Buxton-Matlock Rail and Trail Inquiry

[Kingfisher200262]

Regarding what was said earlier about the Hope Valley line, this post from the "Chinley" thread is worth reading http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=43304&page=4 ( post by VideozVideoz ) with clip from Buxton Advertiser.

The implication is that the route is congested as a result of the mixture of rolling stock that operates over it. What nobody is prepared to say outright is that the Pacers that operate the local services are the cause of the problem, as they are the lowest common denominator in terms of performance (especially since some newly overhauled units have recently been restricted to 60 mph!).

As part of its Business Case for Pacer replacement, which Northern cannot make based on the kind of simplistic arithmetic that is normally applied to these matters, it should be emphasising the wider benefits of Pacer replacement by demonstrating that removing Pacers from the Hope Valley and replacing them with DMUs that have improved performance capability would free up capacity for additional services.

 

[Tomnick]

I don't think the replacement of 142s would make any significant difference. The big problem is the mix of stopping patterns - the stopper takes forever and a day to get from New Mills South and Sheffield (and v.v.), because of the number of stops it makes and not the traction. I suspect any efforts to find additional paths would have to concentrate on the other side of the hour to that stopper.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The problem here is that there are not two established routes which provide cross-Pennine services as do the Calder Valley line and the Huddersfield line to the north of this area that serve West Yorkshire.

The Hope Valley route has many problems, some of which are revealed in the letter in the "thumbnail" sketch in the posting prior to this one. Cross Pennine rail links were cut with the closing of the Woodhead tunnel. Does anyone remember the justification given by the Transport Minister at that time?

I would like to hear what dggar has to report from the meeting on 25th May at Buxton.

 

[PinzaC55]

The problem here is that there are not two established routes which provide cross-Pennine services as do the Calder Valley line and the Huddersfield line to the north of this area that serve West Yorkshire.

The Hope Valley route has many problems, some of which are revealed in the letter in the "thumbnail" sketch in the posting prior to this one. Cross Pennine rail links were cut with the closing of the Woodhead tunnel. Does anyone remember the justification given by the Transport Minister at that time?

I would like to hear what dggar has to report from the meeting on 25th May at Buxton.

As far as I remember it the justification for closing Woodhead was that the overhead catenary was life expired and required complete replacement. Since it was on the non standard 1500 volts DC system this would also mean new supply systems and so on, plus presumably new motive power. Plus it needs to be remembered that at Sheffield running a passenger service to Sheffield involved a reversal at Nunnery Junction or reopening Sheffield Victoria which of course meant no interchange with Midland Main Line trains.
It also needs to be remembered that when Woodhead closed it was about the nadir of British Rail passenger carrying figures although Thatcher still hadn't trashed the coal industry.

 

[dggar]

I would like to hear what dggar has to report from the meeting on 25th May at Buxton.

I'm afraid there is nothing to report at present
Below is a reply I got when I asked for comments about the meeting

Rail Inquiry Report
I am new to this group and was not able to get to the meeting last night.
Is there a report back of what was discussed?
Thanks in advance.

Submitted by JanetMiller on 26 May, 2011 - 21:31.
Lots of people have asked us - yes there will be a report of the proceedings, just as soon as we can pull it together.
Watch this space, or email us and we'll notify you when it comes out..

Another writer(unkown to me) on a completly different forum has posted the following about the Monsal Trail.

This afternoon my wife and I walked 14 miles out and back through the newly opened tunnels on the Monsal Trail. Although it is being promoted as a cycle trail, there were as many walkers using it as bikes and we even saw a couple of horse riders. What impressed me most were the length of the tunnels and just how attractive the scenery is around Chee Dale. A highly recommended and unique walk.

In a year or two's time the Monsal Trail will become the 'must do' experience of the White Peak. What chance of children on their bikes sharing these tunnels with the exhaust of a steam locomotive? I'm afraid that any aspirations that Peak Rail may have had of running trains through to Buxton is now very firmly dead and buried.

