East-West Rail in Westminster

[LE Greys]

And last time I checked, Herts had a direct link to Birmingham (Watford and Hemel to New St).

That's West Herts! My home county must be the only one in England where you can't get from one side to the other by rail. I suppose from Stevenage you might count a bus to Luton, then Thameslink up to Bedford and Marsden Vale to Bletchley if you are being generous, but that takes ages. Not so sure if there is a bus from Hertford to Luton, but there might be. Still, it's probably quicker to go to King's Cross, then walk to Euston, but you have to pay for it. What my vertically-sliced county needs is a lateral link.

 

[tbtc]

That's West Herts! My home county must be the only one in England where you can't get from one side to the other by rail. I suppose from Stevenage you might count a bus to Luton, then Thameslink up to Bedford and Marsden Vale to Bletchley if you are being generous, but that takes ages. Not so sure if there is a bus from Hertford to Luton, but there might be. Still, it's probably quicker to go to King's Cross, then walk to Euston, but you have to pay for it. What my vertically-sliced county needs is a lateral link.

Surely there are a few others.

Direct services from Buxton/Glossop to Derby?
Direct services from Berwick to Hexham?
Direct services from Seaham to Durham?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Just look at the Northern franchise area on the east side of the Pennines. If you want to use Northern to travel from the south part to the north part of that franchise (e.g. from York to Durham), how do you think that by using their own Northern services, that you make such a journey? Defies logic, doesn't it. Are there any other TOC where this occurs?

 

[DXMachina]

Surely there are a few others.

Direct services from Buxton/Glossop to Derby?
Direct services from Berwick to Hexham?
Direct services from Seaham to Durham?

the only populated county then

To get a train to Hatfield or Bishops Stortford from Hemel Hempstead requires going via London, which is ridiculous. there arent even any reliable A-roads going east-west in Hertfordshire, just the rat-run A414 which parallels the M25 and therefore stops working the moment the M25 stops working.

 

[tbtc]

Just look at the Northern franchise area on the east side of the Pennines. If you want to use Northern to travel from the south part to the north part of that franchise (e.g. from York to Durham), how do you think that by using their own Northern services, that you make such a journey? Defies logic, doesn't it. Are there any other TOC where this occurs?

York - Preston (hourly, on the Blackpool service)
Preston - Carlisle (two Cumbrian Coast services a day extend to/from Preston IITC)
Carlisle - Newcastle (hourly)
Newcastle - Middlesbrough (hourly)
Middlesbrough - Durham (two early morning services in this direction only)

But then there are plenty of trains each hour from York to Durham by other TOCs. By the same token you'd have to do quite a complicated journey if you wanted to go from Cheltenham to Birmingham by ATW (via Newport and Shrewsbury), or if you wanted to go from Stockport to Crewe on EMT (via Nottingham and Derby) or if you wanted to go from Brighton to London on FGW (via Bath)...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

the only populated county then

To get a train to Hatfield or Bishops Stortford from Hemel Hempstead requires going via London, which is ridiculous. there arent even any reliable A-roads going east-west in Hertfordshire, just the rat-run A414 which parallels the M25 and therefore stops working the moment the M25 stops working.

True, but there are similar examples where the radial nature of routes mean you need to go into/out of a busy city to make a "short" clockwise / anticlockwise journey (e.g. Stratford on Avon to Redditch, Stockport to Manchester Airport).

 

[Nym]

The latter should be dissapearing soon, apparently the A555 is being extended according to the government infrastructure plan. (IMO a half baked completion, should be completed to D2M or D3M and completed between Manchester Airport and Bredbury, not just Hazel Grove, ah well...

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

But then there are plenty of trains each hour from York to Durham by other TOCs. By the same token you'd have to do quite a complicated journey if you wanted to go from Cheltenham to Birmingham by ATW (via Newport and Shrewsbury), or if you wanted to go from Stockport to Crewe on EMT (via Nottingham and Derby) or if you wanted to go from Brighton to London on FGW (via Bath)

I agree with you about the use of services run by other TOC, but the point that I hoped to highlight was the ease of north to south running on the west side of the Pennines in the Northern franchise area by the use of their own trains, but the difficulty to do so on the east side of the Pennines by the use of their own trains. Do you know of any reason why this gap occurred on the east side, when the services pattern were being formulated when the Northern franchise was granted. Could it have been anything to do with the "No growth" proviso?

Looking at franchise areas, both Stockport to Crewe (EMT) and Brighton to London (FGW) are not exactly what you would call areas well within the core of either franchise area.

 

[tbtc]

I agree with you about the use of services run by other TOC, but the point that I hoped to highlight was the ease of north to south running on the west side of the Pennines in the Northern franchise area by the use of their own trains, but the difficulty to do so on the east side of the Pennines by the use of their own trains. Do you know of any reason why this gap occurred on the east side, when the services pattern were being formulated when the Northern franchise was granted. Could it have been anything to do with the "No growth" proviso?

