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

[Tomnick]

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.

Was that the intended route? I don't know for certain, but it'd certainly seem logical - and, as you suggest, would have proved completely impractical with today's level of traffic!

 

[Genocide]

Was that the intended route? I don't know for certain, but it'd certainly seem logical - and, as you suggest, would have proved completely impractical with today's level of traffic!

Yes - at the time Watkin had a controlling interest in the SECR and a large holding in the Met.

 

[Philip Elliott]

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.

You are right that connectivity was poor but this was the privately owned railway - the MR and GCR(MS&LR) were long sworn enemies. The GCR was connected to the MR at Bede Island during construction and again in the late 1950s which remained in use to access the yard until December 1995 (and was lifted April 2007). There was also a connection onto the LNWR South Leicestershire line at Whetstone - again short lived.

The GCR did a roaring trade in transporting fish from Grimsby. The GCR built Immingham docks and Wrawby junction is still one of the busiest in the country for freight.

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 Newcastle - Bournemouth was a key service along the route and much quicker than going via Birmingham as it does today.

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.

Despite the fact that Rugby - Nottingham stoppers weren't withdrawn by Mr Beeching as they were found to be profitable? The MML stoppers were withdrawn (partially re-instated 1994)

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.

......

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Simple adage - "last in , first out" - a railway that had no real baseload traffic and surrounded by well established competitors was not going to last , once coal flows ended (including Woodhead) - as someone said , a troubled priest in inner London and seeking a quiet place to meditate was told to "try Marylebone station - the quietest place in London" ....i

 

[Bevan Price]

It was built for Yorkshire/Notts coal and there isn't any now.
.

The same coal which also helped to kill the railway between Sheffield & Nottingham. By the 1950s / 1960s, there was an almost endless sequence of speed restrictions due to mining subsidence, with expresses often allowed 59 to 63 minutes (1955 timetable) for about 38 miles between Sheffield and Nottingham.

 

[Kettledrum]

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..

Very true.

Nottingham today has really poor rail links for a city of its size. It's a terminus on the Midland Main Line with slow and roundabout routes to Sheffield and Lincoln. If you try getting from the M1 into Nottingham, you'll see road links are poor too.

Nottingham Victoria was a through station allowing though trains from the South to Sheffield. It would have provided fantastic connectivity for East Midlands commuters into Nottingham from places like Melton, Oakham, and all across Nottinghamshire. We can only speculate on the economic benefits that this could bring to the East Midlands today.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The same coal which also helped to kill the railway between Sheffield & Nottingham. By the 1950s / 1960s, there was an almost endless sequence of speed restrictions due to mining subsidence, with expresses often allowed 59 to 63 minutes (1955 timetable) for about 38 miles between Sheffield and Nottingham.

I've just checked on trainline, and the journey from Nottingham to Sheffield takes 58 minutes today - disgraceful really.
Derby to Sheffield on the other hand takes 32 minutes.

 

[Rugd1022]

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

The new SC is being built beside the site of the old Up Sidings Jason, the formation of the old Leicester line is a little further north and west of it, if you were to drive into the NR compound you'd actually be driving over part of the trackbed. Until the remodelling was done at Rugby we still used the stub of the route as a shunt neck 9and still called it 'the Leicester') to get coal wagons in and out of the old Norfrost siding.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Crossing the WCML at Rugby without connecting to it was a cardinal error.

A connecting chord was planned at one stage but nothing came of it, sadly.

 

[Golden Gripper]

Philip Elliott might be right that the GC route between Newcastle and Bournemouth was quicker than via Birmingham, but they could only sell enough tickets for one train a day. There is much more traffic to be picked up at Derby and Birmingham than Leicester and Rugby.

 

[yorksrob]

There is much more traffic to be picked up at Derby and Birmingham than Leicester and Rugby.

Surprising really, bearing in mind Leicester, Nottingham, Loughborough and Rugby together make up a fairly large population. Enough to generate a reasonable cross country traffic one would have thought.

 

[Kettledrum]

Philip Elliott might be right that the GC route between Newcastle and Bournemouth was quicker than via Birmingham, but they could only sell enough tickets for one train a day. There is much more traffic to be picked up at Derby and Birmingham than Leicester and Rugby.

Would the GC trains from Newcastle to Bournemouth have gone via Nottingham too. I'd have thought there might have been potentially significant passengers from Nottingham and Leicester.

 

[Mugby]

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.

And it's well documented that B1's were struggling to cope with the loadings in the early 1950's, which was why pacifics had to be brought in.

 

[Bevan Price]

Would the GC trains from Newcastle to Bournemouth have gone via Nottingham too. I'd have thought there might have been potentially significant passengers from Nottingham and Leicester.

