Alternatives to the Beeching cuts

[Andy873]

This was always going to be a hot potatoe of a question.

Very interesting to hear all your views on Beeching.

Sadly, I think we are all partly to blame for not using the railways more. I for one used them as and when I could, but because of my age this wasn't until the 1980s.

I love the railways, and now over 50 years on, no matter how you view them, the railways are booming again, so maybe this is the start of a de-beeching process?

 

[PeterC]

With hindsight there are a handful of routes that should have been left alone and a lot more where the right of way should have been preserved.

 

[Taunton]

The key issue here is that so many exercises concentrate on the running costs of the current physical plant. But I believe the real problem is that the physical plant has remained, more or less, as it was when built in early Victorian times. But since then, the world has moved immeasurably on.

For roads, although they also existed at that time, most mileage is done on more recent ones, and all the main high speed routes have been built in the last 60 years. Airports have almost nothing from before 1950. Many dock installations of WW2 era have been replaced by different ones. And where the business comes from, homes, places of employment, retail areas, etc, have all substantially built new in different locations, which the railway has just not adapted to.

In Victorian times, thousands of miles could be built per year. Yet nowadays it takes for ever to agree a one mile route change. Where are the funds to regularly update the infrastructure alignment?

Poor infrastructure for the network never gets sorted out. The S&D would have benefitted from operating from the same station in Bath as the main GWR one. Maidstone and Canterbury would have given far greater connectivity across Kent if their main stations had been amalgamated in the 120 years since they started operation by one company. Rugby to Leicester is a gap in the network, but when in the 1960s the GCR "main" line was the link between the two it carried hardly anybody because its trains operated from stations in obscure back streets of both towns, well separated from the services at the main station, so pretty useless for connections. Even in London, the Circle Line has run in front of the largest main line terminus, Euston, for 150 years without anyone ever getting round to providing platforms at that point.

Bristol Temple Meads must be the station furthest out from any major city. Much of the intervening developed land in this, the largest city in southern England outside London, had been destroyed in WW2 bombing, yet no advantage was ever taken of this to resite to a more convenient central point where the demand was. Bristol always had a pitiful usage by commuters, even when the likes of the Portishead line were open, compared to Leeds or Edinburgh with well-sited central stations. Yet nothing was done, and this continues. Birmingham steadily goes backwards as progressively more services are shifted out of New Street to the less well-sited Snow Hill with less connecting opportunities. Getting back to the original Beeching era, many of the stations on those branches that radiated from Taunton had the furthest out buildings of the places they were named after. And if you look at the likes of the "saved" Bere Alston/Gunnislake line, this still applies.

The HS2 saga with it's own stations in major city areas quite separated from the current main stations - transferring from one to the other will more than eat up any speed advantage - shows the understanding of a network and its impact on driving demand is still not understood. Just because a station is called, say, Gunnislake (which has lots of recent houses) does not mean it is in any way convenient for receiving demand from the town.

 

[yorksrob]

I think the Railway Development Association (later RailFuture), published a plan for the S&D which was a reduction to about 10 stations (most of which were unstaffed), a limited amount of passing loops and reduction from double track (and hence reduction in signalling costs). That guys station, would either have closed or been unstaffed. I seem to recall that using Beechings own figures on DMU running costs, they got it to breakeven point on Bournmouth-Evercreech and Evercreech to Highbridge, with a very small loss on the north to Bath. Big problem was the backlog maintainence.

I wasn't aware of the study, however it doesn't surprise me that Bournemouth to Evercreech could have broke even, even in those days, given the size of the Bournemouth - Poole settlement and lack of journey opportunities westward. I'm a little more surprised about the Highbridge branch. I always imagined the route to Bath would have been more popular.

 

[yorksrob]

so maybe this is the start of a de-beeching process?

Alas, I fear not because so much of the damage done is irreversible (and even where it isn't, it would never meet the "business case".

 

[yorksrob]

The key issue here is that so many exercises concentrate on the running costs of the current physical plant. But I believe the real problem is that the physical plant has remained, more or less, as it was when built in early Victorian times. But since then, the world has moved immeasurably on.

For roads, although they also existed at that time, most mileage is done on more recent ones, and all the main high speed routes have been built in the last 60 years. Airports have almost nothing from before 1950. Many dock installations of WW2 era have been replaced by different ones. And where the business comes from, homes, places of employment, retail areas, etc, have all substantially built new in different locations, which the railway has just not adapted to.