Looking at franchise areas, both Stockport to Crewe (EMT) and Brighton to London (FGW) are not exactly what you would call areas well within the core of either franchise area.

There are certain similarities between the two coasts.

Northern provide an hourly service on the coastal lines (Barrow - Workington - Carlisle and Middlesbrough - Sunderland - Newcastle), but have almost no services on the "main" lines (nothing on the WCML north of Lancaster, only two/day on the ECML north of Darlington).

Really that is because there's no room for local *and* long distance trains on the main line, so the longer distance services (run by other TOCs) have to stop at Oxenholme/ Penrith/ Chester le Street because there's no space for a Northern service to fit between all these expressed.

Anyhow, this is going *way* off topic, and I don't want to get into bother with any type of Mod.

Back to the subject in hand, this thread makes me realise how messy the different "east - west" flows are in "middle England". If you take an area broadly defined by the Birmingham - Leicester - Peterborough service to the north and the North London Line to the south, thats a big area with little "east-west" provision (the Marston line and the St Albans - Watford service are fairly small fish, compared to the Main Line offerings).

But build one "east-west" line and you only cater for a small number of journeys. Oxford - Bletchley - Bedford would be great, but that doesn't serve Milton Keynes or Northampton. Nor is there a way to cut across towards Luton and Cambridge. I honestly don't know whether there is one "flow" significant enough to justify a profitable railway (roads like the A14 may be busy, but they are busy with long distance traffic - especially freight - that have a range of eastern and western destinations - how do you build a railway that takes those cars/trucks off the road?). East-West isn't as simple as the flows to/from London, which is why I don't think it'll work very easily.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Just appeared on the DfT web site:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/press-releases/dft-press-20111205

Extract:
Network Rail will be working with local stakeholders to develop the scheme further. Subject to a satisfactory local contribution and business case, the Government will announce how it will take the plans forward in the summer of 2012. Provided planning consents are granted, construction work could start in 2015 and be ready for train services during 2017

Don't know if there is anything new here.
Local money still needed.

 

[LE Greys]

Back to the subject in hand, this thread makes me realise how messy the different "east - west" flows are in "middle England". If you take an area broadly defined by the Birmingham - Leicester - Peterborough service to the north and the North London Line to the south, thats a big area with little "east-west" provision (the Marston line and the St Albans - Watford service are fairly small fish, compared to the Main Line offerings).

But build one "east-west" line and you only cater for a small number of journeys. Oxford - Bletchley - Bedford would be great, but that doesn't serve Milton Keynes or Northampton. Nor is there a way to cut across towards Luton and Cambridge. I honestly don't know whether there is one "flow" significant enough to justify a profitable railway (roads like the A14 may be busy, but they are busy with long distance traffic - especially freight - that have a range of eastern and western destinations - how do you build a railway that takes those cars/trucks off the road?). East-West isn't as simple as the flows to/from London, which is why I don't think it'll work very easily.

That's why there is a need to get the line to Cambridge, and ideally connect Stansted to Braintree, linking to Felixstowe and Thamesport. That should open up a major catchment area in East Anglia. Possibly integrating the Norwich or Ipswich passenger services with this line might be helpful as well (imagine Ipswich-MK or Norwich-Oxford). Liverpool Street-Peterborough via Whitham and Cambridge might also be an idea. As for freight, there would be a lot of container traffic (hopefully clearing the NLL/GOBLIN altogether) plus permanent way traffic. The idea is to use Cambridge as an interchange while running a lot of traffic through.

 

[OliverS]

That's why there is a need to get the line to Cambridge, and ideally connect Stansted to Braintree, linking to Felixstowe and Thamesport. That should open up a major catchment area in East Anglia. Possibly integrating the Norwich or Ipswich passenger services with this line might be helpful as well (imagine Ipswich-MK or Norwich-Oxford). Liverpool Street-Peterborough via Whitham and Cambridge might also be an idea. As for freight, there would be a lot of container traffic (hopefully clearing the NLL/GOBLIN altogether) plus permanent way traffic. The idea is to use Cambridge as an interchange while running a lot of traffic through.

You'd have to redesign the junction at Witham for freight as it faces the wrong way for the Haven Ports. I have no idea how feasible that is and anything from the east wouldn't stop at Witham. If you want another freight route why not Mark's Tey->Cambridge at least that faces Felixstowe.

Similarly if you want passenger flows then everyone in East Anglia would need to change at Witham. But then again since there are connections via Ipswich & Norwich why bother to head into Essex to go west unless you are going to Stansted.

Remember also that the RUS for the GEML says that the line from Shenfield to Colchester is at capacity so you can't fit in any more services. Yes the Braintree services could be extended but that is probably it.

 

[A0wen]

That's West Herts! My home county must be the only one in England where you can't get from one side to the other by rail.

Bedfordshire?

Northamptonshire?

Buckinghamshire?

Just for starters......

 

[LE Greys]

You'd have to redesign the junction at Witham for freight as it faces the wrong way for the Haven Ports. I have no idea how feasible that is and anything from the east wouldn't stop at Witham. If you want another freight route why not Mark's Tey->Cambridge at least that faces Felixstowe.

