[FANTASY] What if the Great Central hadn't closed?

[mainframe444]

Consider this.......

Had there been more foresight in the 1960s the Great Central route would have been retained as a freight only route, given its continental loading gauge etc.

This would remove freight from the East and West coast routes, and mean that HS2 would not be needed to provide additional capacity.

Discuss......

MainFrame

 

[jopsuk]

Your statement about the loading gauge would activate the siren were you on QI. Common misconception.

 

[mainframe444]

Fair enough, that's why I asked the question!

MF

 

[NSEFAN]

It's not surprising that the GC was closed, given the way people saw railways at the time.

I'm not sure if we could say that HS2 wouldn't be needed just because the GC was kept. If it had been kept open, I think it would have been downgraded to a series of regional routes with slow stopping trains, as happened to the section south of Aylesbury.

 

[mainframe444]

I did not suggest that the GC should have been retained as a passenger route, but as a dedicated freight only route, thereby freeing up capacity for passenger traffic on other routes.

MF

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Consider this.......
Had there been more foresight in the 1960s the Great Central route would have been retained as a freight only route, given its continental loading gauge etc.
This would remove freight from the East and West coast routes, and mean that HS2 would not be needed to provide additional capacity.

Most freight today runs southeast to northwest, and is dominated by ports and coal.
The GC ran south-north/northeast and had poor links to the southern ports and through the northwest.
Not bad for Southampton to Yorkshire, but useless for Essex-Birmingham/Glasgow.
There's very little freight on the ECML and MML anyway.
It was built for Yorkshire/Notts coal and there isn't any now.
Crossing the WCML at Rugby without connecting to it was a cardinal error.

 

[The Ham]

HS2 may still have been proposed but with a slightly later start date for phase 2 or possibly even both phases.

Although as passenger numbers have been out performing the growth model even the slightly later start date may not have stayed as a later start date for very long (even now there are murmurings from government that Phase 2 may be needed before 2033).

It is likely that if it was a freight only route that it would have seen at the very least an active campaign for passenger services to be reinstated by now. However even if passenger services had been started, it is unlikely that it would have made much of a dent in the numbers of people using the WCML.

 

[gordonthemoron]

and it would not have been retained as a freight only route through Nottingham

 

[YorkshireBear]

Great Central doesn't really follow the major freight flows in the UK so it would be difficult. It would have needed work to ensure it had links everywhere which would have rendered the project un-affordable in those times. Whether one day a freight only railway will actually be built is an interesting question which i do hope to answer in my dissertation. It will certainly be needed if we want a large modal shift.

 

[DXMachina]

Also the biggest sin of the GC is it didn't go anywhere except places nobody lived and places that already had main line railways. it was an Victorian vanity project.

 

[Taunton]

The Great Central had less connectivity with other rail routes than just about any other comparable line in Britain. From Nottingham to Woodford there was nothing. About the only connectivity of consequence was with the Great Western at Banbury, via a spur. It actually carried very little freight traffic apart from some coal traffic from Nottingham/Sheffield down to Banbury, and a lesser amount continuing to London which after 1923 the LNER found convenient to keep it off the East Coast main line. This traffic ran down substantially in the 1960s as domestic and gasworks coal usage disappeared, and power stations in cities like London were replaced by ones where the coal was, in Yorkshire etc, with the end product, electricity, being transmitted rather than sending the coal down.

Every main point along the line (Nottingham, Loughborough, Leicester, Rugby)had a station separate, remote and unconnected from the much more used main station of the town (in passing, HS2 is poised to repeat this error). Rugby is probably the worst example on the old GC. As a result even the handful (and they were only a handful) of through expresses per day didn't carry a lot. The busiest train was generally the York to Swindon/Southampton, but that only ran once a day.

The local stopping trains on the line were normally so much empty stock, from the early loco/carriage days right through to the dmus at the end.

