Most under-developed rail corridor? (examples)

[Get-Pulled-Off]

Its not a choice between SELRAP and a loop on the Fylde line, or even some more knitting in the Southwest. It is a choice between SELRAP and another round of tax cuts for bankers or the mind-boggling politically-driven idiocy of the road vehicle scrappage scheme (was that GBP 400 million or even more in the end?)

Well, indeed. I especially agree about using taxpayers money to scrap old cars to buy largely cheap South-East Asian motors under the guise of environmentalism, ignoring the massive energy cost in building a new car, Although I don't support the ideological attack on bankers I take the point that ultimately every decision about what to spend money on is a political decision derived in part from vested party interests. However don't fall into the Ed Milliband trap of confusing tax cuts with "giving bankers money". They (and everybody over £150k) are simply being allowed to keep more of their own money. But we digress.

If SELRAP continue to lobby that's entirely their own choice, everyone needs a hobby. But I will standby my point that I think that its unlikely ever to happen and has a poor business case. Regenerating Nelson and Colne is a laudable aim, but in reality that may simply be gentrification from the metropolitan classes seeking cheaper housing rather than local residents taking good jobs in a city. Regeneration is my opinion would be more successfully achieved by attracting high-end manufacturing to the area for which the skill base is more able to adapt to suit if not already suited.

 

[biggus]

It shouldn't, but the Todmorden Curve at a cost of £8million for 500 meters of track on derelict trackbed demonstrates that this is not the case.

I believe in the end they had to build a whole new formation on a different alignment.

So it is actually 500 m of new build railway and lots of new signalling and pointwork at each end. Still not cheap but it starts to make sense.

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=45735

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

Its a pre-existing embankment that they are building on with nothing to demolish other than trees. I think you're right in so much as its not in the identical 4 foot as it was previously, but given the fact they can complete the majority of the work unimpeded by railways, roads, shops, houses etc its still a large amount of money. I do agree that its peanuts in the big scheme of things though. However if you think how expensive that is, how expensive is it going to close and divert North Valley Road to bridge the railway in an already very confined valley? On one side are houses, on the other is a car dealership, plus 4 way junction with through roads to various destinations?!

 

[biggus]

They (and everybody over £150k) are simply being allowed to keep more of their own money. But we digress.

We do indeed digress, and I have only myself to blame.

However, I assure you Ed Milliband is not a source of ideas for me or anyone I associate with.

My approach to taxation is pragmatic, not ideological. The economic arguments would take a long time to make but I assure you that I quite like a bit of capitalism, properly integrated into a mixed economy.

 

[yorksrob]

Well, indeed. I especially agree about using taxpayers money to scrap old cars to buy largely cheap South-East Asian motors under the guise of environmentalism, ignoring the massive energy cost in building a new car, Although I don't support the ideological attack on bankers I take the point that ultimately every decision about what to spend money on is a political decision derived in part from vested party interests. However don't fall into the Ed Milliband trap of confusing tax cuts with "giving bankers money". They (and everybody over £150k) are simply being allowed to keep more of their own suited.

Except all of the taxpayers money they've had to be bailed out with.

 

[biggus]

There's two trains an hour to Preston from Burnley/ Accrington/ Blackburn - is that not "decent" enough?

Ok, I exaggerated. The timings up the Colne branch are hopeless, however, and I only see one usable train an hour from Burnley to Preston in the morning.

I see two an hour from Accy (which are slightly better than one.) painfully slow if you are used to better lines.

The service doesn't totally rule out a commute by rail, I must admit, though its not particularly attractive, all things considered.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Except all of the taxpayers money they've had to be bailed out with.

But they EARNED it you see because they um... they.... they.... ummmm they earned it, no they did, really! Errr. Its just THEIR money ok? All of it!

 

[Cliveblackpool]

Imo The South Fyle line is the most under developed rail corridor.
It should be eventually extended back to Central Station, which is a logical transport hub.
Passing loops are required, to give at least 2tph.
Stagecoach no 68 double deckers run every 15 minutes along this route for most of the day (1/2 hourly till late evening service)to Preston.
BTS No 11 mostly double deckers runs this route every 15 minutes to Lytham.
To Lytham the route is densely populated, and employement areas.
Blackpool Pleasure Beach. Airport.
An hourly service with a small train severly surpresses potential demand.

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

Except all of the taxpayers money they've had to be bailed out with.