Similarly if you want passenger flows then everyone in East Anglia would need to change at Witham. But then again since there are connections via Ipswich & Norwich why bother to head into Essex to go west unless you are going to Stansted.

Remember also that the RUS for the GEML says that the line from Shenfield to Colchester is at capacity so you can't fit in any more services. Yes the Braintree services could be extended but that is probably it.

Shenfield-Colchester is a prime quadrupling target (hopefully with 110 mph running in mind) and ideally the junction would become a triangle (which would require a curve around the north side of the town). I'd also think of extending the Stansted XC services to reach Colchester with a reversal. The biggest problem, though, would be re-engineering the line to take the axle loads involved. Imagine 40 loaded Freightliner wagons thundering through the Stansted tunnel directly under the airport.

AIUI, the coach link to Stansted is usually busy, and one campaign would be to eliminate rail coach links wherever they are by reinstating lines.

 

[A0wen]

I'm not going to respond to all the points you've made - mainly because I think you're being deliberately awkward, but I will take issue with the following:

Or in other words, there is a large demand for traffic along this corridor which was served by rail. You do know that the A14 is built directly on top of the Kettering - Thrapston line and the A605 on the Peterborough line at Oundle?

And that assumes that the rail network would take them where they want to go - which is a mighty big assumption. The main problems on the A605 are caused by HGVs and Farm traffic - depending on the nature of the work the HGVs are doing e.g. local drops etc, then a rail link would make absolutely no difference to this.

I didn't for one moment suggest that there should be a direct link. You're the one making a strawman argument.

However for journeys above 10-15 miles, buses just aren't suitable (this journey was 3 buses outward including a NX coach and 4 buses on the return?. Lutterworth did once have services to Rugby, Rugby did have services to Leamington, Leamington does have services to Stratford, Long Marston did have services from Stratford. Catching a train to Rugby, then to Leamington then to Straford and then a bus to Long Marston isn't too much to ask for is it. Funnily enough all those routes have had serious proposals for re-opening.

OK - so you wouldn't have a direct link, so you could still end up with a 4 hour journey from Lutterworth to Long Marston on the basis of connections.

And I stand by my earlier comments - the rail network needs to focus on primary traffic flows. I don't see a huge demand for Rugby - Leamington to be reopened - not least because you've already got Coventry - Leamington.

Lutterworth will only get a rail link again IF the GCR was reinstated. HS2 isn't looking at using the GCR formation and the project which did look at it (Central Railway?) has all gone quiet as well.

Long Marston probably wouldn't warrant a station on a reopened Stratford - Honeybourne link - it's got a population of 385 (according to Wikipedia) so hardly a major attraction.

There are 10 million households without access to a car and many millions of people aren't legally allowed to drive (such as under 17s, epilepsy sufferers, the blind etc. etc.) so presumbably you think "tough luck" because you think we should be totally dependent on the car?

I don't know where you get your statistics from - personally I prefer the ONS who will tell you that in 2010 there were 26 million households and in 2009, 25% of households did not have access to a car or van. Assuming the number of households hasn't changed significantly in one year, that means that it's nearer 6 million households which don't have access, not the 10 million you cite - you're out by about 70%.

 

[Philip Elliott]

so you could still end up with a 4 hour journey from Lutterworth to Long Marston on the basis of connections.

Could yes but more likely a vastly reduced time as each leg would be 30-50% the time it takes currently by bus.

And I stand by my earlier comments - the rail network needs to focus on primary traffic flows

So should we still continue to subsidise such existing services as Whitby, Far North, the sleepers? There are plenty of existing services that will never carry as much traffic as a number of routes would if re-opened. I doubt you would consider the routes re-opened during the late '80s / early '90s viable if they were being proposed now.

I don't see a huge demand for Rugby - Leamington to be reopened

It did come very close - Rugby Cement was to pay for the re-opening so it could run to it's Long Itchington plant (the route only closed in 1986) but then the company was bought by mexican firm cemex or needed to make cost savings to pay back the cost of purchase. Long Itchington plant was also shut.

Long Marston probably wouldn't warrant a station on a reopened Stratford - Honeybourne link - it's got a population of 385 (according to Wikipedia) so hardly a major attraction

I did say bus to Long Marston, it helps if you read what is front of you. However, Long Marston is proposed to have a new eco-village with a key part of the proposal being re-opening Honeybourne - Stratford and obviously a station to serve the new town.

that means that it's nearer 6 million households which don't have access

Still millions of households that are not only economically disadvantaged (towns with railway stations on average are better off) but many people are housebound without relying on lifts, dial-a-ride etc.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
We'll just have to agree to disagree - you want the rail network to run as a business, I want it to be a public service.

 

[A0wen]

Could yes but more likely a vastly reduced time as each leg would be 30-50% the time it takes currently by bus.

So in other words, no real justification other than your convenience.

