Most dubious railway closure cases

[Bletchleyite]

The whole closure programme was just an ill conceived, poorly thought out and badly executed cost slashing exercise, given a gig leaf of science washing by Beeching, to satisfy the treasury and the road lobby.

To be fair, there were routes that would have closed later. Germany has been losing branch lines and local stations slowly but surely over the last 50 years, it is just that we did them in one go (ish).

 

[WesternLancer]

To be fair, there were routes that would have closed later. Germany has been losing branch lines and local stations slowly but surely over the last 50 years, it is just that we did them in one go (ish).

And when you do things in a rush you are more at risk of making mistakes....

 

[yorksrob]

And when you do things in a rush you are more at risk of making mistakes....

Indeed.

 

[RT4038]

Republic of Ireland, Spain, Portugal, France, Germany, Poland, United States, Canada, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Argentina, Chile amongst others have closed large quantities of railway lines (certainly for passenger trains, if not completely). Italy and other European states have closed a fair few, even if not quite to the same extent.

The UK was not doing anything different to many other states - the majority of the populace voted with their feet for road transport, and that is what they still want today.

 

[simonw]

Republic of Ireland, Spain, Portugal, France, Germany, Poland, United States, Canada, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Argentina, Chile amongst others have closed large quantities of railway lines (certainly for passenger trains, if not completely). Italy and other European states have closed a fair few, even if not quite to the same extent.

The UK was not doing anything different to many other states - the majority of the populace voted with their feet for road transport, and that is what they still want today.

This^^^


It still amazes me that The conspiracy theorists going on producing the same old nonsense.

TBH it makes me wonder what other nonsense they belive.

 

[Irascible]

What was it again? a third should never have been, a third should have been shut already, and the last third shouldn't have shut at all?

There should possibly have been a "well, let's just stop using it & see if that's really the best idea" policy for the more marginal cases rather than just immediately ripping everything apart. It gets said every time, no attempt at running basic railways etc ( and I still haven't found the source for that anecdote from Barnstaple goods yard that said they were turning away business because there wasn't enough stock - I wonder how many other similar cases there were ). And there was that flawed idea that people would drive to railheads instead of just driving the full distance, but by the time that was realised it was too late to reverse anything.

One day I'll go look up who was running BR at the time & where they came from/who put them there. Our business management in many places in that time period seems atrocious.

My submission wouldn't be a closure as such ( I mean yes, but no ), but the decision of the Gauge Commission to use the wrong gauge! we'd have had far less lines with far more room.

 

[Mikey C]

Birmingham Snow Hill was a very dubious closure, seeing that it was closed in 1972, demolished a few years later and then reopened in 1987!

Indeed has any other line reopened so soon after closure?

 

[Sprinter107]

Birmingham Snow Hill was a very dubious closure, seeing that it was closed in 1972, demolished a few years later and then reopened in 1987!

Indeed has any other line reopened so soon after closure?

Don't know if its a dubious closure, but Narborough station was closed and re opened in less than 2 years. Closed 4th March 1968, reopened 5th January 1970.

 

[2392]

Perhaps the most dubious closure of all was that of the Waverley route in 1969. Many anti campaigners at the time pointed the finger saying it was a "political" closure. As it turned out they were proven right in 1999 [when the 30 year secret rule expired. This is an ongoing rule and every December/January the media usually highlight some interesting/amusing secrets] when various Government secrets were released. Scottish Region of British Rail had been put under pressure to "lose" mileage, in order to finish the electrification of the WCML. Ironically the Northern end has been rebuilt/opened as far as Tweedbank with the opinion to extend to at least Hawick..... With people still campaigning for a full rebuild back to Carlisle.

 

[A0wen]

Birmingham Snow Hill was a very dubious closure, seeing that it was closed in 1972, demolished a few years later and then reopened in 1987!

Indeed has any other line reopened so soon after closure?

I'm not sure it was.

