Darlington - Hartlepool Extended

[tbtc]

By having the avoiders as the platforms, then you'd solve nothing by building them. The Darlo-Saltburn trains would still venture onto the ECML

Regardless of the Pacers, the ECML could do with more capacity to stop at Darlington. At the moment there are five trains most hours from Newcastle to York (two East Coast, two Cross Country, one Transpennine), but only one platform in each direction for them to stop at.

There are stations where platforms have several departures an hour, so five doesn't sound that many, but the long distance nature of the services (all 150 mile minimum journeys) means a messy stopping pattern and plenty scope for late running trains to disrupt services.

Plus, if there were more "through" platforms at Darlington to accommodate long distance trains, there may be more scope for some Saltburn trains to use them and get slots to/from Newcastle. Although there are five trains an hour, there can be big gaps between them when a "local" train could sneak to/from Newcastle - allowing XC to cease their Chester le Street stops and allowing faster Newcastle - Boro services.

 

[dickdarlington]

I can see your point. But that wouldn't alter the major issues at Darlington, which is getting to the station from the branches. The junctions are quite a distance from the station, and that would still mean running on the ECML which would restrict the possible paths. There is space for additional tracks to be laid to make the North Junction and South Junction four tracks. But this would make for a rather hectic points set up.

Talking of new platforms. Could they fit a platform in under the main train shed, the other side of platform 1 (the southbound platform), or would it be too restricted with space?

 

[tbtc]

I can see your point. But that wouldn't alter the major issues at Darlington, which is getting to the station from the branches. The junctions are quite a distance from the station, and that would still mean running on the ECML which would restrict the possible paths. There is space for additional tracks to be laid to make the North Junction and South Junction four tracks. But this would make for a rather hectic points set up.

Talking of new platforms. Could they fit a platform in under the main train shed, the other side of platform 1 (the southbound platform), or would it be too restricted with space?

I agree it doesn't solve the conflicting movement where a Saltburn arrival needs a gap in the southbound ECML, then needs a gap in the southbound ECML to depart again. No easy way round that one

 

[DarloRich]

Talking of new platforms. Could they fit a platform in under the main train shed, the other side of platform 1 (the southbound platform), or would it be too restricted with space?[/QUOTE]


To restricted for space. You COULD build a platform ( I think) on the other side of the outer wall. It might have to be an island platform between an extended and slightly moved up/down goods loop. That way you are not to far from the main body of the station. You can ether access by the horrible footbridge or by a new structure at the south end of the station.

I think the plan is to build two new bay platforms on some of the car parks behind the station at Garbutt Square. They will in effect be a new little station and a LONG way form the body of the station. It still doesn’t solve the conflicting movement problem and just seems a waste of money in that regard.

It WOULD be effective IF you chop the Northern service in half and run Bish-Darlo/Darlo -Boro - Saltburn. Bring back the North bay and you have two self contained services. It will, however, destroy absolutely any traffic from Boro to Bishop because people will not change trains, drag their stuff into what is now the Garbutt Square car park and wait for another train.

 

[142094]

Talking of new platforms. Could they fit a platform in under the main train shed, the other side of platform 1 (the southbound platform), or would it be too restricted with space?

Basically could do the same as what happened at Newcastle in the early 90s, where the former ECS carriage stabling lines were removed and platform 5/6 and 7/8 were created. Wouldn't have thought that there would be enough room on the inside but definately scope to do it on the outside.

I see your point about the platforms on the avoiding line, and it doesn't remove the need to cross over the ECML for Bish - Boro trains. It could do if the trains were seperated into Bish - Darlo and Darlo - Boro/Saltburn, as the Saltburn trains could use the new platforms. If this didn't happen, the Bishop Auckland train could use platform 1 going south, and wait for an EC/TPE/XC train on the avoiding platforms to depart then go across. Similarly a Saltburn train going to Bishop Auckland could be held at the south junction to allow an express to depart (as happens now anyway). Would give better scope for use of platforms, especially when delays are going on as has been said.

I've been to Darlington a few times when there have been delays and it soon stacks up. At one point platform 1 and 4 were being used for south bound departures only, with the Bishop Auckland train stuck in 4a.

 

[Bish Boy]

IMHO DTV airport will never have a decent rail requirement because give it 5 years and the airport will be closed. also split the Bish-Saltburn service and you might aswell close the Bishop line no one will split their journey to get to boro etc. Also if the weardale railway was to run the Bishop line you wouldn't need the north bays at bank top as they would almost certainly terminate at North Road can't see NR letting weardale regularly join the ECML albeit briefley nice way to kill the final part of the Stockton Darlington line.
Oh and as a small footnote more people used Bishop station than Eaglescliffe (2008/2009)

 

[tbtc]

split the Bish-Saltburn service and you might aswell close the Bishop line no one will split their journey to get to boro etc

Surely most people who use the Bish branch are travelling to Darlington (or to ECML stations) rather than to Teesside?

 

[ainsworth74]

Oh and as a small footnote more people used Bishop station than Eaglescliffe (2008/2009)

Bishop has about 12,000 more people living in it that Eaglescliffe which might help to explain that

 

[Bish Boy]

Surely most people who use the Bish branch are travelling to Darlington (or to ECML stations) rather than to Teesside?

Not when i have used the service mainly at rush hour i must admit. maybe splitting some services during the day when maybe Darlington is the primary destination? Also better advertising may change that alot of people i talk to think you have to change at Darlo anyway.

Bishop has about 12,000 more people living in it that Eaglescliffe which might help to explain that

And yet eaglescliffe has a more regular service?