Is the S&C a basket case undeserving of regular public transport?

[Bletchleyite]

But they can go by train anyway - ECML or, indeed using Northern's services on the S+C

Going from Preston to Scotland by train if the WCML is closed is not a very easy or particularly pleasant undertaking, though, involving 3 changes, and often not even a Permitted Route (though that itself could be fixed by adding more engineering easements).

Don't get drawn into the trap of thinking every IC journey has London at one end!

Would be easier if there was an all-day DalesRail service (Preston onto S&C) I suppose, but classically that's always gone to Leeds.

I certainly do think, though, that for all engineering work involving buses, any reasonable rail alternative should be Permitted on all walk-up tickets including TOC-specific ones.

 

[JonathanH]

Going from Preston to Scotland by train if the WCML is closed is not a very easy or particularly pleasant undertaking, though, involving 3 changes, and often not even a Permitted Route (though that itself could be fixed by adding more engineering easements).

Don't get drawn into the trap of thinking every IC journey has London at one end!

Would be easier if there was an all-day DalesRail service (Preston onto S&C) I suppose, but classically that's always gone to Leeds.

What proportion of the passengers using the WCML are starting their journeys at Preston and are they somehow different from passengers at Lancaster who presumably do have to go by coach?

When WCML services have been diverted via the S+C they miss out Preston in some cases.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What proportion of the passengers using the WCML are starting their journeys at Preston and are they somehow different from passengers at Lancaster?

There is an obvious difference from passengers at Lancaster which you perhaps haven't thought of due to its relative insignificance - it's 1 change fewer from there due to the existence of the Little North Western route (which, if you thought the S&C was a basket case, takes it to a new level, as it has almost no tourist usage unlike the S&C).

 

[JonathanH]

There is an obvious difference from passengers at Lancaster which you perhaps haven't thought of due to its relative insignificance - it's 1 change fewer from there due to the existence of the Little North Western route (which, if you thought the S&C was a basket case, takes it to a new level, as it has almost no tourist usage unlike the S&C).

Yes, I had that in mind but you are suggesting Avanti services for Preston passengers and a 'DIY' Northern connection for people from Lancaster.

I bet if there was a Northern shuttle put on from Preston to Hellifield (via Lancaster or Blackburn) to connect with Leeds to Carlisle trains people would prefer to go by coach direct to Carlisle, or more likely, travel on a different weekend.

 

[BayPaul]

Going from Preston to Scotland by train if the WCML is closed is not a very easy or particularly pleasant undertaking, though, involving 3 changes, and often not even a Permitted Route (though that itself could be fixed by adding more engineering easements).

Don't get drawn into the trap of thinking every IC journey has London at one end!

Would be easier if there was an all-day DalesRail service (Preston onto S&C) I suppose, but classically that's always gone to Leeds.

I certainly do think, though, that for all engineering work involving buses, any reasonable rail alternative should be Permitted on all walk-up tickets including TOC-specific ones.

I agree with ticketing changes as you suggest. I don't think that running a very limited rail service on a very slow and indirect route, that is already overcrowded from stations further south would be any help for people from Preston.

There aren't diversionary options on much of the railway, and this doesn't cause significant issue. The fact that a very inadequate diversionary route does exist, but isn't used for me shows that Avanti and their predecessors are being sensible and considering what is best overall, for passengers on all routes, and for the taxpayer.

 

[yorkie]

Going from Preston to Scotland by train if the WCML is closed is not a very easy or particularly pleasant undertaking, though, involving 3 changes, and often not even a Permitted Route (though that itself could be fixed by adding more engineering easements).

I am not sure what flow you had in mind but Preston to Glasgow is valid via the ECML

Would be easier if there was an all-day DalesRail service (Preston onto S&C) I suppose, but classically that's always gone to Leeds.

This post is muddled; DalesRail is the name given to the Blackpool/Preston to S&C service, which does not go via Leeds.

