KWVR - Infrastructure Upgrades Funded

[357]

I understand that heritage railways which operate a service from one place to another are able to sell their tickets as VAT zero-rated/exempt because they’re providing a transport service, as opposed to those who operate out and back from one station who are offering a ‘ride’.

Can confirm that the KWVR charge 0 rated VAT on their tickets from when I was there a few weeks ago.

 

[Dave S 56F]

It was built with the provision for double-tracking, see this photo at Ingrow West:

I always thought it was built as a double tracked railway in some sections if the midland railway would have ever reached Luddenfoot which never materialised anyhow it was I think double track at Oakworth I think only a passing loop and at Haworth. And only became a spur to serve the Worstead textile Mills along the worth valley.

 

[GardenRail]

Can anyone explain what the limitations of the current signalling set up are?

Staffing mainly? Damems, Damems Crossing, Oakworth..... All presently need staff I believe.

For it to be at all 'viable' it would need a single car boarding through one door with about 70 seats, one person operated with the driver collecting fares/checking tickets. Simple flat fare structure of single tickets (any 'through' or season fares being off train sales only). two main trips in the morning (6h50 and 8h00 from Oxenhope) and two in the evening ( 16h20 and 17h50 return from Keighley) [approx times!], with counter flow trips too. One paid employee working a split shift 5 days a week, with a volunteer paid to cover for annual leave. Line operated as 'one train working', so no signallers or station staff required as such. No need for penalty fares, as driver checking before boarding. Separate from steam service (although 'steam' priced tickets could be interavailable)

Who would operate the road barriers at Oakworth and Damems over public highways?

 

[connorwilsonwy]

Staffing mainly? Damems, Damems Crossing, Oakworth..... All presently need staff I believe.


Who would operate the road barriers at Oakworth and Damems over public highways?

Coming from what I’ve heard as I volunteer there (this is not a comment on behalf of the railway just my own knowledge) there’s been interest in signalling the line up and the facility for DMUs but nothing about a “commuter service” as the article states.

Any staff that passengers will be alighting from would need a foreman/crossing keeper (where applicable) and the train would need a guard so in theory almost every station would probably need a staff member to open it up.

 

[Townsend Hook]

Staffing mainly? Damems, Damems Crossing, Oakworth..... All presently need staff I believe.


Who would operate the road barriers at Oakworth and Damems over public highways?

Damems Junction can be switched out for single train operation.

 

[GardenRail]

Damems Junction can be switched out for single train operation.

So we still need two Crossing Keepers. I hope it works none the less, sounds perfect for a bigger version of the Parry People Mover.

 

[Townsend Hook]

So we still need two Crossing Keepers. I hope it works none the less, sounds perfect for a bigger version of the Parry People Mover.

I don’t know if the KWVR rule book allows for traincrew to operate the two crossings, but that would of course have a journey time penalty attached which would probably make it not worthwhile in practice.

 

[Pyewipecarshed]

The way I read it was it was just funding for a DMU shed and upgraded signalling.
The commuter service is a lovely idea but every preserved railway who has considered it has hit the same problem; there is a world of difference between providing a volunteer-run tourist service and having to turn out 5 days a week, 52 weeks a year using paid staff. And even if you did start running you would need a bridging fund to cover the costs whilst you built up the traffic.

 

[43096]

Obviously I don't. Perhaps you could educate me and the rest of the forum what else the 144 would need at KWVR to become PRM compliant.

Mods required around PIS provision, grab rails, contrasting floor colours, door alarms, door button placement etc etc.

 

[D6130]

The way I read it was it was just funding for a DMU shed and upgraded signalling.
The commuter service is a lovely idea but every preserved railway who has considered it has hit the same problem; there is a world of difference between providing a volunteer-run tourist service and having to turn out 5 days a week, 52 weeks a year using paid staff. And even if you did start running you would need a bridging fund to cover the costs whilst you built up the traffic.

Welocme to the forum. I couldn't have put it better!

 

[RT4038]

E



Do they not already run a public service? Members of the public can show up and buy a ticket to use the service already regardless of whether they’re tourists or locals going shopping or indeed commuting. I understand that heritage railways which operate a service from one place to another are able to sell their tickets as VAT zero-rated/exempt because they’re providing a transport service, as opposed to those who operate out and back from one station who are offering a ‘ride’.