 

[Nym]

Peak rail maybe not, but I don't think theres a sensible person on the planet that would refuse Derby - Matlock - Manchester service every 1hr to 30mins, Would proberbly terminate in Piccadilly and run via Romiley and terminate on Pt 1-4, Would speed up Journeys to Derby, Nottingham and Norwich.

What kind of journey time would we be looking at for a limited stop...

Piccadilly - Chinley (Via Romiley or Stockport) - Derby - Nottingham

If coming from Liverpool through Piccadilly, Via Stockport and Hazel Grove
If terminating at Manchester, via Romiley into Piccadilly East
If coming from Liverpool through Victoria, via Romiley

Yes, I am thinking of diverting Liverpool - Norwich that way and having an extra service from Doncaster - Liverpool via Piccadilly & Stockport. Letting Northern have the Sheffeild - Nottingham flow, maybe an extra EMT service.

Would be a possiblity to send the longer distance Liverpool - Norwich via Matlock and retain the 'lost section' of the route with an additional semi fast, in the current path in the Hope Valley.

I'm thinking: Piccadilly - Guide Bridge - Romiley - Chinley - Dore - Sheffeild - (then pick up the current pattern to nottingham, or cut the service to Sheffeild)

Wouldn't take up any more paths on the Stockport Viaduct, and would concentrate the longer distance traffic on a longer distance route, hopfully faster to get to Nottingham. Would need 2 track and 90mph from Derby to Chinley via Matlock and maybe some linespeed improvments round Stockport.

Would also be a way to free up capacity in the hope valley if only one fast service needs pathing.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There is a very big conflict of interest now between the people who use this line for recreational purposes, who quote the special nature of the area concerned, against the views of those who wish to see a once-famous rail route reinstated.

I can see this debate reaching much higher proportions in the coming months with Members of Parliament, local authorities and the National Parks bodies all coming into the debate.

 

[CBG2KGX]

I'd like to thank this thread for letting me know about the opening of the tunnels. I've walked the Monsal Trail in the past before the tunnels opened but the current route is a fantastic enhancement to the experience. This weekend I was one of probably thousands who enjoyed the route. In my case it was a trip up the Derwent Valley line to Matlock, Peak Rail to Rowsley and a walk the whole length of Monsal trail (shame about the missing line section under Haddon Hall though).

On one hand it's a shame the Midland Railway no longer has a route through this lovely scenery but on the other hand it has opened up the area for recreation in a way, even as a keen rail traveller, that I am thankful for.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I'm afraid there is nothing to report at present
Below is a reply I got when I asked for comments about the me.

At least you were promised something from them as soon as they compile their report of the meeting. Once you actually hear something, be it negative or positive, kindly post your news on this particular thread. It will give continuity to matters at hand.

 

[Wyvern]

One problem that no one has mentioned is that extra trains either through the Hope Valley or Buxton are going to hit the bottleneck of Stockport?

Also any new line though Buxton can never be a "high speed route," particularly from reversing from there to Manchester all round Dove Holes.

Curse the LNWR!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

One problem that no one has mentioned is that extra trains either through the Hope Valley or Buxton are going to hit the bottleneck of Stockport?

Also any new line though Buxton can never be a "high speed route," particularly from reversing from there to Manchester all round Dove Holes.

Curse the LNWR!

Here we see the difference between aspiration and actual reality.

 

[bladesman123]

Localism is all very well. However, sometimes it's necessary to step back and look at the bigger picture.

One of the strongest arguments to come from the pro HS2 brigade is that the West Coast Main Line is almost full. Did someone grow some trains over the past ten years, or has this line recently been upgraded at a cost of over £9Bn?

Railtrack / Network Rail etc bottled the WCML upgrade in my opinion. It should have had in cab signalling, not for higher speed (although it would have delivered that) but for more capacity. As it was, it was decided not to proceed with this due to project time / cost over-run.

Now, everyone is paranoid about touching the WCML again, when, in reality that's what is needed... ERTMS.

