Future of the Settle to Carlisle, Bentham and Ribble Valley lines

[Neptune]

I'm liking the OP's idea, an alternating Leeds-Carlisle/Lancaster service would be a nice idea. I don't think there's a need to extend most Lancaster services on to Morecombe, allowing for a more regular and efficient shuttle service for that line. And despite my instincts as a Bradfordian I honestly don't think starting at Bradford FS would be necessary either, I'd rather paths on that section be used to re-instate the half-hourly Aire & Wharfe services that we recently lost.

I agree with this. Hourly Leeds -Hellifield then alternating Lancaster and Carlisle services with Morecambe’s becoming a self contained shuttle. All services should be all stops north of Skipton too giving GGV, HLD, LPR and SET/GIG an hourly service from/to the Aire Valley/Leeds.

Don’t worry about the half hourly Bradford - Skipton/Ilkley services returning. They are due to return in the Dec 22 timetable.

One slight amendment I'd like to see is some extensions of the Carlisle service up to Glasgow. I've no idea if this could be pathed, but if it could it would an alternative to heading up the East Coast towards Scotland or chancing your hand that Avanti make it past Preston. Additionally, would it be feasible to use 170s on such routes, after all this is kind of what they were built for, i.e. longer regional services.

Leeds - Glasgow is just not viable. Pathing north of Carlisle would be a pain and using 3 car DMU’s would be a waste should a valuable path exist. The other RF favourite is via the G&SWR but that then loses a competitive timing for the complete service which people say is the reason for Leeds - Glasgow. It would also increase costs due to additional unit/crew requirements.

It’s usual for these threads about the S&C to descend into ridiculous fantasies about how it should have services all the way to Glasgow or services from Manchester and through to Hawes and sadly this thread after a promising start descended likewise. Nobody ever seems to worry about the massive additional costs.

At the most you could reopen the terminus platform at Hellifield and run the Clitheroe service through to connect but only if the additional units/crew could be sourced. Any further with north with that service and your starting to encroach on paths for freights and incurring avoidable resource costs.

All the 170’s are happily employed elsewhere and there are none available. 158’s are perfectly adequate and it seems to have escaped many peoples attention that this summer has seen more 3/4 car formations appearing. The Bentham line service (yes it’s an awful name for the route but I shall use it as that is the name lumbered on it) used to basically be 2 car 14x and later 150 units and now sees 2/3 car 158’s. A massive improvement.

Some could even take on @Bletchleyite's suggestion of some kind of branding to advertise Dales Rail not only in this region, but in Scotland too. All this of course would be a nice-to-have, I'm not necessarily saying it would actually be possible.

I hope the suggestion for branding isn’t for the units. Why on earth would any company restrict a flexible fleet to one route?

Keeping both of these lines long-term is unaffordable. I would close the Settle-Carlisle line north of Arcow quarry now that there is little if any through freight traffic and introduce an express passenger service (3/day, 2 on Sundays) between Leeds and Glasgow using 5-car Hitachi class 8xx bi-mode trains in part mitigation, reversing in the loop south of Carnforth to join the WCML there. A 2-hourly stopping service could be retained from Leeds to Lancaster, with peak hour extras from Settle to Leeds. The facility to serve the Newbiggin Gypsum works directly by rail would be lost, but a siding could be provided at Penrith with onward road transport. An intermediate block post would be desirable between Settle Junction and Carnforth.

Is this a serious suggestion or are you trolling?

What you’ve said here is that nobody should have rail access to this part of the Yorkshire Dales but more importantly nobody from this part of the Yorkshire Dales should have rail access to anywhere else.

You want to put wagons on the road from Kirkby Thore to Penrith.

Any costs saved would then be spent on upgrading the Bentham line with a single IB allowing you to add in a fantasy Leeds - Glasgow service that reverses in a loop south of Carnforth and would probably take longer than the current Leeds - Glasgow XC service.

Could you please provide us with your figures of unaffordability and also compare them with other routes so we can see which other routes we should close too?

 

[The Planner]

Keeping both of these lines long-term is unaffordable. I would close the Settle-Carlisle line north of Arcow quarry now that there is little if any through freight traffic and introduce an express passenger service (3/day, 2 on Sundays) between Leeds and Glasgow using 5-car Hitachi class 8xx bi-mode trains in part mitigation, reversing in the loop south of Carnforth to join the WCML there. A 2-hourly stopping service could be retained from Leeds to Lancaster, with peak hour extras from Settle to Leeds. The facility to serve the Newbiggin Gypsum works directly by rail would be lost, but a siding could be provided at Penrith with onward road transport. An intermediate block post would be desirable between Settle Junction and Carnforth.

