More trains in Blackburn to Hellifield route

[spionkop64]

If there was enough scope in either the existing diagrams, or by way of a rejig, to allow the existing units and train crews to be able to get to Hellifield (and then RR at Settle Jn) the minor benefit would be joining two parts of the Northern network. As a former resident of Hellifield (and also signaller) I just cannot see any significant market for such a service. Perhaps summer only?

Manchester-Carlisle (or Glasgow) open access with cheap fares to tap into the Anglo-Scottish traffic might just be viable? The quid pro quo would be cheaper fares for the longer journey time, plus some could be attracted by the senic run? It is really difficult to make a convincing case.

We've been here before on this forum, but the best bet for an increase in S&C traffic has to be Leeds-Glasgow, but we had that one before with the short-lived Northern service that was pulled due to concerns about a 158 going demic on the WCML. Perhaps a joint Scotrail/Northern service via Dumfries. I can feel the old Midland ghosts stirring...

 

[55018ballymoss]

Yes, Tomnick, both 56 and 44 ground signals read through to 11/12 ground signals. 11 is for the route into the Up Cripple Siding (siding disconnected), and 12 is for the route into the Up Loop. There would need to be a signal for the Up platform added, or if the closure of the Up Siding was ever formalised, possibly 11 could be reused to provide a signal for the route into the Up platform.

As for Toots, all that was being said is that we would like to run more services. It would be foolish to not do a reasonable amount of passenger forecasting or surveying before planning a service. The question I was answering was the feasibility of running a service using the current infrastructure.

I did also note that someone mentioned that the bay at the South end of Hellifield could be used for a terminating service. It just requires some digging out.
It would also require the station lighting posts moved, various signal rodding and cables removed or rerouted. A change to the track layout, and several addition signals, would also be required. I would not even guess the cost of such a change, but I would expect if such a new service was saddled with such a big infrastructure cost, it could well be killed off before it started!

 

[tbtc]

Manchester - Carlisle is going to be an hourly service in a few years (when the 350s arrive on the services currently run by TPE to Edinburgh/ Glasgow), so I wouldn't get too ambitious about longer distance services via Blackburn.

Would one additional unit be enough to cover a bi-hourly extension of the Manchester - Clitheroe service to Hellifield/ Settle and then a bi-hourly Settle/ Hellifield - Skipton shuttle (to provide more connections to/from the frequent West Yorkshire EMUs)? Even if only a summer Saturday service (when there may be more DMUs spared than the weekday PVR).

 

[bluenoxid]

You speak for yourself!!...seriously though where do you reckon we can get the passengers to fill the services,you've seen how patronage drops of on the Dales Rail at this time of year,can you imaging if we run them through winter?.....

I think this is where passenger forecasting would help but I would encourage the support groups to look at a bus operation to really gauge the demand.

I did try it; 5 days a week for nearly 5 years. I'm not being funny but if you can't attain 60 mph on any of those roads you should consider buying a faster car or attending a driver's refresher course.

I have said this. I think he is talking about the awful reverse bends near Thornton in Craven and the lack of Dual Carriageway sections.

The road does 30-40-NSL-30-NSL (Bendy curves)-30-NSL

The road is not fantastic but it is not the worst.

Yes, Tomnick, both 56 and 44 ground signals read through to 11/12 ground signals. 11 is for the route into the Up Cripple Siding (siding disconnected), and 12 is for the route into the Up Loop. There would need to be a signal for the Up platform added, or if the closure of the Up Siding was ever formalised, possibly 11 could be reused to provide a signal for the route into the Up platform.

So unless the operator runs to Settle Jn, two new signals will need to be put in???

Manchester - Carlisle is going to be an hourly service in a few years (when the 350s arrive on the services currently run by TPE to Edinburgh/ Glasgow), so I wouldn't get too ambitious about longer distance services via Blackburn.

Would one additional unit be enough to cover a bi-hourly extension of the Manchester - Clitheroe service to Hellifield/ Settle and then a bi-hourly Settle/ Hellifield - Skipton shuttle (to provide more connections to/from the frequent West Yorkshire EMUs)? Even if only a summer Saturday service (when there may be more DMUs spared than the weekday PVR).

It would need one to provide the extension to Hellifield and more units for Settle to Skipton.

The question would be whether it would be better to convert one of the Leeds/Bradford stoppers to DMU operation and operate that to Settle instead. In fact, this could be rolled in with other services such as York or Harrogate or even Calder Valley/Sheffield (via Westgate).