When the West Coast main line was electrified in the 1960s, the Midland Main Line was open all the way through to Manchester via Matlock and Miller's Dale and this served as a perfect diversionary route. Had this route been available during the last WCML upgrade, the pain would have been much less and the civils guys wouldn't have had operational trains around their necks half the time.

The 16 missing miles between Miller's Dale junction and Matlock are a critically important artery of our railway network, which should never have been given up to the walkers and cyclists.

As for Peak Rail, well it might be a bit idealistic, but wouldn't it be nice to be able to operate a public service railway through the Peak for six days of the week, and then hand it over to the kettle fans on a Sunday so that they can play trains and entertain the masses? That surely is the ultimate railway win-win.

Good post.

 

[Nym]

One problem that no one has mentioned is that extra trains either through the Hope Valley or Buxton are going to hit the bottleneck of Stockport?

Also any new line though Buxton can never be a "high speed route," particularly from reversing from there to Manchester all round Dove Holes.

Curse the LNWR!

Errrrr...... It doesn't need to go via Stockport?

Perfectly good stretch of line from the Matlock - Buxton route at it's Delta Junction just east of Chinley into Manchester that goes nowhere near Stockport Railway Station, there used to be two, but some idiot closed one of them and put trams on it instead.

What would be wrong with an Inter-Urban service running:

Nottingham - Derby - Matlock - Buxton LNWR (Reverse) - Chinley - Guide Bridge - Piccadilly

Express services can skip the reversing at Buxton, eg Norwich - Liverpool could be routed this way and call only at Derby and Manchester Victoria / Derby - Stockport - Piccadilly - CLC - Liverpool. Cutting back the EMT service from sheffeild to run only to Piccadilly, via Romiley. Using the current path through stockport for Liverpool - Norwich.

Or if it wants to continue to Liverpool could add a coard between the Romiley via Reddish route and Denton, using Ashton Moss Jcn to access Victoria, or keep it simple and use Philips Park Jcns.

Why must everything not only stop at stockport, but all new routes serve it aswell?

 

[Masbroughlad]

Why must everything not only stop at stockport, but all new routes serve it aswell?

The Stockport thing always gets me. It has far too many stopping trains for the size of the town! Didn't XC run some non-stop through Stockport but were made to re-introduce the stop? No idea why?!

 

[Nym]

The Stockport thing always gets me. It has far too many stopping trains for the size of the town! Didn't XC run some non-stop through Stockport but were made to re-introduce the stop? No idea why?!

Don't get me wrong, I can see why everything stops there, it's a faily major junction. (Regardless of the viaduct laws).

But theres nothing stopping TOCs or the DfT routing services away from Stockport.

Is the whole reason the Styal Branch was built, to avoid stockport for express trains, if linespeed on this route was a tad better, and pathing not all taken up by the Airport I'd suspect that some TOCs might want to avoid stockport, although they'd then loose out on ORCATS(sp?) money.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The Stockport thing always gets me. It has far too many stopping trains for the size of the town!

Was the regulation that all trains to and from Manchester Piccadilly via Stockport MUST make a stop at Stockport that was enshrined countless eons ago ever actually revoked....or is it still operational?

Perhaps the railway historians on the forum would give the past history and the current situation on this point.

 

[Wyvern]

The paths into Manchester were always overcrowded, which is why Manchester Central was built, and later the line through DisleyTunnel and Heaton Mersey, was built.



Midland routes into Manchester

 

[Tomnick]

What would be wrong with an Inter-Urban service running:

Nottingham - Derby - Matlock - Buxton LNWR (Reverse) - Chinley - Guide Bridge - Piccadilly

If nothing else, the fact that the Midland branch doesn't run into the LNWR station! Even if your proposed service ran into a reinstated Midland station, it'd add a fair chunk to the overall journey time. Not sure how practical it'd be to call at a new station on the spur from the Midland up to the LNW (and then run via Stockport) - that'd certainly require complete remodelling of the LNW into Buxton.