The S&C is not going to close, its an integral part of how HS2 phase 2 is dealt with when it comes to freight.

 

[yorksrob]

Keeping both of these lines long-term is unaffordable. I would close the Settle-Carlisle line north of Arcow quarry now that there is little if any through freight traffic and introduce an express passenger service (3/day, 2 on Sundays) between Leeds and Glasgow using 5-car Hitachi class 8xx bi-mode trains in part mitigation, reversing in the loop south of Carnforth to join the WCML there. A 2-hourly stopping service could be retained from Leeds to Lancaster, with peak hour extras from Settle to Leeds. The facility to serve the Newbiggin Gypsum works directly by rail would be lost, but a siding could be provided at Penrith with onward road transport. An intermediate block post would be desirable between Settle Junction and Carnforth.

Cheers, I needed a chuckle before work

 

[Bantamzen]

I agree with this. Hourly Leeds -Hellifield then alternating Lancaster and Carlisle services with Morecambe’s becoming a self contained shuttle. All services should be all stops north of Skipton too giving GGV, HLD, LPR and SET/GIG an hourly service from/to the Aire Valley/Leeds.

Don’t worry about the half hourly Bradford - Skipton/Ilkley services returning. They are due to return in the Dec 22 timetable.

I hope this does happen, it has the potential to become a bit of a pain especially when Bradford-Ilkley services are cancelled due to disruption, as this route is often one of the first to get lopped off in my experience. Traffic around here is easily back at pre-covid levels so we really need to be trying to get a few off the roads and back onto the trains.

Leeds - Glasgow is just not viable. Pathing north of Carlisle would be a pain and using 3 car DMU’s would be a waste should a valuable path exist. The other RF favourite is via the G&SWR but that then loses a competitive timing for the complete service which people say is the reason for Leeds - Glasgow. It would also increase costs due to additional unit/crew requirements.

It’s usual for these threads about the S&C to descend into ridiculous fantasies about how it should have services all the way to Glasgow or services from Manchester and through to Hawes and sadly this thread after a promising start descended likewise. Nobody ever seems to worry about the massive additional costs.

Conversely whenever the idea is raised about Leeds - Glasgow the argument is always its too costly, or there isn't the demand. But still plenty of people seem to make the trip from the two hubs, and that's before you consider that it isn't just about getting people from Leeds to Glasgow or the other way around. Having a more regular, and/or direct route might make the Dales a bit more attractive to people north of the border. Plus it might just gain more traffic if competitively priced versus the alternatives, you know growing a market.

But at the end of the day its like I said, it would be a nice-to-have, its not something I'm particularly desperate for.

All the 170’s are happily employed elsewhere and there are none available. 158’s are perfectly adequate and it seems to have escaped many peoples attention that this summer has seen more 3/4 car formations appearing. The Bentham line service (yes it’s an awful name for the route but I shall use it as that is the name lumbered on it) used to basically be 2 car 14x and later 150 units and now sees 2/3 car 158’s. A massive improvement.

Yes I've seen and used the longer S&C formations, they are gratefully received. But from what I've read over on the traction section the 170s aren't all that happy on the Harrogate line, so I just wondered if longer regional runs would be more suited for them.

I hope the suggestion for branding isn’t for the units. Why on earth would any company restrict a flexible fleet to one route?

Branding doesn't necessarily mean you limit the stock, but having a few units with it & making sure they make appearances on said route helps build it with the travelling public. And it doesn't stop at just the units, there's plenty of ways to brand a line.

 

[Ken H]

Walkers generally want "out early back late" so promoting certain services under the DalesRail brand might help.

Running early services to Ribblehead would help. Seasonal dated would do. You need to be in Horton or Ribblehad around 7 to do the 3 peaks. And on sundays too.

 

[Neptune]

Conversely whenever the idea is raised about Leeds - Glasgow the argument is always its too costly, or there isn't the demand. But still plenty of people seem to make the trip from the two hubs, and that's before you consider that it isn't just about getting people from Leeds to Glasgow or the other way around. Having a more regular, and/or direct route might make the Dales a bit more attractive to people north of the border. Plus it might just gain more traffic if competitively priced versus the alternatives, you know growing a market.