 

[spionkop64]

The question would be whether it would be better to convert one of the Leeds/Bradford stoppers to DMU operation and operate that to Settle instead. In fact, this could be rolled in with other services such as York or Harrogate or even Calder Valley/Sheffield (via Westgate).

As the 322s have just replaced the residual DMU diagrams on the triangle I don't think there would be much support for bringing back the DMUs.

I know this might be controversial (and again I know this has been discussed before) but would the Little North Western be better served by a DMU shuttle between Skipton and Lancaster? Yes, in the summer there would be issues about the Morecambe trade, but for the majority of the year the quid-pro-quo for losing the through trains would be an increased service as the crews and units could work more services when the time saving factor of not going through to Leeds is allowed for.

Perhaps even a community rail, mini franchise? In the future Grassington/Bolton Abbey to Lancaster. Now there's a job for the Embsay Railway to take on... I'm only half joking.

 

[philjo]

Maybe some of the Clitheroe services could extend via Hellifield to Lancaster replacing (or filling some of the gaps between) the existing Leeds services provided there was a connection at Hellifield from Skipton/Leeds to get to Carnforth/Lancaster. After all Clitheroe & Lancaster are in the same county.

 

[tbtc]

I think this is where passenger forecasting would help but I would encourage the support groups to look at a bus operation to really gauge the demand

Good point - Alloa to Stirling had around eight buses an hour, so there was an easy market for rail to tap into. Corby to London had nothing like as good an alternative service, so it didn't make the same impact.

If we are talking about introducing a new (short/middle distance) train service and there's no parallel bus/coach service then that suggests that rail may struggle.

I know this might be controversial (and again I know this has been discussed before) but would the Little North Western be better served by a DMU shuttle between Skipton and Lancaster?

I'd agree with that. The current service on the line is pretty terrible - no chance of using it for a day's work in Leeds, irregular times, really not "customer friendly". Having a DMU shuttling between Skipton and Lancaster/ Morcambe (with frequent EMU connections to/from Leeds/ Bradford) would give a much better level of service.

 

[Toots]

As i've said ,there is no chance of these services being resumed,well no chance actually,but in the spirit of the thread,and I don't want any nonsense from the Spotters!,what about a service from Blackburn to Ribblehead (the only feasible turnback without additional signalling),using Parry People Movers....,of course you'd need special dispensation for these to run with other trains on the same lines,and put three very basic stations,( accessible Harrington Humps perhaps) at Gisburn,Rimmington and Chatburn and there you go a reintroduced rail service at very little cost

 

[bluenoxid]

As i've said ,there is no chance of these services being resumed,well no chance actually,but in the spirit of the thread,and I don't want any nonsense from the Spotters!,what about a service from Blackburn to Ribblehead (the only feasible turnback without additional signalling),using Parry People Movers....,of course you'd need special dispensation for these to run with other trains on the same lines,and put three very basic stations,( accessible Harrington Humps perhaps) at Gisburn,Rimmington and Chatburn and there you go a reintroduced rail service at very little cost

Nothing really wrong with your suggestion. The question is what do you call a service. 1 tpd/1tph.

A connecting Coach at Blackburn or Clitheroe, running towards Settle may gauge some idea of the demands.

My advice would be to look closely at bidding for money to start a bus service with through ticketing from Settle to Clitheroe to gauge demand. However, serving Hellifield may be fun. Why lose millions on this?

 

[yorksrob]

I'm still nonplussed as to exactly what advantage a PPM has over a 153 (or in old money) a bubble car.

I'm not against the idea of using the route to provide a decent service over the little North Western (if someone tries it and it works, I'm all for it). However, I still think with the route, is more to get people from the City to the wilderness of the Settle - Carlisle (and visa versa) as tourists/commuters - and who's to say which City that should be ! Perhaps start with a couple of trains each way a day ?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

My advice would be to look closely at bidding for money to start a bus service with through ticketing from Settle to Clitheroe to gauge demand. However, serving Hellifield may be fun. Why lose millions on this?

Are you referring to the existing number 10 bus service run by Little Red Bus which runs from Clitheroe to Horton-in-Ribblesdale that passes through Settle ?

 

[Toots]

Nothing really wrong with your suggestion. The question is what do you call a service. 1 tpd/1tph.

A connecting Coach at Blackburn or Clitheroe, running towards Settle may gauge some idea of the demands.

My advice would be to look closely at bidding for money to start a bus service with through ticketing from Settle to Clitheroe to gauge demand. However, serving Hellifield may be fun. Why lose millions on this?