The aspiration was to centralise most of Birmingham's rail services on New Street - wasn't quite managed as Moor St survived, but the old Snow Hill was huge, but had lost its main reason for existence with the removal of the GW London - Birmingham - Birkenhead services to a newly electrified WCML. The growth of demand in West Mids local services is what drove the reopening of Snow Hill but on a much smaller scale than what was there before.

 

[yorksrob]

I'm not sure it was.

The aspiration was to centralise most of Birmingham's rail services on New Street - wasn't quite managed as Moor St survived, but the old Snow Hill was huge, but had lost its main reason for existence with the removal of the GW London - Birmingham - Birkenhead services to a newly electrified WCML. The growth of demand in West Mids local services is what drove the reopening of Snow Hill but on a much smaller scale than what was there before.

The whole aspiration to close it was pretty foolish.

You had the south facing services which were only partially subject to unjustifiable closure attempts, which meant that you would always need an additional station. Then you had the northbound service which had to be deliberately run down and closed to enable closure.

The whole episode was a result of various poor decisions which had to be reversed or revised.

 

[Sprinter107]

Moor Street was also to close in 1969 when the North Warwicks line trains were to be withdrawn. The Leamington trains were to be diverted into New Street, leaving Birmingham with just one station. Wouldve been very short sighted as time has provern.

 

[Mikey C]

I'm not sure it was.

The aspiration was to centralise most of Birmingham's rail services on New Street - wasn't quite managed as Moor St survived, but the old Snow Hill was huge, but had lost its main reason for existence with the removal of the GW London - Birmingham - Birkenhead services to a newly electrified WCML. The growth of demand in West Mids local services is what drove the reopening of Snow Hill but on a much smaller scale than what was there before.

By all means rationalise Snow Hill, but to completely close a rail line and tunnel running right through the centre of Birmingham, and thus perfectly suited for local services was incredibly short sighted.

 

[Dr Hoo]

By all means rationalise Snow Hill, but to completely close a rail line and tunnel running right through the centre of Birmingham, and thus perfectly suited for local services was incredibly short sighted.

Well, this is what can happen when decision-making and funding is effectively devolved to 'local authorities' (in this case the West Midlands Passenger Transport Authority and Executive).

The PTA seemed to be only able to imagine integrating and modernising Birmingham, Walsall, Wolverhampton and West Bromwich former Corporation buses; getting rid of Walsall's trolleybuses; getting rid of conductors and moving to an all-diesel, all-front-entrance, all Exact Fare only fleet. Railways hardly figured in their initial plans.

Dubious judgement undoubtedly.

 

[Falcon1200]

By all means rationalise Snow Hill, but to completely close a rail line and tunnel running right through the centre of Birmingham, and thus perfectly suited for local services was incredibly short sighted.

Agree, but OTOH diverting the Paddington services into New St (although initially via a tortuous and slow route from Bordesley) allowed much better connections with other services, and later on enabled extending these trains northwards. Now of course, post Covid, all services from the Reading direction run via Coventry and could not access Snow Hill anyway.

 

[WesternLancer]

Well, this is what can happen when decision-making and funding is effectively devolved to 'local authorities' (in this case the West Midlands Passenger Transport Authority and Executive).

The PTA seemed to be only able to imagine integrating and modernising Birmingham, Walsall, Wolverhampton and West Bromwich former Corporation buses; getting rid of Walsall's trolleybuses; getting rid of conductors and moving to an all-diesel, all-front-entrance, all Exact Fare only fleet. Railways hardly figured in their initial plans.

Dubious judgement undoubtedly.

Yes, this point is very well made. Devolvment to local authorities could be an error when the roots of their public transport approach was focused on a background in running municipal bus services. The history of non integration goes back a very long way of course.

 

[yorksrob]

Well, this is what can happen when decision-making and funding is effectively devolved to 'local authorities' (in this case the West Midlands Passenger Transport Authority and Executive).