As far as the commercial value of building the line is concerned, let us not forget that the MS&L, who promoted it, was said by investors to stand for "Money Sunk & Lost", and the new GC name they gave themselves when the line opened was now "Gone Completely". And so it proved.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Poland built a high speed freight line in the 1970s, it's now mainly (only?) used by passenger trains, see here
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Nottingham Victoria was much more central than Nottingham Midland and AFAIR was linked to LNER/Great Northern route to Grantham

 

[tbtc]

Had there been more foresight in the 1960s the Great Central route would have been retained as a freight only route, given its continental loading gauge etc

...and therefore closed in the 1970s instead.

Or maybe the early 1980s.

 

[Dunc108]

...and therefore closed in the 1970s instead.

Or maybe the early 1980s.

Wasnt the Woodhead route the surviving Northern stub of the GC which itself had a heavy reliance on freight... i.e. Coal, only to finally close itself in the early 1980s! Even as useful as Woodhead's reinstatement might be as a fast route between Manchester & Sheffield, I just cannot see it happening...

 

[bb21]

Nottingham Victoria was much more central than Nottingham Midland and AFAIR was linked to LNER/Great Northern route to Grantham

Loughborough Central was closer to town centre than Loughborough Midland, and Leicester Central was much closer to the bus station than Leicester London Road, and certainly no further from the city centre.

Another murmur off the grapevine is that MR personnel had much more influence than GCR higher up at BR, so with only one line to survive, it was inevitable that MR would get the nod.

 

[Tomnick]

Another murmur off the grapevine is that MR personnel had much more influence than GCR higher up at BR, so with only one line to survive, it was inevitable that MR would get the nod.

Indeed, it was transferred from the Eastern Region to the Midland in its later years, who - unsurprisingly - seemed keen to run it down and focus on 'their' main line instead. Much of the decline on the Exeter - Salisbury route occurred in similar circumstances (under the Western Region) with the result that it's not really up to the job nowadays.

 

[HowardGWR]

Loughborough Central was closer to town centre than Loughborough Midland, and Leicester Central was much closer to the bus station than Leicester London Road, and certainly no further from the city centre.

Another murmur off the grapevine is that MR personnel had much more influence than GCR higher up at BR, so with only one line to survive, it was inevitable that MR would get the nod.

The post from 'Taunton' contained so many puzzling statements, I didn't know where to begin, but your posting and that from 'BB21' does part of it for me, thanks. It should also be added that being absorbed into the LNER did not help this excellent railway prosper either.

When you look around the UK closed lines, it's nearly always the absorbed concern in 1923, previously perhaps partly a competitor, that suffered. It seems the idea of actually expanding the business never occurred to the grouped concerns and their nationalised successor. Retrenchment was there long before Beeching IMO.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Another murmur off the grapevine is that MR personnel had much more influence than GCR higher up at BR, so with only one line to survive, it was inevitable that MR would get the nod.

One of the really crass decisions was the closure of both Rugby-Leicester lines.
The Midland (the one with good connections) went first, as the GC route still had through traffic - but then that went too.
If they had retained the Midland route it could today have been a strategic link through from the WCML-MML-ECML.
But both routes were quickly buried under the M1.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Also the biggest sin of the GC is it didn't go anywhere except places nobody lived and places that already had main line railways. it was an Victorian vanity project.

Was it not originally envisaged in Victorian times as part of a direct route from Manchester to Paris with a Channel Tunnel being required. London to Paris via a Channel Tunnel seems to be an existing route...is this a modern vanity project ?

 

[Tomnick]

Was it not originally envisaged in Victorian times as part of a direct route from Manchester to Paris with a Channel Tunnel being required. London to Paris via a Channel Tunnel seems to be an existing route...is this a modern vanity project ?

I've read that the planned connection with the Continent would have relied upon through trains using what is now part of the Circle Line to access other lines towards the channel - so perhaps not as ambitious as is often thought!

 

[The Planner]

But both routes were quickly buried under the M1.

GCR only has the M6 built over it, the M1 is carried under it by bridge. The Midland route is pretty much obliterated.

 

[bangor-toad]

One of the really crass decisions was the closure of both Rugby-Leicester lines.
The Midland (the one with good connections) went first, as the GC route still had through traffic - but then that went too.
If they had retained the Midland route it could today have been a strategic link through from the WCML-MML-ECML.
But both routes were quickly buried under the M1.