My Parry service would be as frequent as slots would allow and if possible to tie in with services on the East Lancs and S&C,it would need to be heavily marketed and reasonably priced,the problem is you'd need so many dispensations and commitment ,that in an industry that always looks for a way not to do things,there wouldn't be a chance of this type of scheme,even if it were financially feasible.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

I think the PPM's 40mph top speed might be an issue.

... an industry that always looks for a way not to do things ...

You, the general public, got us into this situation. Your outrage at railway accidents over the last 180 years has led to one of the safest and risk-averse forms of transport there is, but it all comes at a cost. The representatives you have elected pass laws which make us justify every decision to the nth degree and to expend all reasonable money to reduce risk to negligible levels. You cannot then criticise the industry for behaving as it does - it does what it can within the strictures of legislation.

Personally, I take issue with the statement because it is a crass and sweeping generalisation and is simply not true in my experience.

 

[Toots]

Look mate,me the general public is me The Signalman,and i don't know where you work,probably down south,but up here I can assure you it is a totally different world!,something as just getting a new freight service into a sidings takes an age and a mountain of paperwork or what about having to get special dispensation to put in an IB signal or meetings as to why we can't move trains when it's blatantly obvious that we can so, safely,so you can take issue with what you want,I see it first hand!.

 

[Greybeard33]

I think some of the previous contributions have underrated the potential of this route for leisure and tourist traffic between Manchester and the Pennines. I recently had occasion to make a leisure journey from Manchester to Hellifield. The existing roundabout route is slow and tedious. The change at Leeds is inconvenient, particularly with luggage or bikes (long walk between platforms, stairs or lifts to negotiate). I am sure a quicker, direct service from Manchester, with a same platform change to the S&C, would stimulate new traffic.

The Settle - Horton in Ribblesdale area is popular for outdoor pursuits year round. On a previous, weekday, trip on the S&C, I was also impressed by the large number of elderly tourists making a return excursion from Settle to Carlisle, purely to appreciate the scenery along the route.

The railway should be looking to grow new markets and get people off the congested roads, not just serve existing public transport users. The No.10 Little Red Bus, taking an hour and a quarter to traverse the twisty roads between Clitheroe and Settle, is unlikely to tempt many tourists out of their cars. This does not prove that there is no demand for a rail connection.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Look mate,me the general public is me The Signalman,and i don't know where you work,probably down south,but up here I can assure you it is a totally different world!,something as just getting a new freight service into a sidings takes an age and a mountain of paperwork or what about having to get special dispensation to put in an IB signal or meetings as to why we can't move trains when it's blatantly obvious that we can so, safely,so you can take issue with what you want,I see it first hand!.

I have worked "down south", but not for the last 22 years. Since then I've been actively working to improve the system, not "always look(ing) for a way not to do things". I apologise for pegging you as a civilian.

 

[Toots]

Accepted,but not needed,but I have to point out though (And there is no edge to this) your initial statement was 'I think the PPM's 40mph top speed might be an issue',which I don't doubt,but do you see what you did?,straight to a reason why the proposal would be a problem,which is exactly what we all do.Now as stated I don't think it would have a chance,and neither would any service,but,in answer to that particular statement I would say for a start the Hellifield to Blackburn part of the route has only a top speed of 45MPH anyway,add to this you could use PPM 80 which has a 50MPH speed limit.....but for having me make that post on on a forum though.... now that is unforgivable!!

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Accepted,but not needed,but I have to point out though (And there is no edge to this) your initial statement was 'I think the PPM's 40mph top speed might be an issue',which I don't doubt,but do you see what you did?,straight to a reason why the proposal would be a problem,which is exactly what we all do.Now as stated I don't think it would have a chance,and neither would any service,but,in answer to that particular statement I would say for a start the Hellifield to Blackburn part of the route has only a top speed of 45MPH anyway,add to this you could use PPM 80 which has a 50MPH speed limit.....but for having me make that post on on a forum though.... now that is unforgivable!!

In the rarified atmosphere I work in, we have to do a lot of "client expectation management" so it sort of comes naturally to be the dark side of realistic. For every ten good schemes you can think of, I see about 20 barking ones (generally from local councils who have been pressured into asking the question - so it's a bit of a habit.

I'll see your PPM80 and raise you "why does Hellifield to Blackburn have to be only 45mph"? If the speeds were higher, you'd need fewer units and would attract more business. I feel that the PPM isn't really the right solution, and that a business case would only work with a service running beyond Hellifield, probably down into Victoria.