The amount of people who do travel on the S&C to/from destinations north of Carlisle is plenty but I would say not enough to financially justify a through service. As you say it’s a nice to have but to be fair Carlisle is a good station to change trains at. It’s not a huge confusing mega hub.

I think a lot of people fall into the trap that it used to happen so it should now.

Yes I've seen and used the longer S&C formations, they are gratefully received. But from what I've read over on the traction section the 170s aren't all that happy on the Harrogate line, so I just wondered if longer regional runs would be more suited for them.

The 170’s are quite happy on the Harrogate line as they also work the faster runs between Sheffield & Scarborough. They would probably suffer more up the long drag at 60mph max. Lovely units but I think the 158’s are absolutely fine for this service in 3/4 car formation.

Branding doesn't necessarily mean you limit the stock, but having a few units with it & making sure they make appearances on said route helps build it with the travelling public. And it doesn't stop at just the units, there's plenty of ways to brand a line.

I really don’t like train branding personally and can’t see the point in it. Sure route branding is a great way to advertise a line but I remember the days of seeing 150’s advertising the Colne festival or Buxton festival or whatever and thinking how ridiculous it looked at Knottingley because I’m fairly sure it didn’t make anyone aware or willing to attend any festival in the dim and distant lands of the west. The days of this sort of branding should be left firmly in the Serco/Abellio past. Most people take their cue of what to do from the internet. That’s where to target better than the chance of seeing a Dalesrail branded DMU in their own backyard which they will forget about within 5 seconds.

Everyone has a different opinion of this I’m sure but mine is that it is a pointless exercise. It might work on buses but they generally work in the area that they are advertising.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I hope the suggestion for branding isn’t for the units.

Of course it is. The bus industry recognises the benefits of route branding (and the rail industry has some, e.g. the Marston Vale 230s which don't have any other purpose).

Why on earth would any company restrict a flexible fleet to one route?

You'd only do enough to work the S&C. If you did ever need to send them elsewhere that's a lovely advert, isn't it?

Is this a serious suggestion or are you trolling?

I think @daodao is quite serious, but that their views are quite extreme in rail terms, i.e. that they take a Serpell type line that rail should only be done when it covers its costs from the farebox, and thus they aren't really providing useful input to the discussion.

 

[InkyScrolls]

You need to elaborate here a bit, we would model what it could achieve and wouldn't assume it could do linespeed unless its possible to do so.

I bow to your judgement - if raising the passenger linespeed is in any way feasible then I'm all for it.

One slight amendment I'd like to see is some extensions of the Carlisle service up to Glasgow.

As useful as that would be, especially is the S&C's linespeed was raised, there simply isn't the pathing available north of Carlisle, least of all with a DMU limited to 90 mph.

Keeping both of these lines long-term is unaffordable. I would close the Settle-Carlisle line north of Arcow quarry now that there is little if any through freight traffic and introduce an express passenger service (3/day, 2 on Sundays) between Leeds and Glasgow using 5-car Hitachi class 8xx bi-mode trains in part mitigation, reversing in the loop south of Carnforth to join the WCML there. A 2-hourly stopping service could be retained from Leeds to Lancaster, with peak hour extras from Settle to Leeds. The facility to serve the Newbiggin Gypsum works directly by rail would be lost, but a siding could be provided at Penrith with onward road transport. An intermediate block post would be desirable between Settle Junction and Carnforth.

You make some good points there - but I would go a step further and remove all lines north of Leeds; hardly anyone lives there and they can always drive, can't they? With the money saved we can invest in hot-air-balloon charging ports in Tunbridge Wells. . .

 

[Neptune]

Of course it is. The bus industry recognises the benefits of route branding (and the rail industry has some, e.g. the Marston Vale 230s which don't have any other purpose).

In my subsequent reply I explain why it’s less of a good idea for the rail industry and why it works better for buses. The bus industry is much more localised which is why it works there. There are buses on specific routes such as the various Transdev Keighley routes around here like Shuttle and Aireline where even if the buses go off route they are still local to what they are advertising. The First Bus & TLC services around here seem to manage without the same style of advertising.

Trains are less attached to local communities than buses unless it’s something niche like Stourbridge or Marston Vale.

You'd only do enough to work the S&C. If you did ever need to send them elsewhere that's a lovely advert, isn't it?

Every single Northern 158 whether they be based at Heaton or Neville Hill, 2 car or 3 car is diagrammed onto an S&C turn within the maintenance rotation of their unit diagrams. If you start making them route specific units you restrict the ability to diagram them efficiently.

