mm333
Member
It did, it was great. And it had one a year or so before during engineering works between Guiseley and Apperley Junction. But I can’t see how it would get one in normal operations.
-
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!
Could we see additional services once improvements are made in the Huddersfield area?
- Thread starter Spartacus
- Start date
- Status
It did, it was great. And it had one a year or so before during engineering works between Guiseley and Apperley Junction. But I can’t see how it would get one in normal operations.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
matacaster
On Moderation
- Joined
- 19 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,602
Like your extra station, but how about "Horbury for Ossett" as the station name and make it a mini parkway? Wakefield road both towards Wakefield and Huddersfield is the location of enumerable speed cameras, so it might encourage commuters.
Mirfield, Batley and Morley already have 2tph to Leeds. That is a decent service.
Yeah they do to be fair, I foolishly omitted the Calder Valley service, although it doesn't always take in Ravensthorpe and Cottingley.
Cottingley and Morley suffer from competition with frequent buses, but the locations and lack of parking aren't ideal either. Ravensthorpe's problem is mostly the location. Parking at Batley or Mirfield isn't great either. However can you justify investment when current usage is so woeful compared to e.g the Airedale and Wharfedale lines?
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
If that attitude had prevailed 20 years ago, those local stations on the Airedale and Wharfedale lines would still be getting by on a 144 every hour. No investment, no electrification and no "sparks effect".
Presumably though those lines were selected for electrification rather than any others in Yorkshire because they were already the busiest. And you can't compare the effect of replacing a 144 every hour with a half hourly 333 (or 308) with the far more modest improvement electrification could bring to stations like Batley and Morley.
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
Except you can, because in both cases it's a doubling in frequency (assuming a half-hourly Huddersfield stopper once the wires are up) and an increase in capacity on each service (a 3 or 4-car EMU replacing a 2 or 3-car DMU). Very similar to what happened up the posh valleys (though IIRC the increase to 2tph came before the wires, at least on the Leeds legs).
The local stations between Huddersfield and Leeds suffer because longer-distance services are prioritised. The increase in capacity that will come with the route upgrade and electrification should allow a half-hourly service to all stations to Huddersfield (disregarding the Southport service as that will stay diesel, and is useless for getting to Huddersfield anyway) which will undoubtedly boost usage. Yes, the Airedale and Wharfedale lines had clear potential for growth, and less conflict with longer distance services... but the growth they've seen didn't happen overnight.
xotGD
Established Member
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2017
- Messages
- 6,079
When the new station opens at White Rose I assume that will be getting better than 2 trains per hour.
I doubt it, the White Rose isn’t Meadowhall. It’ll be 2 at best. If not even just 1 initially.
A doubling of frequency is not necessarily likely at all. The original electrification plans reckoned electrification would merely allow a single hourly stopping train to run amongst the 6tph TPE service - the current stopper only exists because 6tph with skip-stoppers didn't work. The DMUs either are already or will be by the time Northern have all their stock mostly 4 car, at least in the peaks. So it'd be hourly 4 car DMU vs hourly 4 car EMU, journey time perhaps 2 or 3 minutes faster - not much difference at all.
xotGD
Established Member
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2017
- Messages
- 6,079
Well it will still be better than the 1 per hour at Cottingley.
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
The original electrification plans also didn't include four-tracking from Huddersfield to Ravensthorpe, so there's a lot of unknowns about what the service patterns will be.
A lot will depend on what enhancements take place beyond the Eastern limit of the current consultation, but dynamic loops at Batley (along with moving the station to the other side of the Soothill Lane bridge) would probably allow for a third (including the Calder Valley service) stopping path per hour.
The skip-stopping plan of summer 2018 was barely deserving of the name East of Huddersfield, as just ONE of the previously fast services had a single stop added: the Hull at Batley. Everything else was as it had been before, other than the Northern service skipping Batley, and the Hudds stopper switching operators and extending to Manchester.
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
Understatement of the year here! The White Rose can't even compete with Leeds itself, let alone Meadowhall. If I ran a retail business in Leeds city centre I'd be a bit cheesed off at the local authority funding a railway station for an out-of-town mall based primarily around the private car. That money would be better spent towards capacity enhancements to bring more shoppers in to Leeds itself. Leeds is after all a major retail destination these days. The White Rose centre certainly isn't that.
Spartacus
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Aug 2009
- Messages
- 2,922
IMHO it’s all a sop to the White Rose as Leeds’ initial plans for a clean air zone encompassed it, something which would sound the death knell for the White Rose, and I suspect that it’s ultimately the same plan long term.
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
I've replied to this post in the broader route upgrade thread, as White Rose Centre is outside of the scope of this consultation.
matacaster
On Moderation
- Joined
- 19 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,602
Slightly off-topic, but I think they should be building an inclined travelator from Platform 2 to the bus station, using the disused blocked off tunnel. Its a real pain to have to walk in pouring rain between the two when they are so close.