No, the VAT rules on this changed some time ago.

 

[357]

No, the VAT rules on this changed some time ago.

So what are the rules now? Do you have a link at all?

My visit on 15th October 2023 has 0 rated VAT on the train tickets and standard VAT on the alcohol tokens.

Image attached reflects the above information

 

[6Gman]

Does it? "Commuter" in a railway context, normally only ever means someone going to their place of work and then back home again.

In the media "commuter" basically means anyone who has ever set foot on a train.

I recall a report a few years ago where a middle of the day service in rural Lincolnshire or Yorkshire was involved in a level crossing incident. The press report referred to "a train packed with commuters". At something like 11 in the morning!

 

[cinders&ashes]

there is a key paragraph in the linked BBC article:

"In total the council has been awarded nearly £20m to spend on the railway and to fund a robotics and engineering research institute in Keighley town centre."

MOST of that money, which are crumbs in the big scheme of things, is going on creating an institute. £20m is nothing.

These links from 2021 suggest that £14m is for the research institute and £5m for the railway improvements to allow a commuter service:
Link1
Link 2

The current blue timetable of the line is the busiest, offering services every 45-50min (total 9/day each way) with earliest and latest departures 1000 (Oxenhope) and 1730 (Keighley), so it could be a case of just 2 further services each way in the evening and maybe 3 in the morning, but I suspect the double tracking being part of this means they'd want to offer a 30-min frequency so this could be more like 5 returns (AM) and 3-4 (evening). This makes sense if they're paying for staff to man the trains, platforms and level crossing - might as well maximise runs and also will deliver frequency expected by commuters.

In terms of journey time, even at current speeds it beats bus and stands up to car at peak times, if they get an exception for higher speeds then better still. For fares, they do cheap fares (£2.75 Haworth return up to £7 Oxenhope return) for local resident card holders (£10) which is competitive enough. An average £5.75 return fare with a 40% full 100-seat unit with 9 return routes a day = >£0.5m revenue.

Making this work then opens the door to other heritage services offering similar, I'm especially thinking of the Watercress Line in Hampshire and the BlueBell and Sap Valley Railways in Sussex - all connect with mainline stations.

Network rail and UK Govt, as well as providing the funding for the improvements, can offer help with advice, mentoring/knowledge transfer and keeping Pacer units available for transfer to these lines.

 

[xotGD]

Perhaps we can stop debating the requirements for operating a non-existent plan to operate commuter services?

Instead, celebrate investment in the railway.

 

[izvor]

Making this work then opens the door to other heritage services offering similar, I'm especially thinking of the Watercress Line in Hampshire and the BlueBell and Spa Valley Railways in Sussex - all connect with mainline stations.

Of these three only the first would - very possibly - have any potential as a commuter-type operation. The other two simply don't go anywhere useful.

 

[cinders&ashes]

Of these three only the first would - very possibly - have any potential as a commuter-type operation. The other two simply don't go anywhere useful.

Surprised to read that, the Bluebell line connects to East Grinstead and from there to London, helping commuters not to have to drive to the railhead.
In future it's hoped to also connect to Haywards Heath.
Spa Valley railway connects to Eldridge for London, and also to Tunbridge Wells.

 

[Townsend Hook]

Surprised to read that, the Bluebell line connects to East Grinstead and from there to London, helping commuters not to have to drive to the railhead.
In future it's hoped to also connect to Haywards Heath.
Spa Valley railway connects to Eldridge for London, and also to Tunbridge Wells.

The Bluebell indeed connects to the main line at East Grinstead but doesn’t usefully serve any other population centres. There’s Sharpthorne/West Hoathly which would need a new station to be built on the site of the original closed station, which local residents have always been against; and then there’s Horsted Keynes which has a big station serving a small village, and it’s a mile between the two, so not walking distance. If a London-bound commuter still has to get in their car to drive to the station, why bother going to Horsted Keynes for a slow train they’d have to change from at East Grinstead when they could just drive to East Grinstead or another main line station for a direct London train?