So should we still continue to subsidise such existing services as Whitby, Far North, the sleepers? There are plenty of existing services that will never carry as much traffic as a number of routes would if re-opened. I doubt you would consider the routes re-opened during the late '80s / early '90s viable if they were being proposed now.

I guess that depends how much subsidy they require versus the alternatives.

Far North is the Scottish Executive's problem so I have no view on what they do.

The sleepers are of dubious value and may succumb at some point.

Whether a reopening of the late 80s / early 90s was viable depended on where they were. Corby for example I fully supported, not least because the infrastructure was already there, Kettering was suffering from people travelling into it to catch trains to London and various governments were encouraging people to move out of London to Corby.

Bletchley to Oxford makes sense for similar reasons - some of the infrastructure is in place, the areas are subject to government development.

It did come very close - Rugby Cement was to pay for the re-opening so it could run to it's Long Itchington plant (the route only closed in 1986) but then the company was bought by mexican firm cemex or needed to make cost savings to pay back the cost of purchase. Long Itchington plant was also shut.

So it would only have made sense if the cement traffic was there - which means it wouldn't make sense without it and I maintain, chainging at Coventry is hardly a hardship (apart from having to sit in Coventry station).

I did say bus to Long Marston, it helps if you read what is front of you. However, Long Marston is proposed to have a new eco-village with a key part of the proposal being re-opening Honeybourne - Stratford and obviously a station to serve the new town.

Fine, so when this "Eco Town" is built, the developers can pay for the rail link. No reason taxpayers should have to subsidise this one then.

Still millions of households that are not only economically disadvantaged (towns with railway stations on average are better off) but many people are housebound without relying on lifts, dial-a-ride etc.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
We'll just have to agree to disagree - you want the rail network to run as a business, I want it to be a public service.

IF the people in question are reliant on lifts / dial a ride, then the rail network will be of precious little use to them - since they have to get to their local station. Anyone who is sufficiently immobile to be reliant on dial-a-ride is unlikely to be using the national rail network.

In terms of the argument about living in an economically disadvantaged area, that's an easy one to resolve. If people feel that strongly, then the answer is for them to move to a more prosperous area and take up a job there. Many, many people have done this through choice, they haven't expected the state to provide them everything.

The network does run as a public service (take a look at the subsidy it currently received) but it shouldn't run as a service with no regard being given to cost of operation and improvement. All these things have to be paid for somehow - funnily money doesn't grow on trees and as the outgoing Chief Secretary to the Treasury wrote in 2010 - "there's no money left".

 

[OliverS]

Shenfield-Colchester is a prime quadrupling target (hopefully with 110 mph running in mind) and ideally the junction would become a triangle (which would require a curve around the north side of the town). I'd also think of extending the Stansted XC services to reach Colchester with a reversal. The biggest problem, though, would be re-engineering the line to take the axle loads involved. Imagine 40 loaded Freightliner wagons thundering through the Stansted tunnel directly under the airport.

AIUI, the coach link to Stansted is usually busy, and one campaign would be to eliminate rail coach links wherever they are by reinstating lines.

I'd love Shenfield-Colchester to be 4 track but that is another issue.

Thinking about it a bit more, there is no realistic way you can relieve the NLL unless the route is wired from Ipswich/Harwich to the WCML. So if you want to route Witham-Cambridge-Bletchley you would need to wire it the whole way, otherwise what advantage does it have over the Nuneaton route? That is an argument for wiring the E-W route, and once you are at Bletchley why not carry on to Oxford...

 

[tbtc]

So should we still continue to subsidise such existing services as Whitby, Far North, the sleepers? There are plenty of existing services that will never carry as much traffic as a number of routes would if re-opened. I doubt you would consider the routes re-opened during the late '80s / early '90s viable if they were being proposed now

There's a big difference between "funding a loss making service" and "spending millions in infrastructure to build a service which will be loss making". The costs of building to Thurso/Whitby etc are historic.

Still millions of households that are not only economically disadvantaged (towns with railway stations on average are better off) but many people are housebound without relying on lifts, dial-a-ride etc

I live in a car-less house; its not done me any harm.

Bear in mind that a significant number of the "six million" figure that you quote are elderly pensioners who aren't likely to use any railway that you plan to build regardless.

 

[LE Greys]

I'd love Shenfield-Colchester to be 4 track but that is another issue.

Thinking about it a bit more, there is no realistic way you can relieve the NLL unless the route is wired from Ipswich/Harwich to the WCML. So if you want to route Witham-Cambridge-Bletchley you would need to wire it the whole way, otherwise what advantage does it have over the Nuneaton route? That is an argument for wiring the E-W route, and once you are at Bletchley why not carry on to Oxford...

Important point. Linking up all the electrified lines would be a very good idea (and perhaps Ely-Peterborough to act as a diversionary route).

 

[Philip Elliott]

So in other words, no real justification other than your convenience.

No, lots of people would be convenienced by re-opening Leicester - Rugby & Rugby - Leamington (with a couple of new chords through journeys such as Oxford - Leicester and Bournemouth - Newcastle could be re-instated). The railway is a 'convenience' product.