I assume you meant to say something like this:

Would be easier if there was a regular DalesRail service (Preston onto S&C) I suppose, but classically the only regular service on the S&C has served Leeds instead.

I certainly do think, though, that for all engineering work involving buses, any reasonable rail alternative should be Permitted on all walk-up tickets including TOC-specific ones.

It should, but that's a whole new topic and the train companies would likely resist any such proposals.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am not sure what flow you had in mind but Preston to Glasgow is valid via the ECML

Well, I never knew that! Which way? Via Manchester?

This post is muddled; DalesRail is the name given to the Blackpool/Preston to S&C service, which does not go via Leeds.

I assume you meant to say something like this:

Would be easier if there was a regular DalesRail service (Preston onto S&C) I suppose, but classically the only regular service on the S&C has served Leeds instead.

Yes, I did.

 

[yorkie]

Well, I never knew that! Which way? Via Manchester?

I've not looked into whether it's valid via Manchester but it's certainly valid via Burnley & York.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've not looked into whether it's valid via Manchester but it's certainly valid via Burnley & York.

Cheers. Would never even have occurred to me to go that way.

 

[D6130]

Yes, I had that in mind but you are suggesting Avanti services for Preston passengers and a 'DIY' Northern connection for people from Lancaster.

I bet if there was a Northern shuttle put on from Preston to Hellifield (via Lancaster or Blackburn) to connect with Leeds to Carlisle trains people would prefer to go by coach direct to Carlisle, or more likely, travel on a different weekend.

This wouldn't work because the Northern services from Leeds to Carlisle and vice-versa are nearly all 2 car 158s, with one 4 car in each direction in normal times. They would not be capable of accommodating all the WCML passengers and their luggage.

 

[JonathanH]

This wouldn't work because the Northern services from Leeds to Carlisle and vice-versa are nearly all 2 car 158s, with one 4 car in each direction in normal times. They would not be capable of accommodating all the WCML passengers and their luggage.

I wasn't suggesting it would work.

Coaches and people being directed to the ECML are the appropriate substitute for engineering work between Preston and Carlisle.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This wouldn't work because the Northern services from Leeds to Carlisle and vice-versa are nearly all 2 car 158s, with one 4 car in each direction in normal times. They would not be capable of accommodating all the WCML passengers and their luggage.

I wasn't suggesting it would work.

Coaches and people being directed to the ECML are the appropriate substitute for engineering work between Preston and Carlisle.

How the railway has fallen. If things get even remotely hard, get the buses in.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

I am not sure what flow you had in mind but Preston to Glasgow is valid via the ECML

Even route "via Carlisle" tickets between Preston and Glasgow? (Useful to know if so during WCML engineering works.)

 

[JonathanH]

How the railway has fallen. If things get even remotely hard, get the buses in.

No, direct passengers to choose a different route which will get them there. There is a limit to how far round an engineering block diversions should be run.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No, direct passengers to choose a different route which will get them there. There is a limit to how far round an engineering block diversions should be run.

I think you may have missed my point slightly. Even if it didn't divert, BR would have brought stock in from elsewhere to strengthen the S&C service so it could cope, and/or staff to conduct a diversion. The fragmented railway can't do that and it is a big loss.

Putting people on buses should really be a last resort. A bus journey is inferior to a train journey, and is reflected in the price. (Perhaps there should be a Delay Repay equivalent for being chucked on a bus?)

 

[chorleyjeff]

Cheers. Would never even have occurred to me to go that way.

I would guess via Burnley to York because the Preston to York fare is much cheaper than via very busy Manchester. But it is quite a slow route via Burnley, Halifax and Bradford. Direct via M6 to Carlisle on a decent coach would be a better option.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would guess via Burnley to York because the Preston to York fare is much cheaper than via very busy Manchester. But it is quite a slow route via Burnley, Halifax and Bradford. Direct via M6 to Carlisle on a decent coach would be a better option.

You assume speed is the only criterion, of course. If it's one of those long distance journeys where you've basically allowed all day for it, that it not at all a given.