Will the people of Wigan or Whitby really take notice if their train says Dalesrail all down the side of it.

Also what is the point of branding a train advertising a route that it is already on meaning the passengers on board know about it already? Seems a bit pointless.

To be fare the S&C isn’t really the sort of line that needs any extra advertising. It’s rather well known even in non railway circles. Take it from someone who worked the line for 20 plus years. The user groups also do an excellent job advertising the route. You don’t need to start branding trains that cover vast swathes of the north as if they are local buses.

As I say, these are my opinions and they will differ with others. I just can’t personally see the point of having advertising on the side of a train that people are already on and in other areas will most likely ignore.

I think @daodao is quite serious, but that their views are quite extreme in rail terms, i.e. that they take a Serpell type line that rail should only be done when it covers its costs from the farebox, and thus they aren't really providing useful input to the discussion.

Thanks for the heads up. Sounds like they are on the wrong forum or are just after reactions. I shall ignore.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Trains are less attached to local communities than buses unless it’s something niche like Stourbridge or Marston Vale.

Or the S&C, which acts like a big branch line.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

It would make a lot of sense for the S&C to have dedicated, branded units with say 8-10 cycle spaces and lots of luggage space, yes. As it's all 15x, you could do a ScotRail with some 153s, fitting them with bike spaces and First Class. Are any still going spare?

25 of them, yes!

 

[Ken H]

@Neptune branding works on buses because loads of non bus users see them. To me the most important place is the back where it is seen by cars occupants following. Trains are only seen by train users.

One big hurdle Northern have with S&C is many think its a preserved steam railway. Not a working all year round railway part of the national railway.
Wonder how many go to Settle Station for a trip to Carlisle and go, 'oh. Its a diesel, not a steam train'

 

[InkyScrolls]

25 of them, yes!

Unless there's an operational reason which can't be overcome (e.g. available siding space) it seems rather an oversight for Northern to have dropped the 153s entirely instead of using them as extra capacity, bicycle storage, etc.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

I suspect the operational reason is £££. ScotGov might be happy funding a refurbishment of 153s to carry bikes and luggage, but DfT has only ever been interested in (a) bums on seats and (b) reducing subsidy.

 

[Neptune]

Or the S&C, which acts like a big branch line.

Yes but it isn’t is it really. It‘s a rural inter regional route with a diverse traffic range mainly for locals connecting from their village into the nearest town/city, people using it as a cheaper alternative to XC (Leeds - Glasgow changing at Carlisle) and of course tourists which it does very well for already. It really doesn’t need bus style branding adding to a few 158’s that may or may not go anywhere near the route.

Are you on a retainer from Best Impressions

Moving back to the Bentham line it acts in a very similar way to the S&C although with less of a tourist market. Giving this route a fixed 2 hourly service pattern from either end and dropping the Morecambe section to make it more robust at Lancaster with a decent turnaround in the north bays would be a huge benefit. Also those students from Lancaster that travel from Leeds via Preston could be encouraged onto the Bentham line if the service was a better and reliable pattern.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Are you on a retainer from Best Impressions

Sorry, the quote lost the smiley!

I do like most of what they do. I say "most of", because I think (much as the livery is lovely) the omisson of "Snowdon" from the new "Sherpa'r Wyddfa" bus livery is a grave commercial error, and because I think the Virgin Trains East Coast livery was and is horrid. And some of it can be slightly samey.

 

[InkyScrolls]

I suspect the operational reason is £££. ScotGov might be happy funding a refurbishment of 153s to carry bikes and luggage, but DfT has only ever been interested in (a) bums on seats and (b) reducing subsidy.

It's unfortunate (in my opinion) that the railways are treated more as drain on the government's coffers than as an essential public service.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's unfortunate (in my opinion) that the railways are treated more as drain on the government's coffers than as an essential public service.

To me the worst thing is that very little attempt is made at marketing lines which could be made less of a basket case by good marketing at very little cost. For instance decent First Class on the S&C would be money for old rope; plenty of tourists would pay it and some of the coach tours might default to it. And you could viably sell a tarted-up 156 as a panoramic coach if you lined the seats up to the windows - they're massive and quite high.

I'd genuinely love to see a Best Impressions "full on" attempt at the S&C, the West Highland or the Conwy Valley.

 

[daodao]

The S&C is not going to close, its an integral part of how HS2 phase 2 is dealt with when it comes to freight.