In Victorian times, thousands of miles could be built per year. Yet nowadays it takes for ever to agree a one mile route change. Where are the funds to regularly update the infrastructure alignment?

Poor infrastructure for the network never gets sorted out. The S&D would have benefitted from operating from the same station in Bath as the main GWR one. Maidstone and Canterbury would have given far greater connectivity across Kent if their main stations had been amalgamated in the 120 years since they started operation by one company. Rugby to Leicester is a gap in the network, but when in the 1960s the GCR "main" line was the link between the two it carried hardly anybody because its trains operated from stations in obscure back streets of both towns, well separated from the services at the main station, so pretty useless for connections. Even in London, the Circle Line has run in front of the largest main line terminus, Euston, for 150 years without anyone ever getting round to providing platforms at that point.

Bristol Temple Meads must be the station furthest out from any major city. Much of the intervening developed land in this, the largest city in southern England outside London, had been destroyed in WW2 bombing, yet no advantage was ever taken of this to resite to a more convenient central point where the demand was. Bristol always had a pitiful usage by commuters, even when the likes of the Portishead line were open, compared to Leeds or Edinburgh with well-sited central stations. Yet nothing was done, and this continues. Birmingham steadily goes backwards as progressively more services are shifted out of New Street to the less well-sited Snow Hill with less connecting opportunities. Getting back to the original Beeching era, many of the stations on those branches that radiated from Taunton had the furthest out buildings of the places they were named after. And if you look at the likes of the "saved" Bere Alston/Gunnislake line, this still applies.

The HS2 saga with it's own stations in major city areas quite separated from the current main stations - transferring from one to the other will more than eat up any speed advantage - shows the understanding of a network and its impact on driving demand is still not understood. Just because a station is called, say, Gunnislake (which has lots of recent houses) does not mean it is in any way convenient for receiving demand from the town.

The Southern Railway made some valiant attempts to sort out the mess left by competing companies in Kent, particularly in Thanet and around Dover. Nevertheless, there's only so much you can do with lines in opposite directions which cross away from the centre of the population. As someone who's used the railways of Kent for around forty years, the oddities of the two networks haven't really damaged the railway "product" by any great extent. The vast majority of people around the County can still get to the majority of places they would want to go, even if in some places such as Maidstone or Canterbury, you have to choose the right station. There are some flows between the two networks that are difficult - Ashford - Faversham for example, however these would never be major.

I would argue that compared to the situation in East Sussex, for example, where towns have either been cut off to important destinations (Uckfield/Crowborough - Brighton) or cut off from the railway network altogether (Hailsham/Heathfield), Kent has been sitting very pretty indeed for the past fifty years.

In terms of Birmingham, the rejuvenation of Snow Hill really is a success story. For a big City, there are only so many people you can flush through a limited number of platforms and if one major station is incapacitated for whatever reason, it means that the whole network isn't brought to a standstill. Also, interchange opportunities such as New Street/Moorstreet and Smethwick Galton bridge mean that network benefits aren't completely impeded.

I would have envisaged the S&D service reversing over Midland Metals and ending up in Temple Meads.

 

[Cowley]

I've always wondered and maybe people who remember the times could throw some light on this?
With so many lines and stations being lost at the time, were closures such as the Somerset and Dorset almost accepted as yet another loss amongst the general destruction that was occurring all around the railways back then?
I know Ivo Peters took many evocative photos of the line near the end and it seemed to be loved by enthusiasts and I assume the locals that it served too, but when you look at the fight to save the Settle to Carlisle line which in the 80s was an isolated case, it was easier to bring the attention to it in some ways.
Were some of the lines that were closed in the era this thread is focusing on just lost in the general whirlwind of destruction (change even) that was blowing at the time? As in someone reading the papers on a Sunday and saying, "Ah the S&D. Oh well, there goes another one. Anyway, what does the weather forecast say for tomorrow?"