 

[RT4038]

How the railway has fallen. If things get even remotely hard, get the buses in.

Still better than in some countries - engineering works meaning cancellation of services with no replacement service at all. Just adjust your travel day accordingly.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Still better than in some countries - engineering works meaning cancellation of services with no replacement service at all. Just adjust your travel day accordingly.

Yes, that is a good point, at least the UK railway has the near-guarantee of not totally stranding you.

 

[Greybeard33]

The S&C line is a basket case, with virtually no through freight traffic now, the main reason why it was retained when there was a threat of closure in the 1980s.

Skimming through RTT for this week, there were up to 10 freights daily that actually ran on the S&C, plus numerous unused paths. There are frequent workings from the Arcow quarry near Horton and from British Gypsum at Kirkby Thore. These flows would have to go by road if the line closed. Additionally there are through workings between Settle and Carlisle, which would otherwise need paths on the WCML or ECML.

Realtime Trains | Departures from Settle Jn all day on 09/04/2021

Train information at Settle Jn all day on 09/04/2021. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

IMO keeping HGVs out of the Yorkshire Dales National Park is adequate justification for the line to remain open, so the infrastructure savings from removing the scheduled passenger service would be modest.

 

[daodao]

Skimming through RTT for this week, there were up to 10 freights daily that actually ran on the S&C, plus numerous unused paths. There are frequent workings from the Arcow quarry near Horton and from British Gypsum at Kirkby Thore. These flows would have to go by road if the line closed. Additionally there are through workings between Settle and Carlisle, which would otherwise need paths on the WCML or ECML.

Arcow quarry can be served by keep a siding open from Settle Junction. The main issue would be loss of rail access to Newbiggin Gypsum quarry, currently served by about 1 train every weekday. There are now relatively few through freight workings (up to 3/day) and only a few additional paths would be needed for them on alternative routes. Passenger traffic alone can't justify the continuing existence of the S&C line.

 

[A0]

I think you may have missed my point slightly. Even if it didn't divert, BR would have brought stock in from elsewhere to strengthen the S&C service so it could cope, and/or staff to conduct a diversion. The fragmented railway can't do that and it is a big loss.

Evidence please that BR "bent over backwards" in this way.

And before you trot out the old "WCML diversions into St Pancras" of the 80s example, that was in the days when St Pancras at best was despatching 1tph on a Sunday to the East Midlands and the MML / Thameslink service was probably no more than half hourly on a Sunday. The paths for such diversions no longer exist because of the growth of the route that was the diversion.

And such diversion opportunities have always been limited. The argument that "the fragmented privatised railway" doesn't do this is also untrue - during the WCML modernisation you had the Rio HSTs to Manchester, the West Mids crowdbusters which used Voyagers along the GW/GC joint and into Euston, and the more recent GW diversions via the GW/GC joint and SWML.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Apr 2021 ==

That is true, but I'm saying that West Yorkshire as a whole is likely to be a bigger market for longer distance travel through Carlisle than Newcastle or the Cumbrian coast.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Apr 2021 ==



See my above post.

So basically you're not prepared to engage on facts and instead will rely on your own opinion and conjecture. I'd kinda guessed that from most of your postings that a few hard facts don't really cut any ice with you. Fortunately decisions on things like the railways are made by people who actually look at the facts and come to reasoned conclusions - because if they didn't it would be draining funds at a far greater rate than it does today.

 

[The Planner]

Arcow quarry can be served by keep a siding open from Settle Junction. The main issue would be loss of rail access to Newbiggin Gypsum quarry, currently served by about 1 train every weekday. There are now relatively few through freight workings (up to 3/day) and only a few additional paths would be needed for them on alternative routes. Passenger traffic alone can't justify the continuing existence of the S&C line.

Its moot anyway, as much of this is speculative, the S&C will not close.

 

[DJ_K666]

In my view, in answer to the OP's question, no I don't think it's a basket case but I do think there are higher priorities at the moment.