It would be helpful if you could provide more information on this point. The S&C was retained primarily as a freight route, but this traffic has dwindled to virtually nothing. If this freight role is to be resuscitated, then I would change my view about its long-term role/viability. It is not affordable on passenger traffic alone, and serves no sizeable population.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It would be helpful if you could provide more information on this point. The S&C was retained primarily as a freight route, but this traffic has dwindled to virtually nothing. If this freight role is to be resuscitated, then I would change my view about its long-term role/viability. It is not affordable on passenger traffic alone, and serves no sizeable population.

Presumably it's in essence a bypass for freight so the additional WCML service(s) can be pathed.

Freight is a barrier to clockface services on the north WCML, it'd really be quite good if more could be made of the S&C to allow the north WCML timetable to be improved, even ignoring HS2's need for two more paths (one to Lancaster and one to Scotland).

 

[Neptune]

Sorry, the quote lost the smiley!

I do like most of what they do. I say "most of", because I think (much as the livery is lovely) the omisson of "Snowdon" from the new "Sherpa'r Wyddfa" bus livery is a grave commercial error, and because I think the Virgin Trains East Coast livery was and is horrid. And some of it can be slightly samey.

Yes it wasn’t a dig or anything hence the wink. I can tell you are a fan and I look at the work they’ve done with Transdev Blazefield locally to me and they actually make bus travel look pleasant which is a tough gig in my book although I still wouldn’t catch a bus to be fair which is nothing to do with their work.

Their work on London Midland was probably the finest rail application in my book and to see what has happened now with LNWR/WMT makes me wince.

To me the worst thing is that very little attempt is made at marketing lines which could be made less of a basket case by good marketing. For instance decent First Class on the S&C would be money for old rope; plenty of tourists would pay it and some of the coach tours might default to it. And you could viably sell a tarted-up 156 as a panoramic coach if you lined the seats up to the windows - they're massive and quite high.

To be fair the S&C has some of the best marketing on Northern. Just look at the boards at Leeds & Carlisle stations advertising the route. Better than any other route on Northern.

I’m not sure FC would be really needed on the S&C. I’ve never known anybody ask about it. At least 158’s are the default traction now due to the crews that sign the route. You’ve said yourself that it is a decent refurbishment on those units. When you get a 3 or 4 car you instantly double your cycle spaces as well.

 

[70014IronDuke]

Go stand on settle station at 0730. Rammed with commuters and students.

Is that still true? How have passenger loadings recovered post-Covid?

Settle is (or was pre-Covid) easily the most important station on both lines (not counting the end stations, or Skipton, Keighley etc), with annual usage of almost 150,000 entries and exits - more than double that of Appleby (c 60,000). This is why, along with the contributions of Horton, Hellifield and Gargrave, I argue that the most important single improvement to the service would be an 08.15 from Ribblehead and 08.30 from Settle to Leeds. This is needed to plug the awful 2.5 hr gap until the next service on weekdays. (Saturdays is different.)

The OP and many posters advocate a two-hourly, all-stations service on both lines. I think the S&C needs better tuning - I'd rather see two-three limited-stop trains each way per day, calling at Hellifield, Settle, Appleby and one of Kirkby Stephen or Langwathby. And Langwathby should be promoted as a railhead for Penrith and Alston.

The current timetable has only one limited stop service in the up on weekdays (and weekends), but just one in the down, and that's on Sundays. Bizarrely (to me) the return on Sundays is an all shacks before continuing to Nottingham.

I'm sure the planners have their reasons for this, but it does seem strange.

 

[The Planner]

It would be helpful if you could provide more information on this point. The S&C was retained primarily as a freight route, but this traffic has dwindled to virtually nothing. If this freight role is to be resuscitated, then I would change my view about its long-term role/viability. It is not affordable on passenger traffic alone, and serves no sizeable population.

Once HS2 starts running north of Crewe, irrespective of Golborne etc... Class 6 paths are going to be nigh on impossible during the day, so will be going via the S&C. Irrespective of your desire to close it, there are no plans to and we wouldn't be spending money on re-looking at line speed improvements.