 

[Bevan Price]

I've always wondered and maybe people who remember the times could throw some light on this?
With so many lines and stations being lost at the time, were closures such as the Somerset and Dorset almost accepted as yet another loss amongst the general destruction that was occurring all around the railways back then?
I know Ivo Peters took many evocative photos of the line near the end and it seemed to be loved by enthusiasts and I assume the locals that it served too, but when you look at the fight to save the Settle to Carlisle line which in the 80s was an isolated case, it was easier to bring the attention to it in some ways.
Were some of the lines that were closed in the era this thread is focusing on just lost in the general whirlwind of destruction (change even) that was blowing at the time? As in someone reading the papers on a Sunday and saying, "Ah the S&D. Oh well, there goes another one. Anyway, what does the weather forecast say for tomorrow?"

There were plenty of objections to some closures, but these were often ignored. Some closure proposals were rejected, or not pursued by BR. So, for example Liverpool still retains services to Southport and to St. Helens/Wigan, both of which were proposed for closure by Beeching.

There were some claims that it might help to retain a service if the local MP was a member of the "right" party, especially in potentially marginal constituencies.....

 

[Cowley]

There were plenty of objections to some closures, but these were often ignored. Some closure proposals were rejected, or not pursued by BR. So, for example Liverpool still retains services to Southport and to St. Helens/Wigan, both of which were proposed for closure by Beeching.

There were some claims that it might help to retain a service if the local MP was a member of the "right" party, especially in potentially marginal constituencies.....

Thanks for that Bevan, it very much makes sense when you put it like that.

 

[infobleep]

To be fair, proper rationalisation costs money short term - most obviously when singling routes, but also (think SR demus on Marshlink) adapting stock for Paytrain working.

In the case of the East Suffolk, it was management aka Gerald Fiennes IIRC who decided to test rationalisation (mainly of station staff) in the 2-3 years between Beeching and an actual closure proposal.

Would it not also cost money to rip up lines after they are closed or did BR get paid for that to happen, as the people ripping up the lines got the materials to sell on?

 

[Lankyline]

Problem with some of the closures was that the proposed closure meetings were well attended by locals, who when asked if they used the railway, said either infrequently or not at all !

Other lines that were axed never received any form of modernisation in order to cut costs, eg DMU's, instead of steam traction etc Preston - Southport was steam hauled right to the end, no cost saving measures were made, even had gas lighting on most of the stations!

There are plenty of conspiracy theories of how lines were axed, eg timetable changes to miss connections, diverted services etc but the biggest single flaw, imo, was the total inaccuracy of the passenger census & revenue figures that took no account of holiday traffic, peak time loadings, freight revenues, for example the passenger census was conducted over a couple of days in April (not Easter) so therefore didn't take into account seasonal traffic and in a lot of cases, was conducted between morning & evening rush hours. Beeching used these as the cornerstone of his recommendations.

Plus freight revenues could never increase as the railways were obligated to publish their charges for all to see. No such obligation was made for road freight haulage

 

[Lankyline]

There were some claims that it might help to retain a service if the local MP was a member of the "right" party, especially in potentially marginal constituencies.....

That actually happened under Labour when it was pointed out that some proposed closures in south wales ran right through, I think, 2 maybe 3 labour seats !

 

[yorksrob]

I've always wondered and maybe people who remember the times could throw some light on this?
With so many lines and stations being lost at the time, were closures such as the Somerset and Dorset almost accepted as yet another loss amongst the general destruction that was occurring all around the railways back then?
I know Ivo Peters took many evocative photos of the line near the end and it seemed to be loved by enthusiasts and I assume the locals that it served too, but when you look at the fight to save the Settle to Carlisle line which in the 80s was an isolated case, it was easier to bring the attention to it in some ways.
Were some of the lines that were closed in the era this thread is focusing on just lost in the general whirlwind of destruction (change even) that was blowing at the time? As in someone reading the papers on a Sunday and saying, "Ah the S&D. Oh well, there goes another one. Anyway, what does the weather forecast say for tomorrow?"

In his famous book, G Fiennes mentions a local Conservative MP from the Dorset area being very vocally against the closure of the S&D (in spite of backing the Beeching plan in votes in the House).

And of course, Sir John Betjamin made one of his passionate appeals against the cuts in a short film about the Highbridge branch (repeated on BBC4's Beeching night a couple of years back).

 

[DarloRich]

Bit of an exaggeration, but the vehicles used at summer weekends (and pre-Christmas week, and for midweek excursions, and ...) were generally at the ends of their lives, and the railway at the time had a good understanding of the marginal costing of them, in fact a far better idea of this than the leasing companines and operators have nowadays. Thus the "loss" by retaining them is not what you may think.