The PTA seemed to be only able to imagine integrating and modernising Birmingham, Walsall, Wolverhampton and West Bromwich former Corporation buses; getting rid of Walsall's trolleybuses; getting rid of conductors and moving to an all-diesel, all-front-entrance, all Exact Fare only fleet. Railways hardly figured in their initial plans.

Dubious judgement undoubtedly.

Although as is often said, the Minister would still have to have approved closure, so should have been in a position to reject lunatic schemes.

 

[A0wen]

Although as is often said, the Minister would still have to have approved closure, so should have been in a position to reject lunatic schemes.

So, you're saying the out of touch mandarin in minister should have over-ridden the recommendations of the local PTA and their experts who would have been local politicians. Feels a bit like you're running with the fox and hunting with the hounds.

 

[YorksLad12]

Well, this is what can happen when decision-making and funding is effectively devolved to 'local authorities' (in this case the West Midlands Passenger Transport Authority and Executive).

The PTA seemed to be only able to imagine integrating and modernising Birmingham, Walsall, Wolverhampton and West Bromwich former Corporation buses; getting rid of Walsall's trolleybuses; getting rid of conductors and moving to an all-diesel, all-front-entrance, all Exact Fare only fleet. Railways hardly figured in their initial plans.

Dubious judgement undoubtedly.

Yes, this point is very well made. Devolvment to local authorities could be an error when the roots of their public transport approach was focused on a background in running municipal bus services. The history of non integration goes back a very long way of course.

It does depend on the PTE. West Midlands concentrated on buses - they do move more people around than trains, after all. Greater Manchester decided to convert train lines into tram lines, and are still doing so - possibly to the detriment of the bus services. South Yorkshire doesn't have that many rail stations, and a smaller network (it was obviously much larger when taken as part of the West Riding), so they concentrated on buses and some of the lowest bus fares in England. Which the locals still think are too high!

In West Yorkshire we wanted everything rather than trading-off, which is why new stuff such as trams and trolleybuses didn't get off the ground but our bus and train networks are pretty good, comparatively. I whinge about them as much as anyone, but I'd much rather have our local transport provision than that in some other areas.

 

[yorksrob]

So, you're saying the out of touch mandarin in minister should have over-ridden the recommendations of the local PTA and their experts who would have been local politicians. Feels a bit like you're running with the fox and hunting with the hounds.

If the PTE is taking a decision that's clearly not in the national interest, then yes

 

[Dr Hoo]

If the PTE is taking a decision that's clearly not in the national interest, then yes

So that leads to a situation (back in the day) where the local PTEs amazingly decide that they are going to withdraw Section 20 support from all their rail services, which the Minister then ‘has’ to save by giving BR a ‘national’ subsidy instead.

Yeah, right.

 

[yorksrob]

So that leads to a situation (back in the day) where the local PTEs amazingly decide that they are going to withdraw Section 20 support from all their rail services, which the Minister then ‘has’ to save by giving BR a ‘national’ subsidy instead.

Yeah, right.

Well, it ended up giving BR a national subsidy anyway.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Well, it ended up giving BR a national subsidy anyway.

So, a genuine question:

Are local rail services 'too important' to allow local elected politicians to make 'dubious' decisons about?

 

[Sprinter107]

Its strange how the PTE picked what routes were viable. I read some years ago that in the very early days of the WMPTE, as well as the Snow Hill line, they wanted to withdraw support for the Walsall to Birmingham service, and the Stourbridge Town car. For a number of years thro the 1970s and into the early 1980s, there were no local trains to Wolverhampton after about 18.30, so i presume they saw no requirement for them.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Its strange how the PTE picked what routes were viable. I read some years ago that in the very early days of the WMPTE, as well as the Snow Hill line, they wanted to withdraw support for the Walsall to Birmingham service, and the Stourbridge Town car. For a number of years thro the 1970s and into the early 1980s, there were no local trains to Wolverhampton after about 18.30, so i presume they saw no requirement for them.

