"Cedric Martindale proposes Penrith to Keswick reopening"

[Bletchleyite]

Ages ago when Virgin were into "RailLinks" (there were a few of them, not uncoincidentally mostly if not all operated by Stagecoach) it was in the timetable and ticketing system. There were a few of them - the Luton Airport 99 (which continues as a Stagecoach service which is and always was primarily used by commuting warehouse staff and not air passengers), the Preston-Southport X2 (which was controversial as it directly competed with an actual rail service from Wigan) and the dedicated Buxton-Macclesfield one were examples.

 

[Bald Rick]

I’ve now had a more detailed look at the line of route ‘virtually’, to get a better idea of the challenges to be overcome were this project to be taken forward to the next stage. I should have done this years ago.

This would be a big, big job. Much of the formation and main civils has gone. That which hasn’t would almost certainly need to be replaced. And there’s a lot of it. Then there’s some all new elements required, for example flood defences (the line of route has clearly washed away in places, or in danger of doing so); to get over / under roads that were formerly level crossings; to get over / under the ‘new’ A66 at least twice. Then there’s a lot of ‘new’ property on the line of route, and with much open country around it is likely to be necessary to build a route that avoids it, even if that is more expensive, which it almost certainly will be. The scale of works required is bigger on a per mile basis than, say, East West Rail.

It’s almost certainly going to be over £30m / mile in cash prices, and probably nearer £40m. So £500m-£700m.

No one with any intelligence can possibly argue that this would be the best way to spend this sum of public money on transport, or even anything, in the Lake District.

 

[HSTEd]

No one with any intelligence can possibly argue that this would be the best way to spend this sum of public money on transport, or even anything, in the Lake District.

When your branch line to a rural town costs more than a medium sized tram system, you know you have an issue.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Would it be cheaper conveying passengers from Penrith -> Keswick by taxi rather than reinstating the old railway line that was closed almost fifty years ago?

Taxi for Martindale?!

 

[A0]

When your branch line to a rural town costs more than a medium sized tram system, you know you have an issue.

Except it isn't - @Bald Rick who has some knowledge of these things has provided a view of circa £ 40m / mile.

The latest estimates on the 11 mile extension to the West Midlands Metro (which is an approved project) has gone up to £ 449.5m (up by £ 50m) and likely to increase again - which means that's costing at least £ 40m / mile. The original figure for that extension was £ 343m.

Midland Metro extension cost rises by £50M - New Civil Engineer

The increase was announced in board papers ahead of a West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) Investment Board meeting next week. The authority said the

www.newcivilengineer.com

.

 

[Bletchleyite]

When your branch line to a rural town costs more than a medium sized tram system, you know you have an issue.

If it was being done (and I would state again that there's about as much case to build this as there would be to build the Conwy Valley if that had already been closed[1]) then I'd suggest building it as a tram style light rail system would make most sense, as it could handle steep curves and "ducking under" roads much more easily.

[1] If you ignore the bottom bit to Blaenau, it's actually very similar to the busiest northern part of the Conwy Valley - a route connecting the mainline which isn't really a tourist destination to a small tourist-destination town (Betws, in the Conwy Valley's case) which would have lowish ridership outside the tourist season, washes away from time to time requiring expensive works (those works of course presently being done on the footpath) and is probably practically better served by bus due to a quality and uncongested road being in place along pretty much the same line of route.

 

[Bald Rick]

I think that @HSTEd was referring to the total price, ie for the total cost of Penrith - Keswick you could buy a medium sized tram system (such as the Midand Metro extension!)

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think that @HSTEd was referring to the total price, is for the total cost of Penrith - Keswick you could buy a medium sized tram system (such as the Mkdland Metro extension!)

I know he was, but I thought it a tangent worthy of (brief) consideration. Many aspects of urban tramways would apply well to a rural line if we did see fit to build one - low platforms and low floor vehicles, open level crossings (the trams having track brakes to be able to stop quickly if needed), cheaper drive on sight signalling, the ability to extend it up the road to a more useful terminus than the traditional one which was very often sited for the convenience of a coal yard rather than the high street etc.

Also trams are "cool" even 30 years on from the first new-generation UK systems (crikey, it's that long?) - a fume-spewing Class 150 every hour isn't. And they're lighter than heavy rail vehicles so battery is more viable.

