Airedale / Wharfedale line history

[quantinghome]

Mods: Please put in history section if appropriate.

Quick question for the Railforums hivemind:

The Airedale line used to be four-track from Leeds to Shipley (and also Bingley to Keighley), and the Wharfedale branch was double-tracked throughout.

At some point the four-track sections were reduced to double-track and the Wharfedale Branch lines to Shipley and Apperley Bridge junction were singled. I'm aware that some track remodelling was then done in the early 1990s as part of the electrification scheme. However, I'd like to understand when the track reductions took place. Anyone know?

 

[Gems]

1968

 

[class 9]

The singling of the lines on the Wharfedale line was 1981.

 

[Ken H]

The bit from the west end of Thackley tunnel to Shipley was 4 track until quite recently. But it wasnt used much, and Thackley box was often switched out. I think I went along it once in a train. Had some non-standard CWR I seem to remember. ('Standard' was concrete sleepers and pandrol clips)

 

[ess]

What's the impact of the singling? How many additional trains would it take to justify a second track?

 

[Ken H]

What's the impact of the singling? How many additional trains would it take to justify a second track?

Surely sorting out the junction where the Ilkley line diverges would be worth doing before a full quadrupling. It must eat capacity. A 'middle' line to allow down trains to stand waiting for a path across the up without blocking the down. Maybe double a short section of the branch to allow an up train to wait for a path on the main while allowing a down to proceed towards Guiseley.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

What's the impact of the singling? How many additional trains would it take to justify a second track?

Not a massive impact, the single sections sustain a 2tph frequency on each branch. If there was a need for 4tph+ then obviously you'd have to reinstate the double track in part or in full.

 

[alistairlees]

The simplified layout at Guiseley was done in 1983. This was when a shuttle from Guiseley to Bradford (in the off-peak) was introduced (or maybe in 1984, once it had been done). I thought that Apperley Junction to Guiseley was singled at the same time. I can't remember if Shipley to Guiseley was singled at the same time, or earlier.

 

[quantinghome]

Not a massive impact, the single sections sustain a 2tph frequency on each branch. If there was a need for 4tph+ then obviously you'd have to reinstate the double track in part or in full.

It's amazing what frequency the single lines can sustain. It's actually 4tph from Guiseley to Apperley junction in the peaks (2tph in the other direction).

But for any further increase, the Leeds area Strategic Study https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Leeds-Area-Strategic-Study-2020.pdf called for the Apperley Bridge - Springs Junction section to be redoubled.

 

[Ploughman]

One of the reasons for the singling was to centralise the track through the overbridges on both branches and the Baildon line tunnels on the lines concerned.
This then allowing for the OHLE to be installed without any track lowerings.
Springs tunnel was redoubled as part of the scheme along with remodellings at Guiseley, Esholt and Shipley.

The Non standard CWR would have been the BH CWR onn the Shipley - Baildon line, since relaid in the 2000's

 

[class 9]

One of the reasons for the singling was to centralise the track through the overbridges on both branches and the Baildon line tunnels on the lines concerned.
This then allowing for the OHLE to be installed without any track lowerings.
Springs tunnel was redoubled as part of the scheme along with remodellings at Guiseley, Esholt and Shipley.

The Non standard CWR would have been the BH CWR onn the Shipley - Baildon line, since relaid in the 2000's

The singling of the Apperley Jct/Shipley to Esholt Jct at Guiseley was a cost cutting measure at a time the line was under threat of closure, not in preparation for electrification.

 

[alistairlees]

The singling of the Apperley Jct/Shipley to Esholt Jct at Guiseley was a cost cutting measure at a time the line was under threat of closure, not in preparation for electrification.

Indeed it was. Services were reduced to just an hourly direct Ilkley to Leeds service, and an hourly shuttle from Guiseley to Bradford FS. All three services were timed to be at Guiseley at more or less the same time to allow for interchange, with the Bradford service reversing back down the Esholt branch whilst the Leeds to ilkley and ilkley to Leeds passed one another, before returning to the other platform and heading back to Bradford.

 

[Ploughman]

The singling of the Apperley Jct/Shipley to Esholt Jct at Guiseley was a cost cutting measure at a time the line was under threat of closure, not in preparation for electrification.

Yes I got that bit wrong. However my later comments still stand.

 

[JRT]

Indeed it was. Services were reduced to just an hourly direct Ilkley to Leeds service, and an hourly shuttle from Guiseley to Bradford FS. All three services were timed to be at Guiseley at more or less the same time to allow for interchange, with the Bradford service reversing back down the Esholt branch whilst the Leeds to ilkley and ilkley to Leeds passed one another, before returning to the other platform and heading back to Bradford.

(At the same time, services on the Bradford FS–Skipton route were reduced from 2tph through services to 1tph through + 1tph from the Guiseley shuttle changing at Shipley onto the hourly local Leeds–Skipton service. )