I remember it well. After the 'flagship policy' of introducing the super new Number 79 Birmingham-Wolverhampton bus route to show how well they had integrated the municipal operations of Birmingham, West Bromwich and Wolverhampton whilst loosely replicating the Snow Hill-Low Level line in the process [what a drag that was end to end...] they did indeed introduce an express bus between Birmingham and Walsall using the new Aston Expressway (A38(M)) and M6. They even tried to claim that it was faster than the train.

There were no signs between the railway station and bus station in Walsall for years, despite the supposed aim of 'integrating' public transport, because there was an expectation that the railway station (which only had local services) would close anyway.

Stourbridge Town could obviously be covered by buses too.

You really needed to live in the West Midlands at the time (as I did) to realise how completely disinterested in rail the PTA/E were back then.

 

[Sprinter107]

I remember it well. After the 'flagship policy' of introducing the super new Number 79 Birmingham-Wolverhampton bus route to show how well they had integrated the municipal operations of Birmingham, West Bromwich and Wolverhampton whilst loosely replicating the Snow Hill-Low Level line in the process [what a drag that was end to end...] they did indeed introduce an express bus between Birmingham and Walsall using the new Aston Expressway (A38(M)) and M6. They even tried to claim that it was faster than the train.

There were no signs between the railway station and bus station in Walsall for years, despite the supposed aim of 'integrating' public transport, because there was an expectation that the railway station (which only had local services) would close anyway.

Stourbridge Town could obviously be covered by buses too.

You really needed to live in the West Midlands at the time (as I did) to realise how completely disinterested in rail the PTA/E were back then.

The local rail system just seemed to stagnate for years, low frequencies, and run down stations. I think the Cross City line opening was probably the start of the improvement in the network.

 

[yorksrob]

So, a genuine question:

Are local rail services 'too important' to allow local elected politicians to make 'dubious' decisons about?

Yes of course. In principle it's good to have checks and balances against precipitously bad and irreversible decisions. Is that not the logic of having the Ministerial veto on closures that are proposed by the railway industry ?

 

[Dr Hoo]

Perhaps the most dubious closure of all was that of the Waverley route in 1969. Many anti campaigners at the time pointed the finger saying it was a "political" closure. As it turned out they were proven right in 1999 [when the 30 year secret rule expired. This is an ongoing rule and every December/January the media usually highlight some interesting/amusing secrets] when various Government secrets were released. Scottish Region of British Rail had been put under pressure to "lose" mileage, in order to finish the electrification of the WCML. Ironically the Northern end has been rebuilt/opened as far as Tweedbank with the opinion to extend to at least Hawick..... With people still campaigning for a full rebuild back to Carlisle.

It was hardly a 'secret' that (all parts of) BR had been under pressure to lose mileage. The Transport Act 1968 explicitly introduced time-limited and tapering Surplus Track Capacity Grants that, despite their name, were actually track elimination grants. O S Nock's definitive (1974) book Electric - Euston to Glasgow discusses this at some length in the description of the run-up to the surprise February 1970 announcement of go-ahead for the WCML scheme. (This was, of course, in preparation for the 'early' June 1970 General Election.)

Obviously the Waverley route closed over a year before the WCML electrification even started.

 

[yorksrob]

It was hardly a 'secret' that (all parts of) BR had been under pressure to lose mileage.

Exactly. A slash and burn policy to cut route mileage at all costs, however much the Beeching acolytes try to dress it up as some sort of quasi scientific process.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Exactly. A slash and burn policy to cut route mileage at all costs, however much the Beeching acolytes try to dress it up as some sort of quasi scientific process.

Err, we are talking about Surplus Track Capacity Grants that were invented and started several years after Dr Beeching had left and a line closure that had been announced under the 1967 'Network for Development' that I think was the only conspiracy strategic planning document ever signed by both the Chairman of the BRB (Sir Stanley Raymond) and Minister of Transport (Barbara Castle).