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
I've thought about something like that before, but the main problems would be (a) needing a second set of ticket barriers somewhere along that route, and (b) anti-social behaviour taking place at times those ticket gates weren't manned.
As you say, it is off-topic though. Perhaps a new thread for West Yorkshire bus stations (in the Buses & Coaches section) would be in order!
Spartacus
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Aug 2009
- Messages
- 2,922
I'm surprised a flyover at Ravensthorpe's being considered considering the local topography towards Dewsbury seems to lend itself to a dive under and a fly over would be visible (and audible) for a considerable distance to the North and East. It'd save having to divert Calder/Ravensthorpe Road too.
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
I don't think the exact configuration of the junction at Thornhill/Ravensthorpe has been decided- I'm sure that those making those decisions will be aware of the various issues that different approaches will involve.
Halifaxlad
Established Member
Certainly agree with concentrating on existing routes but in the long term it would be nice to see a direct Wakefield service from Bradford via Brighouse!
Did you reply to the consultation?
It didn’t say which option was cheaper. And it didn’t say anything about which option was fastest to build. Or which option is least disruptive to rail services during construction.
Iskra
Established Member
It could do a good trade if it is competitive, driving/buses between the two is a pain and rail passengers probably view changing at Leeds as a pain too.
I know the GC service exists but it's hardly competitive on time and not particularly frequent.
I've only just had chance to look at this proposal in detail and it looks really interesting, particularly Huddersfield station, Heaton Lodge Curve and Ravensthorpe Grade Seperation.
Is there any news on the Dewsbury-Leeds section?
Last edited:
Good scheme. The only mild criticism I have is at Huddersfield station, where the Leeds facing bay would be more flexible operationally if BETWEEN the two slow/local/relief platforms rather than to the north of them, so #5 would be the bay rather than #6. I realise tight curvature, structures at both end of the station and standage requirements are all major constraints, so perhaps they've already considered and dismissed such a notion for good reasons. Also between Ravensthorpe and Dewsbury, some 'passive provision' at least in the major grade separation works for a Spen Valley junction would be sensible, and possibly a Dewsbury - Wakefield chord.
Last edited:
Spartacus
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Aug 2009
- Messages
- 2,922
A Dewsbury - Wakefield chord would be something brand new, but I can't really see it being worth the effort (especially as the line will be on a new alignment in the area concerned) to connect Dewsbury, Batley, Morley and Cottingley with direct to Wakefield trains when there are options for the journey with just one change. It would also be one extra service on an already congested route.
Anything up the Spen valley looks increasingly likely to be light rail/tram and not directly connected to the rail network, though Bradford Interchange - Kirkgate Tram/train might be an idea, but I don't believe it's in any proposals. Adding this at a later date shouldn't be too difficult though.
Yes, as soon as I learnt it had gone online.
Might have some value to divert Doncaster - Leeds stopping services via Dewsbury to allow the Westgate route to become dedicated to expresses in various HS2/NPR scenarios.
Anything on the original Bradford- Wakefield alignment shouldn't be affected by this work. The new alignment would simply fly across it, and the river, on the new bridges shown. I would have thought Dewsbury is a more likely terminus for a 'Bradford Metro' following the Spen Valley and I agree it makes sense for it to enter the town centre on its own alignment at that end which could incorporate tight curves, steep grades, and street/streetside running if light rail based tech was used. If suitable tram-train stock was used, the route could approach Bradford from the south sharing existing heavy rail tracks then veer off across the city centre from Interchange.
Last edited:
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
So if the Westgate stoppers are moved to run via a very circuitous route via Dewsbury, what happens to commuters from Outwood, South Elmsall and Fitzwilliam?
As with all these crayon-y ideas, the people who actually use the services as they are now would be hung out to dry in favour of neat lines that don't actually tally up with real usage patterns.
In any case, anything involving Spen Valley or a new curve at Dewsbury is beyond the remit of the consultation under discussion here. If the Spen Valley routes had never existed, nobody would be proposing to build them now.
OK, as suggestions they're off-topic I agree, but on the other hand as opportunities, they could be very relevant to the project. You make some very good points regarding existing local stations on Wakefield - Leeds if that was proposed to be made 'express only', and those passengers would have to be catered for Somehow. Please DO NOT imply I'm a flippin crayonista. Suggestions alone do not constitute irrationality, which is what that term tends to convey. Irrationality is reiterating such pet ideas relentlessly in the face of valid criticism, which you make and I have responded to above. As to the Spen, there's continuous population all along that valley today which could plausibly support some kind of segregated light metro perhaps partly at least on the last remaining rail alignment in the corridor. It need not even be rail technology, but rail might make sense employing tram-trains to use existing infrastructure into Bradford. Anyway no one will ever know what those ideas were because I have now deleted them along with all my other comments on this project, becasue clearly as a mere crayon waver my ideas and opinion are all completely worthless. Thanks for pointing that out.
Last edited:
- Status