Fantasy station/line/route re-openings and other projects

[The Ham]

Perhaps piling technology and flood protection technology has advanced significantly since then and it's worth looking again at this as an option

If the main problem was the embankments, it is possivle to use earth reinforced walls, wich place matting all through the embankment to tie the facing blocks in to hold up the soil. They are cheap to design and build and do not need specilist contractors. Also as they come as small light compounents (other than the matting which can just be long), no need for large and heavey concrete mixers to be moved around the site (which can be a big and costy problem on marshy sites).

 

[glbotu]

I guess for this thread I'd have two suggestions, one very local and one very grand.

1. My local suggestion would be to quad track from Shepreth Branch Junction to Cambridge Station, segregating the WAML services from the Cambridge Line services. The WAML services would get exclusive (ish) use of platforms 7 and 8, and the Cambridge Line services would get exclusive (ish) use of 1,2,3 and 4. The trackwork at both ends of Cambridge would be re-done, to allow slightly higher line speeds in and out (at the moment I think it's 15 mph for anything other than straight through platform 1/4 or the through track), although access to 4 avoiding 1 would still use the existing scissors crossover. In order not to require all WAML passengers to use the footbridge to get out of the station, two new entrances would be built, one at the North End to the cycle bridge (with the building "wrapped around" the bridge) and the other at the South End with a large overbridge exiting at Cambridge Leisure (which would help with passenger flow over the Hills Road Bridge, which is awful in the morning peak).

2. My grander suggestion is one which may generate a little more discussion. It effectively suggests that over the next few years, any disused railway alignments that aren't under consideration for re-introduction to the network are considered for conversion to light rail. This has shown great success, with things like Croydon Tramlink and Manchester Metrolink mostly operating along old railway alignments. I'm not saying that they should all be converted instantly, but that over time they all get considered for it. The lower maintenance and construction cost should improve the financial case (as opposed to re-opening as heavy rail). Any thoughts on this?

 

[Ironside]

I guess for this thread I'd have two suggestions, one very local and one very grand.

1. My local suggestion would be to quad track from Shepreth Branch Junction to Cambridge Station, segregating the WAML services from the Cambridge Line services. The WAML services would get exclusive (ish) use of platforms 7 and 8, and the Cambridge Line services would get exclusive (ish) use of 1,2,3 and 4. The trackwork at both ends of Cambridge would be re-done, to allow slightly higher line speeds in and out (at the moment I think it's 15 mph for anything other than straight through platform 1/4 or the through track), although access to 4 avoiding 1 would still use the existing scissors crossover. In order not to require all WAML passengers to use the footbridge to get out of the station, two new entrances would be built, one at the North End to the cycle bridge (with the building "wrapped around" the bridge) and the other at the South End with a large overbridge exiting at Cambridge Leisure (which would help with passenger flow over the Hills Road Bridge, which is awful in the morning peak).

2. My grander suggestion is one which may generate a little more discussion. It effectively suggests that over the next few years, any disused railway alignments that aren't under consideration for re-introduction to the network are considered for conversion to light rail. This has shown great success, with things like Croydon Tramlink and Manchester Metrolink mostly operating along old railway alignments. I'm not saying that they should all be converted instantly, but that over time they all get considered for it. The lower maintenance and construction cost should improve the financial case (as opposed to re-opening as heavy rail). Any thoughts on this?

Re 2. Sounds like a good idea for consideration in places where a branch line could become become viable, I guess this is less useful if there was the possibility of freight or using the route as a diversionary for heavy rail.

 

[Midlandman]

Just spent a sunny Bank Holiday Weekend Saturday motorcycling around and about the A65 and would now add re-opening the 'Little North Western' route from the other Clapham Junction through Ingleton to join the WCML. This will be set aside for heritage traffic that can't quite make mainline certification but diversionary traffic is allowed (to provide interest and income). Oh, and the heritage traffic will provide a local service too. Also, what a fantastic addition to the standard Carnforth run out.