Yes. Trains reversed at Sheffield Victoria, then called at Chesterfield Central, Nottingham Victoria, Leicester Central, Rugby Central, Banbury, Oxford, Reading West & various stations to Southampton & Bournemouth (Central & West).

 

[Philip Elliott]

One a day stopped at Lutterworth to If the GC hadn't closed, my life would have been very different...

 

[Rational Plan]

I think the main thing we would wish for is that they never sold off the expansion land at Marleybone station in the first place. Imagine what we would be do with an 6 to 8 platforms at the Station now?

 

[Greybeard33]

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.

And it's well documented that B1's were struggling to cope with the loadings in the early 1950's, which was why pacifics had to be brought in.

As a child in Nottingham in the 1950s, I recall that The Master Cutler from Victoria to Marylebone was still the quickest and preferred way to travel to London, right up to the time of the deliberate run down of the line. Even though at that time the expresses from Nottingham Midland to St Pancras went via Melton and Oakham - more direct than the present-day route via Loughborough and Leicester.

 

[ashworth]

If the Great Central had been retained, modernised and perhaps electrified, as the principle route from Sheffield, Nottingham and Leicester to London what sort of journey times might we now be seeing?
Would passengers from Sheffield, Nottingham and Leicester have been better off with this route for fast services to London rather than the MML? The MML would probably still have needed to have been retained for semi fast services calling at Kettering, Wellingborough, Bedford, Luton etc.
Perhaps the GC should have been retained along with the route from Nottingham to St Pancras via Melton, Oakham etc.

 

[The Planner]

It would be have been one or the other of the Chiltern services you have now or probably half as the long distance stuff to the north would have eaten the paths.

 

[yorksrob]

It would be have been one or the other of the Chiltern services you have now or probably half as the long distance stuff to the north would have eaten the paths.

This is true.

The MML has always had the upper hand with regard to multiple tracking.

 

[AndyW33]

It would be have been one or the other of the Chiltern services you have now or probably half as the long distance stuff to the north would have eaten the paths.

Not necessarily, the builders of the southern section of the GC mainline always knew that capacity (and linespeed) on the Met section via Aylesbury and Harrow would be limited, which is why the GW and GC joint line was built, along with the almost forgotten connection between Grendon Underwood and Ashendon Junctions, complete with flyover at Ashendon so GC and GW expresses didn't conflict.
The Joint line stations mostly had platform roads on loops with through roads in the centre. This infrastructure only began to be dismantled after the closure of the GC as a through route and the end of the GW route Birmingham expresses, and has never been fully reinstated. If the original track layouts had survived along with modern signalling, the number of paths might well be quite a bit higher.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Not necessarily, the builders of the southern section of the GC mainline always knew that capacity (and linespeed) on the Met section via Aylesbury and Harrow would be limited, which is why the GW and GC joint line was built, along with the almost forgotten connection between Grendon Underwood and Ashendon Junctions, complete with flyover at Ashendon so GC and GW expresses didn't conflict. .

Well said...you made the very point that I was ready to make.

 

[bangor-toad]

As a way of avoiding doing the work I was meant to do last night, I played around with the National Rail map working on the assumption that back in the 60's the "influencers" liked the GC rather than the Midland. I then worked on the basis of building no new lines at all, just not closing bits and chords that were long ago lost.
OK, that's wildly historically inaccurate but this is only a "what if" fantasy thread isn't it?

So what differences do I think it would have made from what we have now?
Well the Woodhead route is used, not the Hope Valley.
It's Sheffield Victoria, not Midland.
Fast services northbound from Sheffield would run via Huddersfield

Southbound from Sheffield to Derby would go via Barrow Hill and Chesterfield.
Southbound elsewhere would go to Nottingham Victoria.

At Nottingham there would have been a realignment of the spur from the GC lines to better access the Newark / Grantham routes.
Nottingham Midland would still be used for the slow local services to/from Derby.

Nottingham - Derby services would enter Derby from the north.

Leicester would be trickier. To get the east-west link would either require a new connecting chord and a bit of new line (redone as Lincoln was perhaps?) or it would have required the existing station to remain open to service that line, albeit probably as a rather minor stop.

Market Harborough, Wellingborough and Kettering no longer have any service.

Rugby would have a relocated station to have a single solution where the tracks cross, as at Tamworth.

The link between the GC and the GW lines would exist north of Banbury to allow NE to SW types of links.

With the lines towards London better used it is unlikely that there was the opportunity for the Chiltern services to grow and that may have never been re-instated as it has been.




Now if this had happened RailUK would undoubtedly have the following threads:
Is the Bedford-Kettering re-opening plan viable?
Bring back the Hope Valley line
Would Leicester benefit from having one station rather than two?
Does Pennistone need the platform extension from 10 to 12 car?