Hi there,
The M1 was built alongside the GC route for much of the distance between Rugby and Leicester. There are some photos online that show the working GC and cars on the M1. Here's a few from http://www.gcrleicester.info/html/trip_to_nottingham___rugby.html

Crossing the M1

Alongside the M1

Most of the alignment there is still visible alongside the motorway, even today.


The Midland route is surprisingly intact(Edit: no "intact" is a bad word implying there could still be a railway there! Better say the alignment instead...) with some residential development on the trackbed in some of the villages it passed through and again it's surprising how little encroachment there is on the approach into Leicester.
Until recently the Rugby end was clear too. However, and I haven't been that way for a while now, isn't the new signalling centre being built on the alignment?

Cheers,
Jason

 

[traji00]

I've read that the planned connection with the Continent would have relied upon through trains using what is now part of the Circle Line to access other lines towards the channel - so perhaps not as ambitious as is often thought!

That would be via Baker St & Kings Cross then either via Liverpool St & St Mary's Curve or Snow Hill Tunnel onto Southern metals.
...
Imagine fitting that around services then.

 

[edwin_m]

One of the really crass decisions was the closure of both Rugby-Leicester lines.
The Midland (the one with good connections) went first, as the GC route still had through traffic - but then that went too.
If they had retained the Midland route it could today have been a strategic link through from the WCML-MML-ECML.

Retaining Market Harborough to Northampton would have been an alternative - this was kept until the 80s possibly because it would have allowed closure of the MML further south with trains diverted into Euston.

Another alternative was the Oxford-Cambridge line, another valuable route that was closed without trying to make it useful (through trains through Bletchley, connection to Bedford Midland) but at least we should get that one back. If they get the service pattern right this will allow quicker journeys between the East Midlands and Oxford or beyond, hopelessly uncompetitive on the existing route via Birmingham.

 

[Taunton]

The post from 'Taunton' contained so many puzzling statements, I didn't know where to begin.

Go on, give it a shot ..........

 

[Dunc108]

Poland built a high speed freight line in the 1970s, it's now mainly (only?) used by passenger trains, see here
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Nottingham Victoria was much more central than Nottingham Midland and AFAIR was linked to LNER/Great Northern route to Grantham

You're right, Nottingham Vic was very well situated for the City centre & could have still had enormous potential as a Cross Country hub aswell as accomodating Chiltern Intercity services from Marylebone using those superb MK3s..

 

[Genocide]

Was it not originally envisaged in Victorian times as part of a direct route from Manchester to Paris with a Channel Tunnel being required. London to Paris via a Channel Tunnel seems to be an existing route...is this a modern vanity project ?

Edward Watkin felt that the Great Central could serve as the English spine of a pan-European system. His concepts were rather ahead of both technology and revenue at the time.

Watkin's attempt to build a taller version of the Eiffel Tower at Wembley was a vanity project - it only got to the first storey, although we have the GCR and Watkin to thank for the Wembley complex - but he was sincere, if misguided, about his ambitions.

 

[w0033944]

I've noticed that, so far, most posts have discussed the London Extension, rather than the earlier east-west routes.

 

[Genocide]

I've noticed that, so far, most posts have discussed the London Extension, rather than the earlier east-west routes.

Probably because most people - including me I suppose - think of Woodhead as an LNER project and forget it's pre-grouping history.

To answer the question in the Woodhead context - I don't think we need it now, I can't forsee a traffic flow in the immediate future which would demand that capacity and the engineering was simply not suited to modern operations anyway.

 

[bunnahabhain]

It should also be added that being absorbed into the LNER did not help this excellent railway prosper either.

When you look around the UK closed lines, it's nearly always the absorbed concern in 1923, previously perhaps partly a competitor, that suffered. It seems the idea of actually expanding the business never occurred to the grouped concerns and their nationalised successor. Retrenchment was there long before Beeching IMO.

On the contrary the line went from strength to strength under the LNER and it was only really in the late 1950s when the line started being run down proper. Under the LNER a number of express services were introduced, including The Master Cutler amongst others.