 

[Bald Rick]

I know he was, but I thought it a tangent worthy of (brief) consideration. Many aspects of urban tramways would apply well to a rural line if we did see fit to build one - low platforms and low floor vehicles, open level crossings (the trams having track brakes to be able to stop quickly if needed), cheaper drive on sight signalling, the ability to extend it up the road to a more useful terminus than the traditional one which was very often sited for the convenience of a coal yard rather than the high street etc.

Also trams are "cool" even 30 years on from the first new-generation UK systems (crikey, it's that long?) - a fume-spewing Class 150 every hour isn't. And they're lighter than heavy rail vehicles so battery is more viable.

I agree. (I was replying to @A0wen, you managed to reply just in front of me).

Although it wouldn’t make any difference to the business case for this line!

 

[A0]

I think that @HSTEd was referring to the total price, ie for the total cost of Penrith - Keswick you could buy a medium sized tram system (such as the Midand Metro extension!)

Actually I've just noticed an error in my calculation because I misread the article - the distance is 11km not 11miles - so it's actually 7 miles - and their /mile cost is coming out at £ 65m / mile.

I'll take bets on the final cost coming in at around £ 75k / mile (£ 500-550m).

 

[yoyothehobo]

I think to fully satisfy everyone, if you replace the bus with one of those mini road train things like you get in York to the railway museum!

This line would require a total rebuild/likely rerouting of anything close to the river, so this is a reopening that will never happen.

 

[trebor79]

I’ve now had a more detailed look at the line of route ‘virtually’, to get a better idea of the challenges to be overcome were this project to be taken forward to the next stage. I should have done this years ago.

This would be a big, big job. Much of the formation and main civils has gone. That which hasn’t would almost certainly need to be replaced. And there’s a lot of it. Then there’s some all new elements required, for example flood defences (the line of route has clearly washed away in places, or in danger of doing so); to get over / under roads that were formerly level crossings; to get over / under the ‘new’ A66 at least twice. Then there’s a lot of ‘new’ property on the line of route, and with much open country around it is likely to be necessary to build a route that avoids it, even if that is more expensive, which it almost certainly will be. The scale of works required is bigger on a per mile basis than, say, East West Rail.

It’s almost certainly going to be over £30m / mile in cash prices, and probably nearer £40m. So £500m-£700m.

No one with any intelligence can possibly argue that this would be the best way to spend this sum of public money on transport, or even anything, in the Lake District.

I cycled part of it over 20 years ago, and even then as a spotty teenager I could see it would, unfortunately be a massive job. In parts the formation was little more than a muddy footpath. I remember particularly where it clings to the side of a valley with the river below, you could scarcely believe there had once been a railway there at all. All of the remaining metal bridges were in very poor condition. The formation had been completely destroyed where the A66 viaduct over the valley has supports.
I think that last bit from the A66 viaduct into Kewsick would be the most costly stretch, notwithstanding there are "challenges" of subsequent development along other parts of the route. You basically have to start from scratch, so finding an alternative route might make more sense.
I'm also of the view that had it survived nobody in their right mind would suggest closing it today, but that no one in their right mind would suggest rebuilding it with the current costs of railway construction.

One possible alternative would be to construct a narrow gauge railway/tramway. That would come with considerably lower cost and allow diversion along or aside existing highways such as the A66 to avoid the most difficult spots.

Edit - whilst idly perusing the route on Google Earth, I spotted this surviving relic near Threlkeld:

[Old BRB sign warning "Laden weight not to exceed 2 ton"]
I wonder if the little sign below has contact details for a long demolished signal box?

 

[Bletchleyite]

One possible alternative would be to construct a narrow gauge railway/tramway. That would come with considerably lower cost and allow diversion along or aside existing highways such as the A66 to avoid the most difficult spots.

I was going to say that

As I mentioned above, I think any new rural branch line (if we ever see fit to build any) should be done using tramway rather than heavy rail principles - it will save money, make it much easier (including make adding new stations cheaper) and would allow things like you suggest - bringing a line up to cross a river on an existing road bridge, say. And in the case of Keswick you could have the terminus[1] somewhere nice and prominent rather than a former coalyard on the edge of town as most such termini were.

The Swiss narrow gauge lines work on similar principles - they are really very much like tramways, for instance you're allowed to walk across the tracks like you are on tramways.

The downside is that you'll need a dedicated spare unit, but then you do for the Marston Vale which isn't light rail.

[1] I know Keswick wasn't a terminus, but continuing it to Workington would be beyond pointless, also I think the A66 has been built on long sections of the trackbed of that section?