I think I might be careful what I wish for on this one. If Clapham to Low Gill was re-opened, it probably wouldn't be long before it was realised that it actually formed the shortest route from Leeds to Carlisle. It could only be a matter of time before some bean counter, once again, began to wonder about the cost of maintaining all those tunnels and viaducts, not to mention 72 miles of what would now be a duplicate route a few miles to the east (after all, even the Midland tried to back out of the S & C at the last minute....)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Meant to mention my own suggestion in my last post. Now that the landowner who originally objected is long gone, let's put the Kyle of Lochalsh line where it was always supposed to be, which is in the middle of Strathpeffer village. When the owner of the Coul estate proved implacably opposed, they had to divert the line north of the village with a station a mile and a half away, uphill. This was later renamed Achanalt when a branch line terminating at Strathpeffer was built, but 2 mile long branches had a rather short life expectancy, post war and it closed. It shouldn't even be a huge job. Strathpeffer station is even still there, restored and in tourist-oriented use. Rather oddly, the last picture I saw of it showed that the run round loop had been built up to platform height and grassed over but the platform line hadn't. Does somebody know something? This, in an era when we're casually talking ten billion here or there for HS2 and the like would be a comparatively minor undertaking, but would mean that, at last, trains from Dingwall to Kyle of Lochalsh would properly serve the largest population centre between those places. Albeit about 140 years late. (Last historical note - the landowner in question died before the Kyle line opened and his son immediately dropped all objections. Sadly the Dingwall and Skye Railway had spent so much money on the deviation via Raven Rock that there wasn't enough in the kitty to revert to the originally planned line)

 

[Andyjs247]

How about a dive under at Redhill to permit through running from the North Downs to Tonbridge without the need for reversal at Redhill? Then electrify at 25kV AC from the Channel Tunnel all the way to Reading as an extension of the electric spine.

As this is a fantasy thread and money is no object I would be really ambitious a construct a brand new line to complete an outer orbital railway M25 equivalent. The new route would link the Ashford - Tonbridge line to East West Rail west of Milton Keynes. It would link Maidstone - Boris Island Airport - Southend - Chelmsford - Stansted/Bishops Stortford - Stevenage - Luton Airport - Luton/Dunstable - Milton Keynes Central (new low level platforms) and join EWR/HS2 west of MK. Connections would be provided to HS1, GE main line, west Anglia, ECML, MML, WCML. Much of the line would be tunnelled, or where possible sections would be built on stilits above existing motorways to reduce environmental impact (e.g. Luton - Milton Keynes would be above the M1).

All new build would be to continental loading gauge and electrified at 25kV.

 

[HSTEd]

My own fantasy project relating to the Channel Tunnel involves a new railway running from the Channel Tunnel to Liverpool via the various conurbations in the Midlands (passing east of London with a spur to barking).... constructed to Channel Tunnel gauge or possibly AAR Plate H to safeguard against any gauge improvements being made to the Chunnel involving conductor rails.
Motorail trains from the M25 and the Midlands to Calais.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

One project I thought of last night was if the link between Manchester Airport and the Mid-cheshire line was built in CP6, it could be combined with electrification of the Mid-Cheshire line and electrification of Crewe-Chester-North Wales so an electric service could run from Holyhead to Newcastle.

 

[Markdvdman]

I would like to see Porthcawl back on the network. Also, linking a few more West Wales areas onto the rail network, such as Cross Hands which could have been viable if the track was not removed fairly recently (the old freight line).

Also, Merthyr having a direct East to West link without having to take an hour to get to Cardiff to go anywhere!!!

Boring fantasies perhaps, but quite humble for now.

They will NEVER happen though, so where is my Euromillions winning ticket from last night.....?

 

[Kali]

Should never have happened: Ilfracombe. Would be ridiculously costly to replace - albeit mostly just avoiding urban development rather than roads over the trackbed - but we're not costing anything.

Makes sense, needs another look: Bideford. Pretty sure there's no obstacles ( I can't remember if the new bridge at Barnstaple had a tunnel or not ). The entire line down to Exeter can get some much needed love at the same time.

If only: Okehampton to Bude. Miles of countryside & little in it, but sun & surf at the end. ( And talking of that, Newquay needs the ability to handle more than one train again... ).

 

[ValleyLines142]

Also, Merthyr having a direct East to West link without having to take an hour to get to Cardiff to go anywhere!!!

That's a good point actually. Stagecoach route 9 links Merthyr and Aberdare in forty minutes; at present, the train takes an hour and ten minutes because a change is required at Abercynon!

A link roughly following the A4165 Heads of the Valleys road would be very useful indeed.

Say for instance there was a train from Merthyr to Aberdare, and there was a signalling problem at Merthyr Vale. Currently, buses are normally put out to replace the train service, which adds extra journey time and is inconvenient for those with prams, bikes, dogs or large cases. As a relief, passengers could take a train over to Aberdare from Merthyr and go straight down south towards Ponty and Cardiff via Mountain Ash and rejoin the current route at Abercynon.