The report found c.2000 carriages used less than 10 times per year and with the changes in society ( car ownership/foreign holidays etc) they weren't going to get used . Despite not running very often they still needed repairs, brake and bogie tests, siding space, cleaning etc etc. They will still have been "on the books" for overhaul. They will still consume spare parts. They will still consume workers time. A vehicle stilling still costs money. They are not free because they don't move very often. If nothing else the siding space alone has a commercial value.

Anyone familiar with the current road freight business will be aware of thousands of HGV trailers (let alone hundreds of thousands of containers) which stand unused from one week to the next, yet form part of what is a straightforwardly profitable business. The rail trend nowadays to throw away any asset not in use 24x7 (or to be more precise, not giving leasing revenue on that basis) does not always show an understanding of real costs and revenue.

A road haulier does not have to plan and build the M1 to operate. The railway operator does. The road haulier does not, really, have to pay for the costs of operating the M1. The railway operator does. The road haulier doesn't, really, pay for the army of people needed to keep the roads in good nick. The railway operator ( at least in the case of BR & the tax player) does.

BR could not find all of its wagons at the time of the report as so many were tied up in private yards or sidings. The utilsation of that fleet was terrible. Surely it is correct to try and get the maximum use of your expensive assets and get rid of those that will never earn you a return?

I've always wondered and maybe people who remember the times could throw some light on this?
With so many lines and stations being lost at the time, were closures such as the Somerset and Dorset almost accepted as yet another loss amongst the general destruction that was occurring all around the railways back then?
I know Ivo Peters took many evocative photos of the line near the end and it seemed to be loved by enthusiasts and I assume the locals that it served too, but when you look at the fight to save the Settle to Carlisle line which in the 80s was an isolated case, it was easier to bring the attention to it in some ways.
Were some of the lines that were closed in the era this thread is focusing on just lost in the general whirlwind of destruction (change even) that was blowing at the time? As in someone reading the papers on a Sunday and saying, "Ah the S&D. Oh well, there goes another one. Anyway, what does the weather forecast say for tomorrow?"

I have never understood the spotterish love of this line. Perhaps it was those pictures or some half remembered and alleged halcyon summer holi-days. It has always seemed like a picturesque but silly railway serving nowhere in particular.

 

[DarloRich]

That actually happened under Labour when it was pointed out that some proposed closures in south wales ran right through, I think, 2 maybe 3 labour seats !

I think the heart of wales line was said to run through several marginal seats and so was reprieved.

 

[JohnR]

There were plenty of objections to some closures, but these were often ignored. Some closure proposals were rejected, or not pursued by BR. So, for example Liverpool still retains services to Southport and to St. Helens/Wigan, both of which were proposed for closure by Beeching.

There were some claims that it might help to retain a service if the local MP was a member of the "right" party, especially in potentially marginal constituencies.....

Why else do you think the Heart of Wales line survived? It passed through no less than 6 Marginals

 

[yorksrob]

The report found c.2000 carriages used less than 10 times per year and with the changes in society ( car ownership/foreign holidays etc) they weren't going to get used . Despite not running very often they still needed repairs, brake and bogie tests, siding space, cleaning etc etc. They will still have been "on the books" for overhaul. They will still consume spare parts. They will still consume workers time. A vehicle stilling still costs money. They are not free because they don't move very often. If nothing else the siding space alone has a commercial value.




A road haulier does not have to plan and build the M1 to operate. The railway operator does. The road haulier does not, really, have to pay for the costs of operating the M1. The railway operator does. The road haulier doesn't, really, pay for the army of people needed to keep the roads in good nick. The railway operator ( at least in the case of BR & the tax player) does.

BR could not find all of its wagons at the time of the report as so many were tied up in private yards or sidings. The utilsation of that fleet was terrible. Surely it is correct to try and get the maximum use of your expensive assets and get rid of those that will never earn you a return?



I have never understood the spotterish love of this line. Perhaps it was those pictures or some half remembered and alleged halcyon summer holi-days. It has always seemed like a picturesque but silly railway serving nowhere in particular.

Not true at all. The S&D linked the "Howards Way" belt of Poole and Bournemouth with Bath, Bristol and the Midlands. With decent connections at Templecombe, it could also link Bournemouth to the West. From a geographical point of view, the route seems to have at least as much potential as the Heart of Wessex.