 

[30907]

These links from 2021 suggest that £14m is for the research institute and £5m for the railway improvements to allow a commuter service:
Link1
Link 2

Read the second article again. The KWVR said additional services - not the same as commuter services.

 

[cinders&ashes]

The Bluebell indeed connects to the main line at East Grinstead but doesn’t usefully serve any other population centres. There’s Sharpthorne/West Hoathly which would need a new station to be built on the site of the original closed station, which local residents have always been against; and then there’s Horsted Keynes which has a big station serving a small village, and it’s a mile between the two, so not walking distance. If a London-bound commuter still has to get in their car to drive to the station, why bother going to Horsted Keynes for a slow train they’d have to change from at East Grinstead when they could just drive to East Grinstead or another main line station for a direct London train?

Yes, good point - I hadn't realised that Sharpthorne/West Hoathly wasn't served by a station. There remains an intent to build a new one and now it seems the council is supportive. Clearly, any move by that line to introduce a commuter service would be dependent on this station and/or the Haywards Heath extension going ahead.
The Spa Valley line provides a mnore useful link - as well as Groombridge on the line itself, it would facilitate travel between Tunbridge Wells and Uckfield and Crowborough along with smaller settlements on those routes.

 

[InkyScrolls]

Perhaps we can stop debating the requirements for operating a non-existent plan to operate commuter services?

Instead, celebrate investment in the railway.

Hear hear!

 

[izvor]

Spa Valley railway connects to Eldridge for London, and also to Tunbridge Wells.

True, but again the potential is almost zero in my view. There is a reason this line closed in the 1980s, and back then there was the added opportunity to travel through to the main line at Tunbridge Wells and on to Tonbridge, which is lost now. Groombridge, the only village that would benefit, is not a large community: after the line closed a dedicated commuter (and all-day) bus ran from there to Tunbridge Wells (Central) station (as part of the closure conditions), integrated with rail tickets, and did survive for quite a few years but finally died the usual slow death with these things. There is still an hourly bus service (Metrobus 291) passing through, including a recently reintroduced evening service, which is surely more than adequate for the village's needs. Eridge has 2 bph to Tunbridge Wells, also in the other direction to Crowborough, Uckfield and Brighton, although I accept that connections with the trains are less than ideal since the by-pass road opened, diverting the buses away from the station.

I appreciate that trains are far more likely than buses to lure travellers out of their cars, but not here imho.

1Q18 has admirably expanded my point about the Bluebell idea in post #78!

 

[cinders&ashes]

Perhaps we can stop debating the requirements for operating a non-existent plan to operate commuter services?

Instead, celebrate investment in the railway.

OK, so they are going to:

1. Upgrade the signalling to increase the capacity of the line
2. Overhaul their diesel fleet
3. Build a dedicated storage and maintenance facility for their diesel fleet.

Looking at their services for 2023, they run the following timetables/days:

• Blue timetable - 18 routes inc 8 diesel: 50
• Orange timetable - 16 routes inc 8 diesel: 55
• Green timetable - 10 routes inc 0 diesel: 35
• Yellow timetable - 12 routes, all diesel: 8
• Purple timetable - 10 routes, all diesel: 12
• Pink timetable - 8 routes inc 0 diesel: 28
• Days with only specials: 27
• Days when they offer no services: 150 (mostly weekdays in term time)

Why do they need to run more services on the line when most days they don't run the maximum number represented by the blue timetable?
If the demand for diesel heritage experience is so great as to demand their fleet be upgraded and a dedicated maintenance facility built, why don't they lay on more diesel-only days so people can ride around all day?
If more heritage runs is the goal then it's only those 50 blue days they can benefit from the upgrades on, by being able to run 50% more routes (so ~27/day or ~450 extra routes a year).
I live near Portsmouth, who won £56m levelling up funds last year for cycle and bus improvements - their bid showed benefits to cost of 3.11, to achieve similar KWVR would need to pull in £15m in extra revenue.
How they will achieve that over such a small number of routes a year? Of course, they'd benefit from being able to scale capacity every day, but all those other days they're not sweating their existing assets anyway.