So it would only have made sense if the cement traffic was there - which means it wouldn't make sense without it and I maintain, chainging at Coventry is hardly a hardship (apart from having to sit in Coventry station).

It still makes sense to re-open, the proposed cement traffic meant that the cost could be offloaded to the private sector. This was in the 1990s when the government wouldn't spend any money on 'local' schemes and council budgets don't extend to rail re-openings. Funny how there have been several Scottish and Welsh re-openings when the political will is there. Changing at Coventry is problematic as the fare is made up of combinging the separate portions (it's cheaper to Birmingham and quicker) and you'll never get a good service between Coventry - Leamington. It is all about competing with the car and being convenient which changing at Coventry is neither. I do it quite regularly going to Bicester and it is a right pain. Until the recent LM improvements between Coventry & Northampton, I think it was actually quicker by bus.

IF the people in question are reliant on lifts / dial a ride, then the rail network will be of precious little use to them - since they have to get to their local station. Anyone who is sufficiently immobile to be reliant on dial-a-ride is unlikely to be using the national rail network.

I live in a town of 11,000, I'm not half way up a mountain but slap bang in the middle of the country in the M1/M6/M69 traingle, 15 miles from Leicester, 30 miles from Birmingham yet we have no public transport whatsoever on a Sunday now following bus cuts and no evening service on any day. That seriously restricts what I can do without relying on lifts or megaching on a taxi. If I had a local station, I could walk to it, nowt to do with immobility:roll:

If people feel that strongly, then the answer is for them to move to a more prosperous area and take up a job there.

How do you expect people to afford to move to a prosperous area, even on my good salary there are many areas I simply could not afford to go to - I considered applying for a job at Chiltern but Banbury is too expensive. Most employers won't offer job if you say 'I will move to the area if I get the job' but many can't afford to move without getting a better job. Hence why people do this thing could a 'commute' - but they can't if there is no suitable service. I'm not talking about quaint little villages but medium and large market towns.

There's a big difference between "funding a loss making service" and "spending millions in infrastructure to build a service which will be loss making". The costs of building to Thurso/Whitby etc are historic.

Several of these routes Beeching proposed for closure but Rugby Central - Nottingham Victoria was deemed profitable and to be kept. It was politics (including railway politics) that saw the basket case kept and the profitable one binned.

I live in a car-less house; its not done me any harm

You live in Sheffield with it's comprehensive, rail, bus and tram networks. You've just proved my point - put a decent system in and people can live without their cars. The lowest car ownership in the UK is in London because it has such a great system. And the spending per head is 7 times the national average....put the money elsewhere and you will see a step change in our transport network.

 

[tbtc]

You live in Sheffield with it's comprehensive, rail, bus and tram networks. You've just proved my point - put a decent system in and people can live without their cars. The lowest car ownership in the UK is in London because it has such a great system. And the spending per head is 7 times the national average....put the money elsewhere and you will see a step change in our transport network.

So you accept that a significant number of your (insert number) million people who live without cars are either the elderly (who wouldn't be using trains even if they had a local service) and those living in urban areas who don't need cars?

It'd be naive to claim that all people without cars are part of an economically disadvantaged underclass...

 

[A0wen]

No, lots of people would be convenienced by re-opening Leicester - Rugby & Rugby - Leamington (with a couple of new chords through journeys such as Oxford - Leicester and Bournemouth - Newcastle could be re-instated). The railway is a 'convenience' product.

Bournemouth - Newcastle could be done using the existing network. That it doesn't currently is because the Cross Country network has been standardised to improve reliability - presumably in response to passenger demands - whereas I'd expect the number of travellers wanting to go Newcastle - Bournemouth to be minimal.

It still makes sense to re-open, the proposed cement traffic meant that the cost could be offloaded to the private sector. This was in the 1990s when the government wouldn't spend any money on 'local' schemes and council budgets don't extend to rail re-openings. Funny how there have been several Scottish and Welsh re-openings when the political will is there. Changing at Coventry is problematic as the fare is made up of combinging the separate portions (it's cheaper to Birmingham and quicker) and you'll never get a good service between Coventry - Leamington. It is all about competing with the car and being convenient which changing at Coventry is neither. I do it quite regularly going to Bicester and it is a right pain. Until the recent LM improvements between Coventry & Northampton, I think it was actually quicker by bus.

Still not a justification for reopening then - the Welsh and Scottish schemes reintroduced rail links to towns which had lost them. Rugby - Leamington would merely re-link two towns which it is fairly easy to travel between today either by bus or train and not add any new destinations to the network. Interestingly I suspect Coventry - Leamington will be improved, there are calls for Kenilworth station to be reopened and I suspect XC would like to route more services via Coventry to access Birmingham Intl rather than run via Solihull.