 

[Wath Yard]

Manchester-Carlisle (or Glasgow) open access with cheap fares to tap into the Anglo-Scottish traffic might just be viable? The quid pro quo would be cheaper fares for the longer journey time, plus some could be attracted by the senic run? It is really difficult to make a convincing case.

I doubt that would be viable. Hourly direct Manchester - Scotland services are being introduced from 2014, and you can get some very cheap tickets on the current service.

There is no doubt that people are attracted to the S&C scenery as it sees many charters, but having a day out, and a nice meal on a charter service is different to sitting on a 158 for several hours and I don't think we can judge the market by the number of charters.

 

[Toots]

In response to JL's post.Well it's 45mph because it is....as to why,track condition I believe, but even with renewals there has been no will to enhance speeds on the part of NWR or it appears on the part of the TOC.
The proposal by LCC won't happen because there isn't an all year market for leisure traffic or sufficient demand or population for a commuter service.My Parry scheme was very tongue in cheek,but never the less more feasible than any other one

 

[tbtc]

I'm still nonplussed as to exactly what advantage a PPM has over a 153 (or in old money) a bubble car

They are still making 139s (or, at least, they comply with modern standards or would build more if you paid them).

They aren't building 153s (which don't comply with modern design standards etc), so any plan for a 153 run service would presumably have to justify where you'd "steal" one from.

 

[Toots]

I'm still nonplussed as to exactly what advantage a PPM has over a 153 (or in old money) a bubble car.

They are cheaper to run,and more enviromentally friendly,so obviously these are the sorts of things you would push if you were looking for funding.....

 

[yorksrob]

Well, that's as maybe. However, as I've mentioned earlier, I can't really see the route being viable as anything other than a Settle - Carlisle to Manchester feeder, so as far I can see, something along the lines of a 158 would be more likely.

 

[tbtc]

Well, that's as maybe. However, as I've mentioned earlier, I can't really see the route being viable as anything other than a Settle - Carlisle to Manchester feeder, so as far I can see, something along the lines of a 158 would be more likely.

Any service would mainly be an extension of the Manchester - Blackburn - Clitheroe service, so odds on would be a 150.

 

[Sox]

In response to JL's post.Well it's 45mph because it is....as to why,track condition I believe, but even with renewals there has been no will to enhance speeds on the part of NWR or it appears on the part of the TOC.
The proposal by LCC won't happen because there isn't an all year market for leisure traffic or sufficient demand or population for a commuter service.My Parry scheme was very tongue in cheek,but never the less more feasible than any other one

.....and because the Sectional Appendix says so (London North Western, pages 578/579/580):

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/10563.aspx

 

[Joseph_Locke]

.....and because the Sectional Appendix says so (London North Western, pages 578/579/580):

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/10563.aspx

That's a bit like saying its green because that's the colour its been painted.

Far more likely, as Toots suggests, that it has become fit for 45mph because there is currently no drive (sorry) to go any faster, so the line has been "maintained down" to that speed. In my experience of journey time improvement work, most route's alignments are easily fit for 60mph,but the signal spacing, sighting, track quality, track construction, bridge strengths, track cant aren't. This means it probably could be a higher speed, if it were "repainted".

 

[yorksrob]

Any service would mainly be an extension of the Manchester - Blackburn - Clitheroe service, so odds on would be a 150.

I've seen them turn up on trains from Ribblehead before, so that wouldn't surprise me either.

 

[Sox]

That's a bit like saying its green because that's the colour its been painted.

Far more likely, as Toots suggests, that it has become fit for 45mph because there is currently no drive (sorry) to go any faster, so the line has been "maintained down" to that speed. In my experience of journey time improvement work, most route's alignments are easily fit for 60mph,but the signal spacing, sighting, track quality, track construction, bridge strengths, track cant aren't. This means it probably could be a higher speed, if it were "repainted".

Very informative, my post was intended to serve two purposes though as I thought the pages contained useful diagrams germane to the discussion further up on the signalling arrangements at Hellifield.

 

[Toots]

My response was based on the fact that I know it is,because I have to know,but cannot see why it is,especially on the Up line which was upgraded and resignalled two years(ish) ago..the Down is in the process of being relaid,so it will be interesting to see if portions are given higher lines speeds but I cannot see it happening....

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

They are cheaper to run,and more enviromentally friendly,so obviously these are the sorts of things you would push if you were looking for funding.....

What type of units are used these days on the Heart of Wales line ?