 

[Bald Rick]

It appears that over the past 100 posts or so that the readership is in broad agreement that opening this line is a non-starter, and that even investigating it would be a waste of money. Who is going to tell the promoter?

 

[yoyothehobo]

It appears that over the past 100 posts or so that the readership is in broad agreement that opening this line is a non-starter, and that even investigating it would be a waste of money. Who is going to tell the promoter?

Reminds me of the whole Port Road thread and Sandy R...

 

[Bletchleyite]

It appears that over the past 100 posts or so that the readership is in broad agreement that opening this line is a non-starter, and that even investigating it would be a waste of money. Who is going to tell the promoter?

I think he's been told once or twice but ignores it. Which is fine if he's doing so with his own money, but now, it seems, he's not.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

It appears that over the past 100 posts or so that the readership is in broad agreement that opening this line is a non-starter, and that even investigating it would be a waste of money. Who is going to tell the promoter?

Therein lies the problem.

It is incorrect in the modern world to tell someone that their idea is, to put it bluntly, barmy. A few scraps of money from here and there keeps the project ticking over and, most importantly, prevents having to say no. 'No' is a vote loser. 'Yes' is also a vote loser - if you are against a scheme. 'Maybe' is a vote gainer / retainer.

Mr Martindale (in this case) perhaps really believes that his pet scheme has a chance of progressing to implementation, and sees the latest official funding as confirmation of that. Most people see it as a way of kicking the can down the road. Best that he terminates his own proposal than being told so by officials.

Locally we have something similar. A group, led by a vocal individual, want to restore a canal branch, purely for leisure benefits. Politicians and officials politely nod and say soothing things every time the issue is raised. In 30 years not one inch of progress has been made. If the group had gone out with their shovels every Sunday for the past 30 years, they would be well on the way to completion! Precisely how many canal restoration and railway preservation schemes achieved things.

 

[Bald Rick]

I think he's been told once or twice but ignores it. Which is fine if he's doing so with his own money, but now, it seems, he's not.

I’m told by a ‘reliable source’ that much of the study work done over the past 20 years was actually funded by local fundraising in the form of bonds. Several hundred thousand pounds. If I was a bond holder, I’d want my money back. Although I wouldn’t have been foolish enough to invest in it in the first place.

Therein lies the problem.

It is incorrect in the modern world to tell someone that their idea is, to put it bluntly, barmy. A few scraps of money from here and there keeps the project ticking over and, most importantly, prevents having to say no. 'No' is a vote loser. 'Yes' is also a vote loser - if you are against a scheme. 'Maybe' is a vote gainer / retainer.

Mr Martindale (in this case) perhaps really believes that his pet scheme has a chance of progressing to implementation, and sees the latest official funding as confirmation of that. Most people see it as a way of kicking the can down the road. Best that he terminates his own proposal than being told so by officials.

Locally we have something similar. A group, led by a vocal individual, want to restore a canal branch, purely for leisure benefits. Politicians and officials politely nod and say soothing things every time the issue is raised. In 30 years not one inch of progress has been made. If the group had gone out with their shovels every Sunday for the past 30 years, they would be well on the way to completion! Precisely how many canal restoration and railway preservation schemes achieved things.

An astute observation. I think for everyones’ sanity, Government should do one of two things, both for this and numerous other no-chancers:

1) say “we have assessed it, there is no chance of it ever being viable, here is why, if you think we are wrong please present us with facts to support your argument. We will not enter into further correspondence (please don’t darken our door again)”

Or

2) say “the initial assessment has shown that a new railway is not the best way to improve transport on this corridor. Therefore we have agreed to to allocate the funds identified for feasibility with (bus company) and (rail company) to (double / treble / whatever) bus services on the corridor and offer through fares from the national rail system to all locations on the route. This step change in local connectivity will take effect from (imminently) and be in place for a minimum of (x) years, and will be extended if demand increases by more than (x)% within that period.


I’m not holding out hope for either!

 

[HSTEd]

Even if you were going to spend this much money in hard public transport infrastructure in the Lakes, I think something like a Windermere or even Keswick tram would give you much better returns (not necessarily good mind you!) than building a line between two medium-small towns through pretty empty terrain.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Even if you were going to spend this much money in hard public transport infrastructure in the Lakes, I think something like a Windermere or even Keswick tram would give you much better returns (not necessarily good mind you!) than building a line between two medium-small towns through pretty empty terrain.