I live in a town of 11,000, I'm not half way up a mountain but slap bang in the middle of the country in the M1/M6/M69 traingle, 15 miles from Leicester, 30 miles from Birmingham yet we have no public transport whatsoever on a Sunday now following bus cuts and no evening service on any day. That seriously restricts what I can do without relying on lifts or megaching on a taxi. If I had a local station, I could walk to it, nowt to do with immobility:roll:

Presumably the evening and weekend buses weren't being used then? In Northamptonshire this has been exactly the case with some journeys costing £30 / passenger - hardly a worthwhile use of the income from the council tax payers given a taxi for those individuals would have been cheaper and less polluting.

How do you expect people to afford to move to a prosperous area, even on my good salary there are many areas I simply could not afford to go to - I considered applying for a job at Chiltern but Banbury is too expensive. Most employers won't offer job if you say 'I will move to the area if I get the job' but many can't afford to move without getting a better job. Hence why people do this thing could a 'commute' - but they can't if there is no suitable service. I'm not talking about quaint little villages but medium and large market towns.

Sorry - don't believe you that property prices between Lutterworth and Banbury are that different. These examples from Rightmove:

Lutterworth for £ 125k http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-27668455.html

Banbury for £120k http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-19413738.html

The prices in Banbury, Rugby or Coventry are NOT significantly different to Lutterworth, so if living somewhere where there are good public transport links are important to you there are opportunities to move.

Several of these routes Beeching proposed for closure but Rugby Central - Nottingham Victoria was deemed profitable and to be kept. It was politics (including railway politics) that saw the basket case kept and the profitable one binned.

Nobody disputes the fact the GCR was not a Beeching closure, it was purely a BR decision. Yes, with hindsight it was probably the wrong decision, but it was taken over 40 years ago now - the world has moved on and you can't reverse every wrong decision.

You live in Sheffield with it's comprehensive, rail, bus and tram networks. You've just proved my point - put a decent system in and people can live without their cars. The lowest car ownership in the UK is in London because it has such a great system. And the spending per head is 7 times the national average....put the money elsewhere and you will see a step change in our transport network.

Sheffield is a city of circa 1 million people http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheffield and its transport links reflect that.

Lutterworth has about 8000 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lutterworth

The two are not comparable. Out of interest what do you believe a 'suitable' bus / rail service would be for Lutterworth?

And if you feel so strongly, why not put your money where your mouth is, buy a bus and start a Sunday / Evening bus service?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Dennis-Da...es_Coaches&hash=item35b77267a1#ht_1229wt_1187

would look to be a suitable vehicle.

If you're right, there will be plenty of passengers.

If you're not, you lose out - what could be simpler?

 

[MK Tom]

Who puts a bus on ebay?

Anyway I hate to be a bore but this thread has deviated fantastically from its original focus. If possible I would like to bring it back to being about EWR... we could have a separate thread for discussing random reopenings elsewhere

 

[Philip Elliott]

Bournemouth - Newcastle could be done using the existing network. That it doesn't currently is because the Cross Country network has been standardised to improve reliability - presumably in response to passenger demands - whereas I'd expect the number of travellers wanting to go Newcastle - Bournemouth to be minimal.

There are currently direct, Southampton - Newcastle but whether they can be directly connected by another is not the point. Going via Birmingham add distance and time making the routes uncompetitive. XC's largest problem is with capacity as the trains are filled with passengers going to Birmingham. Running direct express trains avoiding London and Birmingham will help developed a poorly served part of the intercity/long distance market aswell as opening up other regions such as the East Midlands.

Presumably the evening and weekend buses weren't being used then? In Northamptonshire this has been exactly the case with some journeys costing £30 / passenger - hardly a worthwhile use of the income from the council tax payers given a taxi for those individuals would have been cheaper and less polluting.

I've never known there to be an evening service. However, 2 of the 3 routes than run SX are commercial / profitable services. The one I use daily was subsidised 6 days a week (but now SO) - there has been a considerable rise in patronage. The bus industry has been savaged but a reduction of DfT grants by £100million and the free buses for pensioners scheme - the money the bus companies get is far less than through half fares and it hasn't risen with ticket prices. The last bus to Rugby from Leicester is a miserly 16.25 - probably about once a month someone gets on the 17.25 service (to Lutterworth) asking for a ticket to Rugby and get quite ****ed off the find there is no service. More people would use a service if they knew they could get back.

The £30/passenger figure is almost certainly for the one day a week shopper buses for pensioners. The whole contract service industry seems to be based around pensioners. There are plenty of services that 80-90% of the cost is covered by the farebox - only a small amount of subsidy is required yet many have been cancelled by the likes of Northamptonshire CC who decided to withdraw ALL subsidies. Yet I didn't here about a cut in the road budget. In Leicestershire we have the best quality road surfaces in the country yet some of the lowest public transport usage. Why are you so against spending what are small sums of money on local services yet happy for humungous sums on big projects. £600m for New Street yet won't improve any service whatsoever. HS2 will never pay for itself through the farebox yet local schemes are expected to do just that - it isn't a level playing field.