 

[DarloRich]

Not true at all. The S&D linked the "Howards Way" belt of Poole and Bournemouth with Bath, Bristol and the Midlands. With decent connections at Templecombe, it could also link Bournemouth to the West. From a geographical point of view, the route seems to have at least as much potential as the Heart of Wessex.

through very sparesly populated (if stunning) rural areas and carrying very few passengers

 

[PeterC]

Problem with some of the closures was that the proposed closure meetings were well attended by locals, who when asked if they used the railway, said either infrequently or not at all !

Just like modern campaigns against pub closures.

 

[yorksrob]

through very sparesly populated (if stunning) rural areas and carrying very few passengers

I imagine Wincanton, Blandford and Shepton Mallet would generate decent passenger flows today.

 

[DarloRich]

I imagine Wincanton, Blandford and Shepton Mallet would generate decent passenger flows today.

perhaps - but that is part of my point. The people of the 1960's could only make decisions on the information they had at the time. They couldn't foresee how society changed between then and now (there are nearly 12 million more people living in our islands compared to 1960) any more than we can know what life will be like in 2060. Nor can we project what we know now onto them.

Put simply the railways were skint, costs were going up, passenger numbers were going down, people were buying cars in greater and greater numbers, people were starting to explore foreign holidays, freight was running to the roads and commuting was focused on 20 (!) miles from London - something had to be done.

 

[lyndhurst25]

You have to wonder about the validity of Beeching's cost calculations, when he came up with harebrained proposals like closing the Liverpool to Southport line. It's a very busy line nowadays and I'm pretty sure that it must have been similarly well used in the 1960s. I'd like to see the figures that Beeching used to justify the closure proposal. Maybe he was just part of the mindset that Liverpool Exchange needed to be got rid of and the land sold off? A lucky escape.

 

[JohnR]

My memory played a few tricks with the details - the original pamphlet is here:

http://www.railfuture.org.uk/RDS+pamphlets

In their proposal, they suggested closing all stations between Broadstone and Mangotfield bar 6 - Blandford Forum, Sturminster Newton, Wincanton, Glsagtonbury & Street, Shepton Mallet, Radstock and Bath. They assumed that Templecombe and Highbridge would remain open.

Their movement costs are for 3 DMU's on the Main line, at a cost of £68,640 and a Single unit on the Branch at a cost of £10,270. They costed the track & signalling at £3,500 per mile - £259,000.

I would contrast that with what Gerry Fiennes had for the East Suffolk just a couple of years later:

2 x DMU's including crew, fuel, maintainance - £30,000
1 x hauled train - £6,000.

Remembering that Gerry was estimating the cost of maintaining the East Suffolk at £670 per mile, its probably not unreasonable to suggest that this could be say £1,000 a mile for the S&D - at least over the southern section and the branch. Indeed, the branch is most like the East Suffolk.

Assuming the branch is at East Suffolk cost (£670/mile) and the southern section of main line at £1000/mile and the northern at £1,500/mile, and using the movement costs from Fiennes, we find that the main line need only have just under 3,000 passengers a week and the branch just under 2,300. In the famous maps of traffic density, the northern section was at 5,000-10,000 passengers per week, and the southern and branch at 0 - 5,000.

 

[Taunton]

I imagine Wincanton, Blandford and Shepton Mallet would generate decent passenger flows today.

I'm sorry to have to keep correcting the views of those from the other end of the country here, but as one of the few here to have taken more than an enthusiast excursion on the S&D, even that is not so. Trains on the S&D, year round, generally ran empty from Bristol to Bath GP (there being of course a better service on the old GW line). There always was some local traffic on Bath to Radstock, but beyond there things fell right away. Shepton focuses much more on Bristol rather than Bath, its main bus service ran straight up the A37 road there, as did almost all the locals in their cars, likewise lorryloads of Shepton Mallet's most famous export, "Babycham". Evercreech Junction is in the middle of nowhere. Evercreech itself, one station north, is quite a large village, but few trains stopped there, whereas all stopped at the Junction. Typical operating convenience first.