 

[Nym]

OK then, Buxton Midland station. But anytying semi fast on the route shoud be serving Buxton.

 

[Tomnick]

Agreed. The trek back out towards Peak Forest would do nothing to improve the journey time for through passengers (still significant, even if there's a fast service too) though.

 

[Kingfisher200262]

Errrrr...... It doesn't need to go via Stockport?

Perfectly good stretch of line from the Matlock - Buxton route at it's Delta Junction just east of Chinley into Manchester that goes nowhere near Stockport Railway Station, there used to be two, but some idiot closed one of them and put trams on it instead.

What would be wrong with an Inter-Urban service running:

Nottingham - Derby - Matlock - Buxton LNWR (Reverse) - Chinley - Guide Bridge - Piccadilly

With a park-and-ride at Guide Bridge so that people can drop straight off the M60 with their car and either head into Manchester or away to Derby / Nottingham. Why, with a change at Derby or Nottingham, they even have another route to London.

I do question the need to run into Buxton with all services, although I do admit that some Buxton - Matlock and Buxton - Derby services do make sense.

Sounds tailor-made for open access, rather than integration into the franchised network. A substantial open access operator could make the investment in the reinstatement, in order to gain paths over the rest of the network that they would need to run a sensible service.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The trek back out towards Peak Forest would do nothing to improve the journey time for through passengers (still significant, even if there's a fast service too) though.

But the scenery would be worth seeing. Just think, a Peak District version of the Settle to Carlisle....

The Tourist Information office in Buxton would have a field day!!

 

[trickyvegas]

Was the regulation that all trains to and from Manchester Piccadilly via Stockport MUST make a stop at Stockport that was enshrined countless eons ago ever actually revoked....or is it still operational?

Perhaps the railway historians on the forum would give the past history and the current situation on this point.

There have been a references to it news articles in the Manchester Evening News in the past but apparantly no-one has ever been able to find the Act of Pariliament in the archives to back it up.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

Now I may be COMPLETELY wrong on this (a rarity but true nonetheless lol), but I am sure I either read or heard somewhere that the reason this myth about all trains stopping at Stockport came about was way back when the Viaducts were built, The Railway companies needed to get permission to build the viaduct into Stockport, so the agreement was that all trains had to stop there and also it helped to get the cost of building the viaduct back from the companies that used it, it could be complete codswallop but it certainly makes a heck of alot of sense!

 

[tbtc]

Now I may be COMPLETELY wrong on this (a rarity but true nonetheless lol), but I am sure I either read or heard somewhere that the reason this myth about all trains stopping at Stockport came about was way back when the Viaducts were built, The Railway companies needed to get permission to build the viaduct into Stockport, so the agreement was that all trains had to stop there and also it helped to get the cost of building the viaduct back from the companies that used it, it could be complete codswallop but it certainly makes a heck of alot of sense!

IIRC the Manchester - Bournemouth XC service ran non-stop through Stockport for a while.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

IIRC the Manchester - Bournemouth XC service ran non-stop through Stockport for a while.

but only for a relatively short time!

 

[Chapeltom]

I think it was for 6 months.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There have been a references to it news articles in the Manchester Evening News in the past but apparantly no-one has ever been able to find the Act of Pariliament in the archives to back it up.

This matter concerning Stockport was told to me in the 1950's when I was attending grammar school by a teacher as part of a project on early railways. I remember being quite impressed at the time.

Would the National Railway Museum have any information in their archives? Maybe no-one has ever approached them on this matter.

 

[tbtc]

but only for a relatively short time!

Regardless, if this was a "law" of some type then it'd never have been allowed in the first place.

If this was true, and all trains over the viaduct were forced to stop at Stockport then how come no other towns did this?

Urban myth

 

[OxtedL]

I have heard this too, and am not convinced it's myth. I understand the government were happy to overlook it.

Other towns got other strange things through. Can't recall any at the moment, but know there's a few...