I'd just spend it on upgrading the bus service in the National Park generally. It's already fairly good, but there are some gaps, and the interchange facilities are poor, such as the bus stops by the car park in Ambleside which really aren't suitable for the level of service now provided.

 

[lyndhurst25]

I’m told by a ‘reliable source’ that much of the study work done over the past 20 years was actually funded by local fundraising in the form of bonds. Several hundred thousand pounds. If I was a bond holder, I’d want my money back. Although I wouldn’t have been foolish enough to invest in it in the first place.

I was "foolish" enough it invest! I bought the minimum amount, £100 I think, worth of bonds with some of the the money one of first pay cheques when I first started work. I did it mainly to support the scheme, but the bonds paid around 4% interest per year so I figured out that I'd get my money back in 25 years anyway. Mr Martindale used to send me a cheque for £4 without fail every year, until a year or two ago. What happened was that Mr Martindale's project company, CKP Railways, couldn't afford to keep on paying the interest on the bonds, so the bonds got converted into shares in the company, without a guaranteed payment. Now if the railway ever gets rebuilt and CKP Railways turns a profit then I'll be entitled to a dividend! This time next year, Rodney...

 

[BigCj34]

Precisely how many canal restoration and railway preservation schemes achieved things.

It shows what the community can do when the political will is not there. However, having high level political support is optimal, as a community built railway has severe limits. There are of course Community Rail Partnerships but that needs an active line to already exist. How long did it take the Cumbrian Coast Rail User Group to lobby for Sunday services again?

 

[Bald Rick]

I was "foolish" enough it invest! I bought the minimum amount, £100 I think, worth of bonds with some of the the money one of first pay cheques when I first started work. I did it mainly to support the scheme, but the bonds paid around 4% interest per year so I figured out that I'd get my money back in 25 years anyway. Mr Martindale used to send me a cheque for £4 without fail every year, until a year or two ago. What happened was that Mr Martindale's project company, CKP Railways, couldn't afford to keep on paying the interest on the bonds, so the bonds got converted into shares in the company, without a guaranteed payment. Now if the railway ever gets rebuilt and CKP Railways turns a profit then I'll be entitled to a dividend! This time next year, Rodney...

Looks like you’ve been had. If I’m reading the latest accounts correctly, each £5 worth of bond (paying 4% annually) has been converted into a share with a nominal value of £0.01p, paying nothing. Your £100 investment is now worth a nominal 20p. I doubt it’s even worth that.

With fiscal chicanery like that, I’m not sure I would trust any number he quotes about anything. It makes some of the Victorian railway promoters look like paragons of virtue.

Perhaps we should have a whip round to raise a few quid to make him an offer to buy all the shares, then very publicly close it down to save everyone anymore hassle. I’ll chip in £50. Who’s in?

 

[lyndhurst25]

I looked at it as more of a donation than an investment, similar to buying shares in a preserved railway. It was over 20 years ago, so I probably got back £80 of the £100 and am only £20 down. I think that the business model was to invest the bond holders' cash and get a return of greater than 4% to cover the annual payments, and use the surplus to fund the railway development company. Low interest rates since the 2008 financial crash messed that idea up.

 

[Merle Haggard]

I was "foolish" enough it invest! I bought the minimum amount, £100 I think, worth of bonds with some of the the money one of first pay cheques when I first started work. I did it mainly to support the scheme, but the bonds paid around 4% interest per year so I figured out that I'd get my money back in 25 years anyway. Mr Martindale used to send me a cheque for £4 without fail every year, until a year or two ago. What happened was that Mr Martindale's project company, CKP Railways, couldn't afford to keep on paying the interest on the bonds, so the bonds got converted into shares in the company, without a guaranteed payment. Now if the railway ever gets rebuilt and CKP Railways turns a profit then I'll be entitled to a dividend! This time next year, Rodney...

Bearing in mind that, as far as I can see, there was no part of the operation that generated any income (apart from the purchase of bonds and interest on cash deposited at a bank), I wonder how the dividend was paid.
Well, actually, I do have an idea...

 

[Bald Rick]

Bearing in mind that, as far as I can see, there was no part of the operation that generated any income (apart from the purchase of bonds and interest on cash deposited at a bank), I wonder how the dividend was paid.
Well, actually, I do have an idea...

A modern day George Hudson?

I do hope not. The auditors would surely have picked that up.