 

[southern442]

You forgot Lutterworth.

That is true, though my route would go past Cirencester. My idea is for the uk's transport system to become railway-based. Here are some aspects In more detail.
-New overhead lines in London, with terminals/part terminals at Picadilly circus (huge one), St. Thomas, Heliport, (then there would be a link to the O2), St. Bartholomews, Oxford circus, and Holborn viaduct.
-A developed transport system in the major towns:
-Cirencester will have a line from Cirencester Central to Kemble and the main line will call at Cirencester Watermoor, with a tube system linking them. There will also be a suburban rail network there, with lines to Ashton Keynes, Stroud, Oxford, and the south of Cirencester with stations at Cirencester Chesterton lane and Cirencester parkgate.
- the main line (and the TOC for the main line, British Connection) will take over the cross city line from bromsgrove to Birmingham, with a new station at Birmingham Central, with subway links to new street, moor street and curzon street (for HS2)
I'll post more later if requested

 

[dvboy]

A sort of semi-circular North/West Black Country line:
Sutton Coldfield - Streetley - Aldridge - Walsall* - Darlaston - Willenhall - Wednesfield/Bentley Bridge/Heath Town? - Wolverhampton - Dunstall Park - Compton - Womborne - Pensnett - Brierley Hill* - Stourbridge Junction

* connect with the proposed Brierley Hill - Dudley - Dudley Port - Wednesbury - Walsall metro line

 

[Class172]

Another money no object plan that would require many CPOs and a lot of earthworks.

Make the line between Kings Norton and Five Ways in to four track, to allow the Cross-city services to stay on the slow lines and not slow faster trains which still call at University - also allowing more trains to travel via this route. Then use the old spur at Five Ways towards the former Granville Street and Central Goods to construct a dual-track line for Cross-city trains that enters a tunnel under the City Centre, with a station at New Street, before emerging again near Curzon Street to rejoin the original line to Duddesdon; this would free up space at New Street and make the Cross-city line more self-contained.

 

[mr_jrt]

1. My local suggestion would be to quad track from Shepreth Branch Junction to Cambridge Station, segregating the WAML services from the Cambridge Line services. The WAML services would get exclusive (ish) use of platforms 7 and 8, and the Cambridge Line services would get exclusive (ish) use of 1,2,3 and 4. The trackwork at both ends of Cambridge would be re-done, to allow slightly higher line speeds in and out (at the moment I think it's 15 mph for anything other than straight through platform 1/4 or the through track), although access to 4 avoiding 1 would still use the existing scissors crossover. In order not to require all WAML passengers to use the footbridge to get out of the station, two new entrances would be built, one at the North End to the cycle bridge (with the building "wrapped around" the bridge) and the other at the South End with a large overbridge exiting at Cambridge Leisure (which would help with passenger flow over the Hills Road Bridge, which is awful in the morning peak).

I long thought about that too when I used to commute into Cambridge.

Problem is however, that the WAML services are usually quite short (with notable exceptions) and it's the Shepreth trains that need to be 12 cars. Havign things the easy way around leaves the bays inaccessible to the WAML route and gives the Cambridge line just the one 12 car platform, unless they've finally gotten around to lengthening 2 as well yet.

What I always figured would be ideal is if they could somehow move the listed station building out to where the hopeless turning circle is/was(it's been awhile!), then linking through the bay platforms to turn 1,2,3,5 into another 12-car island platform of sorts, and having the new 7&8 at the same length as 1&2 with a staggered crossover, enabling two 12 car platforms on each face (so 8 in total!).

Ideally though, you want the bays in the middle so they're accessible from both routes, and it'd be far better to have both routes having same-direction cross-platform interchange with each other.

All very complicated.

I also considered that a "Cambridge Metro" option of a line from Sandy to Huntingdon via Cambridge over the disused lines with a widened Hills Road bridge opening could then run as a segregated line using linked-together bays. It's remotely feasible to widen the formation north of the station to Chesterton, I think.

Likewise, another from somewhere like Sudbury or Haverhill to Bury St Edmunds or some such on the other side of the formation.

 

[yorksrob]

My fantasy reopenings (and they are complete fantasy as they're never going to happen for various reasons) would be;

Lowestoft to Yarmouth - why a link through a populated area between two large towns was shut, rather than being retained as an extension of the East Suffolk line I will never understand.

