rail travelers are more affluent than road users but benefit from much larger taxpayer support.

But the taxpayer, in the form of local Councils look after a large proportion of small local roads, not the DfT. A lot of your local road journeys will be short distance on these.
 

A0wen

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,468
Road users get to pollute the air, cause noise pollution and nuisance to other people to a far greater extent than rail users without having to pay for it (before you say, fuel duties an road tax, there have been quite a few estimates that suggest revenue from fuel duties etc. does not cover anything like the full cost of the 'collateral damage' that cars cause). There are also things like the cost of policing roads, pressure on the health service because of the lack of exercise associated with driving everywhere and so on.

I don't doubt that rail receives a considerable operating subsidy, but to get the full picture you probably need to take into account these kinds of 'hidden subsidies' to motorists that don't register on the DfT budget.

Wow - who knew trains weren't polluting or noisy.... Oh hang on a sec.

And motorists actually pay tax on the fuel they use unlike the rail industry.
 

ruthtom010

Member
Joined
28 Apr 2012
Messages
15
But the taxpayer, in the form of local Councils look after a large proportion of small local roads, not the DfT. A lot of your local road journeys will be short distance on these.
That's why I quoted approx traffic figures for roads funded by Highways England - the same coverage as their budget.
 

Unixman

Member
Joined
16 Mar 2012
Messages
144
Just for the moment keeping to the T&W order, and assuming that the A5 will be made dual, a couple of questions:

  • what is the maximum gradient that is reasonably permissible at a bridge? Whether for a standard heavy rail vehicle or a PPM ...

  • If the A5 were to be dualed, could the bridge building occur at that time?

To my mind, a simple Oswestry-Gobowen link is at the limits of feasibility.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top