Wincanton focuses on Yeovil, Frome, and places up and down the main east-west A303 road, which in those days went through what was then a notably small village, only really known for its traffic jams and its racecourse, the latter too far from the station to walk. The S&D didn't serve any of these places. Although the line crossed the village main street (only main street), the station was out on the south-west edge of things. Blandford has also expanded greatly since S&D days, for once the station was in the middle, and it does relate mainly to Poole and Bournemouth (never say that Poole is 'part of Bournemouth' ), but there's a lot of empty country in between. It never seemed to generate much traffic though.

 

[Lankyline]

I think the heart of wales line was said to run through several marginal seats and so was reprieved.

That's the one.

 

[Andy873]

This is very interesting, thanks everyone, it's great to read all the different view points.

 

[yorksrob]

I'm sorry to have to keep correcting the views of those from the other end of the country here, but as one of the few here to have taken more than an enthusiast excursion on the S&D, even that is not so. Trains on the S&D, year round, generally ran empty from Bristol to Bath GP (there being of course a better service on the old GW line). There always was some local traffic on Bath to Radstock, but beyond there things fell right away. Shepton focuses much more on Bristol rather than Bath, its main bus service ran straight up the A37 road there, as did almost all the locals in their cars, likewise lorryloads of Shepton Mallet's most famous export, "Babycham". Evercreech Junction is in the middle of nowhere. Evercreech itself, one station north, is quite a large village, but few trains stopped there, whereas all stopped at the Junction. Typical operating convenience first.

Wincanton focuses on Yeovil, Frome, and places up and down the main east-west A303 road, which in those days went through what was then a notably small village, only really known for its traffic jams and its racecourse, the latter too far from the station to walk. The S&D didn't serve any of these places. Although the line crossed the village main street (only main street), the station was out on the south-west edge of things. Blandford has also expanded greatly since S&D days, for once the station was in the middle, and it does relate mainly to Poole and Bournemouth (never say that Poole is 'part of Bournemouth' ), but there's a lot of empty country in between. It never seemed to generate much traffic though.

Not to worry - I can assure you that I took no pleasure from correcting your earlier post on the railways of Kent !

With regard to yours and Darlo Rich's points about Blandford and Shepton Mallet, I daresay that similar could have been said about Landridnodd Wells and Beccles, however someone decided to make an effort with those lines and we are in a better position for it now.

If only we could say the same about the S&D.

 

[infobleep]

The report found c.2000 carriages used less than 10 times per year and with the changes in society ( car ownership/foreign holidays etc) they weren't going to get used . Despite not running very often they still needed repairs, brake and bogie tests, siding space, cleaning etc etc. They will still have been "on the books" for overhaul. They will still consume spare parts. They will still consume workers time. A vehicle stilling still costs money. They are not free because they don't move very often. If nothing else the siding space alone has a commercial value.




A road haulier does not have to plan and build the M1 to operate. The railway operator does. The road haulier does not, really, have to pay for the costs of operating the M1. The railway operator does. The road haulier doesn't, really, pay for the army of people needed to keep the roads in good nick. The railway operator ( at least in the case of BR & the tax player) does.

BR could not find all of its wagons at the time of the report as so many were tied up in private yards or sidings. The utilsation of that fleet was terrible. Surely it is correct to try and get the maximum use of your expensive assets and get rid of those that will never earn you a return?



I have never understood the spotterish love of this line. Perhaps it was those pictures or some half remembered and alleged halcyon summer holi-days. It has always seemed like a picturesque but silly railway serving nowhere in particular.

I personally think it was a useful route to the south coast. Even if you removed all the intermediate stations BR NY at significant population points, I. E. Bath and Bournemouth.

I mean north of Carlisle there is a long stretch of railway where stations closed.

 

[infobleep]

Just like modern campaigns against pub closures.

Pubs are now seem as centres of communities so can't be closed as easily.

Shame some of these railways weren't seen as that back in the 60s.

I speak with hindsight.

 

[infobleep]

perhaps - but that is part of my point. The people of the 1960's could only make decisions on the information they had at the time. They couldn't foresee how society changed between then and now (there are nearly 12 million more people living in our islands compared to 1960) any more than we can know what life will be like in 2060. Nor can we project what we know now onto them.

Put simply the railways were skint, costs were going up, passenger numbers were going down, people were buying cars in greater and greater numbers, people were starting to explore foreign holidays, freight was running to the roads and commuting was focused on 20 (!) miles from London - something had to be done.

Where many people communting from places like Heathfield back in the day? I use that example as wasn't that line double track.