 

[InkyScrolls]

Reading back through the posts on this thread so far the general (and I stress general!) consensus is as follows:-

• A clockface timetable would be beneficial, with perhaps slight variations to minimise gaps at peak times
• 1tp2h is largely sufficient, again with additions at the peaks
• There is no need to demote any of the stations to requests
• A higher linespeed would be beneficial but not essential
• 158s are adequate suited to both lines (preferably of at least three carriages)
• Through services to Glasgow, though an interesting concept, are likely unachievable and arguably unnecessary
• The S&C is already well-marketed but the FoBL could be more so
• The Morecambe/Heysham section of the latter should be operated wholly as a separate service
• Through services to/from Blackburn & Manchester via Hellifield are possible but difficult to path for (any passenger service terminating at Hellifield from the South would have to run to Settle Jct. to turn round as the pointwork in P2 for the Clitheroe line lacks an FPL)

A rough sketch of a possible timetable would be as follows:

• Departures from Leeds for Lancaster at (0419 - starts from Skipton at 0457), 0619, 0819, 1019, 1219, 1419, 1519 (one hour earlier to allow a departure between 5pm and 6pm), 1719 and 1919
• Departures from Leeds for Carlisle at 0519, 0719, 0849 (to minimise the gap at the tourist peak), 1049, 1249, 1449, 1619 (likewise), 1819, 2019
• Departures from Lancaster to Leeds at 0646, 0846, 1046, 1246, 1446, 1646, 1746 (catering for commuter traffic), 1946, 2146
• Departures from Carlisle to Leeds at 0456, 0656, 0826 (again, aimed at tourist traffic), 1026, 1226, 1426, 1626, 1756 (aimed at returning tourist and commuter traffic), 1956

This timetable suggestion removes the sometimes very large gaps (up to three hours, or six hours at Long Preston between trains from Carlisle) and aims to cater to the tourist and commuter peaks. All trains stop at all stations. There are nine return trips per day, which is one more on each line than at present; I believe this should be possible with the currently available crew and units by 'jigging things about a bit'.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The OP and many posters advocate a two-hourly, all-stations service on both lines. I think the S&C needs better tuning - I'd rather see two-three limited-stop trains each way per day, calling at Hellifield, Settle, Appleby and one of Kirkby Stephen or Langwathby. And Langwathby should be promoted as a railhead for Penrith and Alston.

Penrith has a railway station already. Why would you promote people making additional car journeys over, er, using it?

There aren't many intermediates, so I don't think reducing frequency at them further would be of benefit.

 

[InkyScrolls]

Penrith has a railway station already. Why would you promote people making additional car journeys over, er, using it?

There aren't many intermediates, so I don't think reducing frequency at them further would be of benefit.

I think the idea is that it would save time for the inhabitants of Penrith, were they wishing to travel towards Skipton/Leeds, if they were to travel via the S&C rather than down the WCML, changing at Lancaster for the FoBL.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think the idea is that it would save time for the inhabitants of Penrith, were they wishing to travel towards Skipton/Leeds, if they were to travel via the S&C rather than down the WCML, changing at Lancaster for the FoBL.

It might and they can already do it if they want to. I'd not explicitly promote that as it creates car journeys.

 

[70014IronDuke]

A rough sketch of a possible timetable would be as follows:

• ...
• Departures from Carlisle to Leeds at 0456, 0656, 0826 (again, aimed at tourist traffic), 1026, 1226, 1426, 1626, 1756 (aimed at returning tourist and commuter traffic), 1956

This timetable suggestion removes the sometimes very large gaps (up to three hours, or six hours at Long Preston between trains from Carlisle) and aims to cater to the tourist and commuter peaks. All trains stop at all stations. There are nine return trips per day, which is one more on each line than at present; I believe this should be possible with the currently available crew and units by 'jigging things about a bit'.

But without an additional train turning at Ribblehead c 07.00, this means you drop the most important train of the day from Settle, departing c 07.30 for an 08.35 arrival in Leeds.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But without an additional train turning at Ribblehead c 07.00, this means you drop the most important train of the day from Settle, departing c 07.30 for an 08.35 arrival in Leeds.

I think what I'd do is go pure clockface but then add trains like these on top. You lose the benefit of clockface if it's not consistent, so if you're going to have multiple patterns you may as well forget it entirely and plan trains for specific demands.

 

[InkyScrolls]

But without an additional train turning at Ribblehead c 07.00, this means you drop the most important train of the day from Settle, departing c 07.30 for an 08.35 arrival in Leeds.

True, true.

I think what I'd do is go pure clockface but then add trains like these on top. You lose the benefit of clockface if it's not consistent, so if you're going to have multiple patterns you may as well forget it entirely and plan trains for specific demands.

I'll have a rework.