The Cuckoo line - just look at the towns it passed through . There is no conceiveable way it wouldn't be a busy commuter route by now.

The Alston branch - no way it‘s coming back, but would have been great for tourism.


East Links and Wymondham - Hunstanton via Swaffham and Kings Lynn. Would be useful community routes - possibly with RETB. The East Links would be via Mablethorpe rather than direct to serve maximum population.



I‘ve deliberately not included those I still think might happen one day.

 

[Batman]

Another money no object plan that would require many CPOs and a lot of earthworks.

Make the line between Kings Norton and Five Ways in to four track, to allow the Cross-city services to stay on the slow lines and not slow faster trains which still call at University - also allowing more trains to travel via this route. Then use the old spur at Five Ways towards the former Granville Street and Central Goods to construct a dual-track line for Cross-city trains that enters a tunnel under the City Centre, with a station at New Street, before emerging again near Curzon Street to rejoin the original line to Duddesdon; this would free up space at New Street and make the Cross-city line more self-contained.

That isn't a pie in the sky idea, that's been seriously suggested before.

I'd make a few modifications though. Instead of a tunnel portal at Curzon Street where it would get in the way of HS2, i'd have the cross city line running in a cut and cover tunnel along Corporation Street and the Lichfield Road through Aston. I'd have a new underground station in the area of Aston University and the Children's hospital, as well as lower level stations at Aston.

It would run under spaghetti junction and re-join the cross city line in the area of Gravelly Hill station with the station possibly having to be re-built depending on the exact location of the tunnel portal. The existing line between Aston and Gravelly Hill would be abandoned. This has the advantage of segregating the cross city line from freight and Walsall/Rugeley services in the Aston area.

To the south of the city the bored tunnel would need to continue to Five Ways as the old Granville Street station is now apartment buildings and the old alignment to provide approach tracks to the south is no longer available.

You'd also need dive unders at King's Norton and Barnt Green if you're to have a truly segregated cross city line.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

SP limits can probably be easily converted into EMU limits.

<screams silently*> SP was effectively a track construction work-round for jointed track and on at least one route, with which I am intimately acquainted, is no longer required at all - no jointed track; it could thus be re-plated as an MU**. However, 185s aren't allowed to run at any of the non-standard differential permissible speeds***, so can we consign them to Iran with the 14x please?

* Very long story - one day I will be in a position to share it.

** Assuming someone finds the certificate that authorises all 319 to run as Appendix C braked - watch this space.

*** No, they aren't classified under MU or DMU. Yes, I know they like multiple units, but they aren't, OK?

 

[infobleep]

Fair point- though many of the former stations along the ECML are in the middle of nowhere, one of the reasons they closed in the first place. There may be a case for more services calling at places like Thirsk and Northallerton once HS2 is up and running, but I can't think of anywhere where no station exists currently yet there'd be a case for opening one.

Getting back on topic and moving away from my home territory, it'd be nice if a case could be made for a station reopening in Wellington (Somerset). This small market town should serve as a warning of what happens when a settlement becomes isolated- When I lived in Taunton (2003-2006) I met several Wellingtonites who considered a trip to Taunton (a distance of around 10miles) to be something of great luxury and would be undertaken only 2-3 times each year!

The stations towards York are no more in the middle of nowhere in my opinion than those near York not on the ECML. In fact those not on the ECML are further away from York.

We have to remember that the numbers living in a village in the 1960s may have grown since then. I'm sure there would bevillages servered in the south east with similar numbers of residents to those on lines such as the ECML. Perhaps we should close those stations. Not that I'm seriously suggesting we do.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
This has no doubt been looked into before but I would reopen the line from Guildford to Cranley. If it could go back to Horsham then I'd open that too. Why not go to Shorham even. I doubt though revenues would justify it.

However I do think Cranley could be added onto existing SWT services. So Cranley to Ascot for example.

I would also have more cross county services running through Guildford because on a selfish note, it would cut the cost of my advance purchase tickets on Cross Country trains. The cheapest Cross Country advance purchase tickets from Guildford seem to only be when Cross Country trains get diverted via Guildford.

I would also have another cross London route which passes through Woking so people can avoid having to change at Waterloo every time. No wonder Waterloo is to busy. Ideally I'd like this to go via Guildford but there may be more passengers from Basingstoke way.

Given that some trains from London to Southampton now travel via Guildford, I guess they could run some via Guildford and others via Basingstoke, regardless of starting point.