Its the shareholders who got bailed out, not the bankers per se, although I appreciate that many will be the one and the same. Iceland had the correct response and allowed the banks to go bankrupt, those who owned the banks should be the ones who lost out, not the general public. It would have been perfectly possible to put a firewall around the general banking and savings of the "High Street" operations to keep a functioning banking facility for the population without having to bail out the dodgy investment arms of the banks which is where the problems came, and therefore all the shareholders would have lost their money, for failing to exercise control of the company. This is exactly what Iceland did (and to a lesser extent America) and when I last checked Iceland was the fastest growing Western economy (albeit from a depressed base).

But your response suggests that bankers are the only ones earning over £150k? There are many people who aren't bankers earning that. Do they deserve to be treated the same as bankers? Ed Milliband stated on record in the House of Commons that all money belongs to the state and we "give" money back to people.

 

[tbtc]

I'm a bit confused how this argument has been turned into "oh, so you don't want SELRAP? would you rather that we spent the money on bankers bonuses".

Is this some attempt to twist the argument so that people are forced to chose between the two (as if that's the only choice)?

Reality is that rail tends to have a pot of money allocated to it - spending that money on a quiet branchline in North Yorkshire comes at the cost of spending it elsewhere.

Things cost money. 8 million is peanuts.

If you want examples of silly amounts being spent on silly things, give the railway industry a break and eye up some road schemes: Vast sums of money, horrible outcomes. Seen all the motorways that have ruined Glasgow City Centre? That wasn't exactly cheap, and it wasn't exactly wise. I don't think todays railways even afford the opportunity for stupidity on such a scale.

Heres a special piece of "local authority managed" genius for you... 123 million (estimated) for 4.8 km or road (that's the cost of 8 Todmorden Curves)
http://infrastructure.planningportal.gov.uk/projects/north-west/heysham-to-m6-link-road/

The figure that you've quoted is the cost of the new road plus a fully remodelled junction 34, with new slip roads, a new bridge over the River Lune and a 600 space park and ride site (as the article says).

The cost of the Tod Curve is just for putting a track onto an alignment that used to have a track on it. No buildings to demolish, no station, nothing fancy.

The motorway through Glasgow is an essential part of the road network in the west of Scotland - ridiculously busy - completely different to SELRAP for many reasons.

 

[yorksrob]

Its the shareholders who got bailed out, not the bankers per se, although I appreciate that many will be the one and the same. Iceland had the correct response and allowed the banks to go bankrupt, those who owned the banks should be the ones who lost out, not the general public. It would have been perfectly possible to put a firewall around the general banking and savings of the "High Street" operations to keep a functioning banking facility for the population without having to bail out the dodgy investment arms of the banks which is where the problems came, and therefore all the shareholders would have lost their money, for failing to exercise control of the company. This is exactly what Iceland did (and to a lesser extent America) and when I last checked Iceland was the fastest growing Western economy (albeit from a depressed base).

But your response suggests that bankers are the only ones earning over £150k? There are many people who aren't bankers earning that. Do they deserve to be treated the same as bankers? Ed Milliband stated on record in the House of Commons that all money belongs to the state and we "give" money back to people.

I was merely responding to your perception of an attack on casino bankers.

I'm sure there are plenty of people who earn £150k salaries. When it comes to tax, I believe all such high earners should be treated the same, i.e. that they should not receive any tax cuts. If we have money for such luxuries, they should go to the lowest earning members of the workforce who are more likely to spend any additional income in their own local economy, providing economic stimulus where it's needed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm a bit confused how this argument has been turned into "oh, so you don't want SELRAP? would you rather that we spent the money on bankers bonuses".

Is this some attempt to twist the argument so that people are forced to chose between the two (as if that's the only choice)?

Reality is that rail tends to have a pot of money allocated to it - spending that money on a quiet branchline in North Yorkshire comes at the cost of spending it elsewhere.
.

I'm merely responding to someone elses comment.

The figure that you've quoted is the cost of the new road plus a fully remodelled junction 34, with new slip roads, a new bridge over the River Lune and a 600 space park and ride site (as the article says).

The cost of the Tod Curve is just for putting a track onto an alignment that used to have a track on it. No buildings to demolish, no station, nothing fancy.

The motorway through Glasgow is an essential part of the road network in the west of Scotland - ridiculously busy - completely different to SELRAP for many reasons.

It does illustrate that there is a problem for such schemes and the fact that they cost so much to build. Perhaps we need an equivalent to the old "light railway order" which would allow us to build the line integrated with the national network, but recognising that it will not be a mainline and without the onerous requirements for all level crossings to be replaced etc.