Sorry - don't believe you that property prices between Lutterworth and Banbury are that different. These examples from Rightmove:

Lutterworth for £ 125k http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-...-27668455.html

Banbury for £120k http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-...-19413738.html

The prices in Banbury, Rugby or Coventry are NOT significantly different to Lutterworth, so if living somewhere where there are good public transport links are important to you there are opportunities to move

You miss one key point - I'm living with my parents currently. I could not afford to live in Lutterworth and my brother moved out to Rugby. Rugby and Coventry are significantly cheaper than Lutterworth - about 25% less. I currently am in the process of buying a house (away from family) but have been severely limited by choice because I don't drive. I did look at Rugby but other than going to Birmingham or London, it is awful going anywhere.

Sheffield is a city of circa 1 million people http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheffield and its transport links reflect that.

Lutterworth has about 8000 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lutterworth

The two are not comparable. Out of interest what do you believe a 'suitable' bus / rail service would be for Lutterworth?

Sheffield is not 1 million, it even says 550,000 on the wikipedia link!! Lutterworth is bigger than 8,000 - there has been a lot 4-bed houses built since 2001. A 'suitable' bus/rail service would be hourly from 6am - 7pm, a couple of additional peak services and a 9pm and 11pm departures from Leicester, Rugby, Market Harborough & Hinckley. The lack of evening services is the biggest problem (or even 'afternoon' - the last off Rugby is 17.52 so if you get a post 5pm train off Northampton or Birmingham you will miss it.)

What about Coalville then? Where do you stand on the Leicester - Burton line re-opening proposal. Coalville is population 33,000 with the wider population on the route being over 60,000. The track is still there and used...

And if you feel so strongly, why not put your money where your mouth is, buy a bus and start a Sunday / Evening bus service?

I have been tempted by the idea previously but I can hardly drive the vehicle myself and you miss the problem of requiring the passengers to buy two single tickets rather than a cheaper return. Evening services don't make a profit though but a small subsidy gets paid for most services because of the 'public service' element. The rail industry is subsidised £5bn a year. A Rugby - Birmingham annual season ticket for Virgin cost £884. People believe HS2 is needed because we are pricing people off the west coast. I used to pay more than that for my bus fare for a 10mile journey rather than 30miles. The government is happy to artificially boost number in one area with huge subsidies but insist on others paying the full cost. Many of the 'primary routes' would not be busy without all the subsidy they have swallowed up. The transport network has been based around political needs not transport needs.

 

[The Planner]

Any reason why you haven't learnt to drive ??

 

[MK Tom]

Can we please return to topic?

 

[A0wen]

There are currently direct, Southampton - Newcastle but whether they can be directly connected by another is not the point. Going via Birmingham add distance and time making the routes uncompetitive. XC's largest problem is with capacity as the trains are filled with passengers going to Birmingham. Running direct express trains avoiding London and Birmingham will help developed a poorly served part of the intercity/long distance market aswell as opening up other regions such as the East Midlands.

XC's biggest problem is they are providing a hybrid service, which to some is a long distance IC service and others little more than a local stopper.

The Birmingham area (by that I mean Birmingham NS, Birmingham Intl, Coventry, Stafford) is used as the link to most other areas of the rail network, because that is where the passenger flows have been identified as being.

Interestingly, despite the claims there is demand for links from the East Mids (e.g. Leicester) to other places, this was disproved in practise when Project Rio was in place. Loadings from Leicester northwards were lower than expected and there was not a clear uplift in passenger traffic to Manchester from MML stations - that despite the fact the WCML was well below capacity.

I've never known there to be an evening service. However, 2 of the 3 routes than run SX are commercial / profitable services. The one I use daily was subsidised 6 days a week (but now SO) - there has been a considerable rise in patronage. The bus industry has been savaged but a reduction of DfT grants by £100million and the free buses for pensioners scheme - the money the bus companies get is far less than through half fares and it hasn't risen with ticket prices. The last bus to Rugby from Leicester is a miserly 16.25 - probably about once a month someone gets on the 17.25 service (to Lutterworth) asking for a ticket to Rugby and get quite ****ed off the find there is no service. More people would use a service if they knew they could get back.

OK, so the evening service wasn't a victim of the recent "cuts" then?

So was there a Sunday service, or was this a mirage as well?

As for the pensioner's pass - blame John Prescott, I believe he was the architect of that piece of bribery by the last Labour govt to the pensioners of the UK.

The £30/passenger figure is almost certainly for the one day a week shopper buses for pensioners. The whole contract service industry seems to be based around pensioners. There are plenty of services that 80-90% of the cost is covered by the farebox - only a small amount of subsidy is required yet many have been cancelled by the likes of Northamptonshire CC who decided to withdraw ALL subsidies.

And NCC have also provided subsidies to some and introduced dial-a-ride community services in other areas. Basically the subsidy model used by County Councils is largely unchanged since 1985 - that needed to be addressed.

Yet I didn't here about a cut in the road budget. In Leicestershire we have the best quality road surfaces in the country yet some of the lowest public transport usage.