 

[yorksrob]

So basically you're not prepared to engage on facts and instead will rely on your own opinion and conjecture. I'd kinda guessed that from most of your postings that a few hard facts don't really cut any ice with you. Fortunately decisions on things like the railways are made by people who actually look at the facts and come to reasoned conclusions - because if they didn't it would be draining funds at a far greater rate than it does today.

Which facts are these then ?

@Ianno87 posted the fact that 370k interchanges at Carlisle - something I haven't challenged, however no one that I can see has come up with any statistic as to where those 370k interchanges originate from.

Do you have any statistics to that effect ?

 

[CBlue]

Which facts are these then ?

@Ianno87 posted the fact that 370k interchanges at Carlisle - something I haven't challenged, however no one that I can see has come up with any statistic as to where those 370k interchanges originate from.

Do you have any statistics to that effect ?

I thought you were trying to prove that ridership on this line was sufficient to justify the services run on it? May I ask what statistics you have provided, my friend?

 

[yorksrob]

I thought you were trying to prove that ridership on this line was sufficient to justify the services run on it? May I ask what statistics you have provided, my friend?

I don't have to justify anything old chum.

It's up to you people to justify the theory in the original post that the line is a "basket case". So far I've seen nothing of any value.

 

[Starmill]

My view is that a service can and should be provided between Skipton and Lancaster or Carlisle but that the paths south of Skipton should be reorganised around EMU timings at 100 miles / hour max, as per the available rolling stock. If this permits a third Leeds to Skipton service to run all day rather than at peak only, this would allow semi-fast services off peak which are quicker and offer much greater capacity, especially given the potential traffic generated by Bingley and Keighley. Trains to the hills could then start and terminate at Skipton, with significant extra DMU availability. Any loss of custom from people unwilling to change trains to reach Leeds would be more than balanced out by the trip generation in urban West Yorkshire.

 

[Starmill]

If we have genuinely reached the point where it is cheaper to hire in road coaches, marshals etc (particularly now they have to be PSVAR coaches) than divert trains to the point where it would render engineering work infeasible, the railway needs to take a serious look at its cost model.

A coach driver is almost always going to be available at short notice and will be able to take their vehicle anywhere in the country with the aid of a briefing booklet, a sign in the window that says where they're going and a Sat Nav. And they're probably going to be paid £15 / hour or so.

A train requires a driver and a guard, weeks (being paid) to ensure that they sign the relevant diversionary route, and they'll each be paid more, sometimes much more given Sunday pay arrangements. I admit that you need an awful lot of coaches to replace one diverted train, but staff costs are a killer. Of course, certain people become immediately incensed if you mention staff costs.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Apr 2021 ==

Cheers. Would never even have occurred to me to go that way.

For travel on LNER, a Preston to Glasgow Off Peak Return at £128.90 is significantly more expensive than a Leeds to Glasgow Off Peak Return at £116.60. Much cheaper options across both cases, including route Carlisle, route Appleby or TransPennine Express Only.

 

[yorksrob]

My view is that a service can and should be provided between Skipton and Lancaster or Carlisle but that the paths south of Skipton should be reorganised around EMU timings at 100 miles / hour max, as per the available rolling stock. If this permits a third Leeds to Skipton service to run all day rather than at peak only, this would allow semi-fast services off peak which are quicker and offer much greater capacity, especially given the potential traffic generated by Bingley and Keighley. Trains to the hills could then start and terminate at Skipton, with significant extra DMU availability. Any loss of custom from people unwilling to change trains to reach Leeds would be more than balanced out by the trip generation in urban West Yorkshire.

I'm not against changing trains at Skipton myself, but I fear that it would damage the product for some people who value the through journey.

Also, would the third electric train generally be any quicker, given that the current DMU's operate as express services between Leeds and Skipton. I use both, and the through services certainly seem faster between Skipton and Leeds (I'm not sure whether they actually are, but I know from my own family that perception counts for a lot in such cases)