As well as going for Levelling Up funding, this also appeared as a bid for Restoring Your Railway (which was described as "To restore a daily train service on the Keighley and Worth Valley Railway"). If it IS only heritage services and not commuter ones then it'd be unique of all those bids. They could run services daily anyway (if they could get volunteers) without infra improvements.
We'll all find out in a few months, but for me I can't see it being anything other than an attempt to offer commuter services and the related need to be able to offer tighter intervals than they can at present (30min, down from 45 in blue timetable)

 

[Mcr Warrior]

If the demand for diesel heritage experience is so great as to demand their fleet be upgraded and a dedicated maintenance facility built, why don't they lay on more diesel-only days so people can ride around all day?

Maybe not if the heritage diesel experience is a Pacer.

 

[30907]

OK, so they are going to:

1. Upgrade the signalling to increase the capacity of the line
2. Overhaul their diesel fleet
3. Build a dedicated storage and maintenance facility for their diesel fleet.

Apparently. As a working member, I am not privy to inside information about the detailed bid. However, the following may clarify your misunderstandings, which are understandable as you live 250miles away - do come and visit! .

Looking at their services for 2023, they run the following timetables/days:

• Blue timetable - 18 routes inc 8 diesel: 50
• Orange timetable - 16 routes inc 8 diesel: 55
• Green timetable - 12 routes inc 2 diesel: 35 (except Nov. dates which were affected by engineering work)
• Yellow timetable - 12 routes, all diesel: 8
• Purple timetable - 10 routes, all diesel: 12 plus 10 Santas!
• Pink timetable - 8 routes inc 0 diesel: 28
• Days with special timetables - Galas etc: 27
  
  

Slight amendments in bold.

Why do they need to run more services on the line when most days they don't run the maximum number represented by the blue timetable?

1. Because on some Gala days we have to restrict numbers, and on others services (or "routes" as you call them) are heaving at times. Better signalling would allow more trains to run efficiently.
2. There is a problem getting access for engineering trains on operating days (see comment on Green timetables above.
3. There is no point in operating extra trains on quiet days just to "sweat the assets"

If the demand for diesel heritage experience is so great as to demand their fleet be upgraded and a dedicated maintenance facility built, why don't they lay on more diesel-only days so people can ride around all day?

We've just had the very first Railcar Day, with all 4 (of 5) serviceable units in use - capacity was limited by the signalling, and the class 108 needs restoring, which is why undercover storage is essential. We don't have a vast diesel fleet, as you may know.

As well as going for Levelling Up funding, this also appeared as a bid for Restoring Your Railway (which was described as "To restore a daily train service on the Keighley and Worth Valley Railway").

I am not sure this was the same project, nor that it was bid by the KWVR

They could run services daily anyway (if they could get volunteers) without infra improvements.....I can't see it being anything other than an attempt to offer commuter services and the related need to be able to offer tighter intervals than they can at present (30min, down from 45 in blue timetable)

A 2-train half-hourly DMU service could be offered with the present signalling, so your view is implausible, as several people have already said.

 

[Halish Railway]

Is there any specific reason why the K&WVR's existing DMU fleet must be used and upgraded to meet the various accessibility requirements, rather than just borrowing a DMU from Northern (Ideally a Class 158 given that doors at 1/3s and 2/3s would be impractical on the sharp curves at Keighley), as well as a driver and conductor from either Skipton or Leeds?

 

[30907]

Is there any specific reason why the K&WVR's existing DMU fleet must be used and upgraded to meet the various accessibility requirements, rather than just borrowing a DMU from Northern (Ideally a Class 158 given that doors at 1/3s and 2/3s would be impractical on the sharp curves at Keighley), as well as a driver and conductor from either Skipton or Leeds?

None - should there ever be an actual need, and Northern have a spare.

 

[xotGD]

Why are people still persisting with the notion that there will be a commuter service?

 

[InkyScrolls]

I am a working member and have been for a number of years. I was not involved directly with the bid but am in a position to state categorically that services specifically aimed at commuters will not be happening. That is not and likely will never be part of the KWVR's "plan". There is almost no call for it outside of this forum and it would be hugely cost negative.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Why are people still persisting with the notion that there will be a commuter service?

Maybe the thread title has something to do with that?!