Last time I checked buses and coaches use the road network, so it's hardly in public transport user's interests to cut back road maintenance :roll:

Why are you so against spending what are small sums of money on local services yet happy for humungous sums on big projects. £600m for New Street yet won't improve any service whatsoever. HS2 will never pay for itself through the farebox yet local schemes are expected to do just that - it isn't a level playing field.

Sorry - where did I ever say I was happy at the sums being spent on 'big' projects? I have massive reservations about HS2 not least the desire to carve up a large swathe of countryside and the fact it won't benefit many places. No idea why you've raised the New Street redevelopment.

You miss one key point - I'm living with my parents currently. I could not afford to live in Lutterworth and my brother moved out to Rugby. Rugby and Coventry are significantly cheaper than Lutterworth - about 25% less. I currently am in the process of buying a house (away from family) but have been severely limited by choice because I don't drive. I did look at Rugby but other than going to Birmingham or London, it is awful going anywhere.

No, I didn't miss it. You never mentioned it. I was merely pointing out that relatively speaking, house prices in Banbury (which you did mention) are not significantly different to Lutterworth (where you currently live) which you claimed was a reason you couldn't consider a job with Chiltern.

Sheffield is not 1 million, it even says 550,000 on the wikipedia link!! Lutterworth is bigger than 8,000 - there has been a lot 4-bed houses built since 2001.

You also mis-read it as well. The city & met district is 550,000 the Sheffield urban area - which will be covered by it's public transport services is 640720.

Even if you built 200 4 bed houses, the average family is 4 people - that would only increase the population by 800, so a 10% increase.

A 'suitable' bus/rail service would be hourly from 6am - 7pm, a couple of additional peak services and a 9pm and 11pm departures from Leicester, Rugby, Market Harborough & Hinckley. The lack of evening services is the biggest problem (or even 'afternoon' - the last off Rugby is 17.52 so if you get a post 5pm train off Northampton or Birmingham you will miss it.)

By your own admission until recently the existing services were subject to subsidy. So on what basis do you believe such a service pattern is justified? Sounds like there would be lots of empty / half empty buses running around most of the time.

What about Coalville then? Where do you stand on the Leicester - Burton line re-opening proposal. Coalville is population 33,000 with the wider population on the route being over 60,000. The track is still there and used...

It has potential, but has never managed to gain widespread support - mainly, I suspect because it doesn't seem to create a 'new' link. Leicester - Burton isn't likely to attract many passengers and Leicester already has good links to the WCML and Birmingham.

I have been tempted by the idea previously but I can hardly drive the vehicle myself and you miss the problem of requiring the passengers to buy two single tickets rather than a cheaper return.

Either there is the demand, or there isn't. The issue of buying two fares is a red herring where bus travel is concerned as the pricing model is usually different to the rail network.

Evening services don't make a profit though

Hallelujah ! - Finally an admission that these are unprofitable services. And the reason they are unprofitable? I'd hazard a guess that they are very lightly used.

but a small subsidy gets paid for most services because of the 'public service' element. The rail industry is subsidised £5bn a year. A Rugby - Birmingham annual season ticket for Virgin cost £884. People believe HS2 is needed because we are pricing people off the west coast. I used to pay more than that for my bus fare for a 10mile journey rather than 30miles. The government is happy to artificially boost number in one area with huge subsidies but insist on others paying the full cost. Many of the 'primary routes' would not be busy without all the subsidy they have swallowed up.

Season tickets are basically a 50% discount on buying a ticket on a daily basis. Both Arriva and Stagecoach offer similar deals - Arriva's Leicester City Plus is £500 ish and Stagecoach Midland offer a similar deal covering most of Northamptonshire. Either of those are far cheaper than Virgin's season ticket cost and give similar mileage coverage.

The transport network has been based around political needs not transport needs.

Bollocks, utter bollocks.

The network as it stands today has grown up around the economic demands of the country and the desire of individuals to be mobile. Public transport is hampered by the fact you have to travel when it tells you, to where it tells you and you have no control over it, which is why many people are disdainful of it.
The rail network, specifically, is looking to maximise passenger numbers, hence the focus on the areas where there is the most demand - so commuter traffic into London, Birmingham, Manchester and others has seen a lot of focus.
Intercity traffic between the key cities is the other.

Rural lines, secondary lines, and obscure journeys which always get raised on forums such as this will always come last, for the simple reason they tend to be the most costly to operate whilst attracting the fewest passengers.

 

[MK Tom]

Urgh! Please argue in PMs... this is a thread about East-West Rail. I'm sure I'm not the only person who'd like to use it to actually discuss that topic. It's cool to discuss related things but it's not cool to use pages in a massive argument about unrelated things. Please, please, please get back on topic.

Does anyone know where/how long the loop between Aylesbury and Risborough is likely to be?

 

[The Planner]

Enough to fit a 775 metre freight train I suspect, it hasnt even got off the fag packet yet.

 

[Buttsy]

With the Aylesbury - Claydon link, is that likely to be doubled from Vale Parkway or remain single and what's the likelyhood of Quainton Road being served by the new link, bearing in mind there's a platform there and a few villages that would feed into it?