Cheers,
Jason

 

[gordonthemoron]

not bad, retaining Matlock-Buxton would also have been a good idea

 

[The Planner]

If the original track layouts had survived along with modern signalling, the number of paths might well be quite a bit higher.

Marginally possibly, but the stopping services would be that slow that it would put people off as they would be sat in loops all the time. Bringing in trains on modern signalling with approach control (as I doubt the old loops were long enough to have high entry and exit speeds) would restrict the capacity no end. There is no way you could provide the same level of service on the joint line that Chiltern provide today if the GC was still open.

 

[edwin_m]

As a way of avoiding doing the work I was meant to do last night, I played around with the National Rail map working on the assumption that back in the 60's the "influencers" liked the GC rather than the Midland. I then worked on the basis of building no new lines at all, just not closing bits and chords that were long ago lost.
OK, that's wildly historically inaccurate but this is only a "what if" fantasy thread isn't it?

...

At Nottingham there would have been a realignment of the spur from the GC lines to better access the Newark / Grantham routes.
Nottingham Midland would still be used for the slow local services to/from Derby.

Nottingham - Derby services would enter Derby from the north.

Probably a spur at Netherfield Jn but the other way round from the one actually installed.

I think you're suggesting Nottingham-Derby would have taken the GN route through Ilkeston with a new chord where it crosses the Derby-Chesterfield line. This is an elegant solution but it's unlikely the line via Beeston would have survived.

On a wider point, freight would have been seen as at least as important as passenger at the time when the GC was closed. In this East Midlands this means particularly power station coal traffic, which was being modernised at the time. Being built later and closely paralleling other routes through the coalfield, I don't think the GC served any collieries that weren't either already connected to another railway or easy to provide with an alternative connectoin. Serving the then-new power station at Ratcliffe would have required retention of significant sections of the Midland as freight-only routes. Given the need for proximity to a large river for cooling, I can't think of any suitable site along the GC where the power station could have been built instead.

 

[tbtc]

You can argue that Nottingham Victoria would be more central than Nottingham Midland, but at least the current Nottingham station is pretty close to the city - Sheffield Victoria is quite a walk from central Sheffield and wouldn't be an ideal location for a single station in this city.

 

[gordonthemoron]

actually, neither Loughborough station is/was well located with regard to the town centre and Leicester Central one was as bad as Sheffield Victoria

 

[bangor-toad]

Hi there,
There's some infrastructure that was used that could have been used without too much fuss.

Probably a spur at Netherfield Jn but the other way round from the one actually installed.

For a GC (South) to Midland (East) spur there's still the viaduct stub today. This could have been used and a few 100 yards of link built where the recent new buildings are could have been put into place to make the link. Here's a picture of the current stub showing the GC route before the tram and the chord going off to the left:

I think you're suggesting Nottingham-Derby would have taken the GN route through Ilkeston with a new chord where it crosses the Derby-Chesterfield line. This is an elegant solution but it's unlikely the line via Beeston would have survived.

Thanks for the comment but it's simpler than that.
I suggested that the old goods sidings which were next to the A52 in Derby could have been used rather than the current alignment. Here's a old map showing them:

Serving the then-new power station at Ratcliffe would have required retention of significant sections of the Midland as freight-only routes. Given the need for proximity to a large river for cooling, I can't think of any suitable site along the GC where the power station could have been built instead

I must admit to not knowing enough about the links to the actual collieries but for the power stations you could have linked to Radcliffe with a short spur down from the Derby - Nottingham line. Other than that I don't think there were any power stations along either the MML route or the GC route?

Cheers!
Jason

 

[YorkshireBear]

Sheffield Victoria for me will only ever open as a two platform small scale station. In an ambitious world, 4 platforms followed by the council investing in the area but it is the opposite of the Moor and other areas of city so not much good. Very badly placed, my views on how this particular part of the GC could be reignited have been stated many times on here. Other parts i am not so sure about. I think it should never be reopened in its old form simply because Marleybone can't take it and Chiltern is a good system that would be severely impacted.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

In 1860, the LNWR and GNR reached an agreement to jointly lease the MS&L (then simply an east-west regional railway), but it was vetoed by the LNWR chairman Lord Chandos.
How different the railway map would have looked if this had come to pass.

 

[didcotdean]

actually, neither Loughborough station is/was well located with regard to the town centre and Leicester Central one was as bad as Sheffield Victoria

If Leicester Central were still in use, I would imagine there would be a bridge from it over Vaughan Way directly into the Highcross Shopping Centre, or the centre itself might have bridged the road to have an entrance on Great Central Street (Vaughan Way might not have been built how it was either). The former buildings in between have been demolished anyway.

By contrast Leicester London Road is on the edge of the declining end of the centre.