 

[lancastrian]

I'd agree. Although I'm not sure about the tunnel under Bradshaw gate doubling looks tight....

Anyone have any pictures of olde Bolton Station with the doubling or the triangle between Blackburn and Wigan way?

Dave.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
there's a pic here:

looks to be double track under Bradshawgate:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ingythewingy/5064704105/in/photostream/

i stand corrected.

I can confirm that the track under Bradshawgate used to be double track. The whole route from Bolton to Blackburn was double track.

However there are now two basic problems that will stop double track being relaid over the whole route, and they are:-

1. In the last ten years the bridge over the road between Bromley Cross and Turton, at the site of the old King William Goods Station, was replaced as a single track bridge only. This can be rectified.

2. The Sough Tunnel between Entwistle and Darwen, has some problems I believe which make it not possible to reinstate the double track through the tunnel. Apart from these two problems, and the bridge can easily be replaced by a double track bridge, the rest of the route can be re-doubled.

I believe that this not only should be done BUT needs to be done.

As an aside, I support the good work of SELRAP to re-instate the line between Skipton & Colne, and to re-double the line between Colne and Gannow Junction.

This is another route that should never have closed.

Once again short term gain which will cause long term pain.

 

[cgcenet]

If we are not restricted to UK domestic routes, then the Channel Tunnel route is a good example of an under-developed corridor, especially for inter-regional passenger rail services. Very few passenger trains serve Ashford International, and IIRC only one train a day, in one direction, serves both Ashford and Calais. The Channel Tunnel itself is operating at only about 57% of capacity.
There is a proposal for an inter-regional rail cross-Channel passenger rail service serving all stations between Lille and St Pancras, and I for one think it's an excellent idea. But I suspect it's not very likely to happen any time soon, principally because it wouldn't be viable if it can't also carry domestic UK passengers (as is the case with Eurostar), and because of the expensive access charges and excessive safety requirements.

 

[rail2016]

Well, indeed. I especially agree about using taxpayers money to scrap old cars to buy largely cheap South-East Asian motors under the guise of environmentalism, ignoring the massive energy cost in building a new car, Although I don't support the ideological attack on bankers I take the point that ultimately every decision about what to spend money on is a political decision derived in part from vested party interests. However don't fall into the Ed Milliband trap of confusing tax cuts with "giving bankers money". They (and everybody over £150k) are simply being allowed to keep more of their own money. But we digress.

If SELRAP continue to lobby that's entirely their own choice, everyone needs a hobby. But I will standby my point that I think that its unlikely ever to happen and has a poor business case. Regenerating Nelson and Colne is a laudable aim, but in reality that may simply be gentrification from the metropolitan classes seeking cheaper housing rather than local residents taking good jobs in a city. Regeneration is my opinion would be more successfully achieved by attracting high-end manufacturing to the area for which the skill base is more able to adapt to suit if not already suited.

Once again you don't even bother to read the fine print of the rail project, it's not and I must make this very clear again not a stopping service for just Colne to Skipton, it's a full on inter regional service linking both the Leeds and Manchester City regions as well as a possible link with Liverpool and Preston, and it has a business case, and a private investor sitting on the side lines that approached SELRAP 18 mths ago with a railway development plan for the line, and its not just passenger service but also freight, with a major need in the North for inland ports, and 3 sites have been looked at.

The Colne to Skipton Line sits where these inland ports need to be, Can't say more than that, but does anyone on here understand the true value of this line, which has the lowest gradient and no major tunnels or embankments, which all the other Pennines lines have, and works out far more expensive to run them than this line will be once opened, it will make it a lot quicker for those residents around the Air Valley line to get to Manchester, Man Airport, Preston and Liverpool, than going back up the line and down again to get to those locations, it will also benefit all the people of Pendle and to the west of Burnley to get to and from Leeds, Bradford. and the Line was built as a main line in the first place, I know from History that all the West Coast Main Line trains would be diverted to go down this line when it had a blockade on it, which would happen again once it's reopened.

Some times I think some of you on here work for Lancashire CC, as Planning officers, you come across that way, from the meeting that have been held, why is it that Pendle gets it in the Neck, when it comes to getting any Public Transport Investment, Pendle would do far better within West Yorkshire CC, at least they support this project more.

LCC with their Bypass Project, hmm, far more costly than any double track railway, and the Bypass would only benefit about 55% of the population of Pendle and Burnley, and that number will go further down due to fuel prices and the cost of insurance for car drivers.

Attracting high-end manufacturing to the area for which the skill base is more able to adapt to suit if not already suited,

well that's not going to Happen, Rolls Royce have said they are having issues with getting the right work force, most of the staff coming from outside the area, same with Morrisons in Colne, a lot of their staff come in from North and West Yorkshire, by Car, at the min, and by the way no other high end manufacturing company will move in to Pendle due to poor Public Transport Links, the above is fact, not fiction.

No New Companies will move in to Pendle until you have a joined up railway, the line was closed by mistake at the last minute, Barbra Castle wasn't going to close it, but for the fact that contracts had gone out for the line to be fulled up. this was a well used railway, and DR Beeching didn't want it closed, funny that isn't it, current line isn't working due to the fact its one of the longest single lines in the Country, with Poor Rolling stock that no and I mean no one should have to put up with, its about time the Government and all those High paid County Councilors started to look out for the poor people of Pendle, you should be ashamed of your self for not getting the Government to allow Norther Rail to Invest in new Trains, and I know they want to, from meetings with them.

 

[JohnCarlson]

In general you are correct - Sunderland's Transpennine service was a bi-hourly extension of the Liverpool to Newcastle service, however there was also a smattering of Transpennine services from Manchester Airport that ran the full length of the Durham Coast route to terminate at Newcastle. I remember there being one on a Saturday morning. Extensions of the Middlesbrough service, I presume.

A new line from Seaton Carew through Port Clarence and then crossing the Tees to allow trains to run onto Middlesborough then directly on to Darlington /York/London would be good as well.

 

[HowardGWR]

Rail2016 Yesterday, 18:56
I am so sorry, but I gave up halfway through your posting, due to the fact you used hardly any punctuation. Could you not go back and do this, so as to make it 'easier on the eye'? At the moment it comes over as somewhat rambling, which I am sure it was not meant to be. Thanks in advance, hopefully.

This happens a lot on this site. Is it due to the use of these hand held phone things? I notice also the spelling here is atrocious. We are all capable of a typo but.... Do colleagues have no spelling checker?

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

No New Companies will move in to Pendle until you have a joined up railway

Yes, Rolls-Royce et al are just sat there, pen in hand ready to sign the cheque to develop a new site, if only there was a train to link a couple of small towns to Skipton...

I know some outlandish claims are made on this forum but the bit I've quoted is up there with the best of them. As for an inland port, you can forget it until the M65 is linked through to the Aire Valley. There is not a chance planning will be given where it will increase the traffic through Colne.

As for freight traffic, I repeat, WHAT FREIGHT TRAFFIC? It might have been used in the past but the overwhelming majority of stuff using the WCML is Mossend/Carlisle to Warrington/The South. How will the SELRAP benefit that?

Everyone needs a hobbyhorse though, I guess!

 

[Morgsie]

The Stockport to Stalybridge line

 

[tbtc]

I must make this very clear again not a stopping service for just Colne to Skipton, it's a full on inter regional service linking both the Leeds and Manchester City regions as well as a possible link with Liverpool and Preston

What are you asking for?

An extension of the hourly Pacer service beyond Colne to Skipton with a single track railway east of Colne?

An extension of the hourly Pacer service beyond Colne to Leeds (via Skipton) with single track from Colne to Skipton?

An electrified double track line from Colne to Skipton with a redoubled electrified line from Burnley to Colne and electrification of dozens of miles of other lines through Lancashire to allow EMUs all the way from Leeds to Manchester/ Preston/ Liverpool via Colne plus a few gold-plated new stations, some freight loops, some 390s to operate it, a connection with HS2...

 

[YorkshireBear]

What are you asking for?

An extension of the hourly Pacer service beyond Colne to Skipton with a single track railway east of Colne?

An extension of the hourly Pacer service beyond Colne to Leeds (via Skipton) with single track from Colne to Skipton?

An electrified double track line from Colne to Skipton with a redoubled electrified line from Burnley to Colne and electrification of dozens of miles of other lines through Lancashire to allow EMUs all the way from Leeds to Manchester/ Preston/ Liverpool via Colne plus a few gold-plated new stations, some freight loops, some 390s to operate it, a connection with HS2...

Doubt he would want 390s, Alstom TGV Duplex surely???

I think your first option may be the only one which is viable, but does not balance with construction costs.

 

[tbtc]

Doubt he would want 390s, Alstom TGV Duplex surely???

I think your first option may be the only one which is viable, but does not balance with construction costs.

That's what I was wondering

Whilst I could see an argument for some limited service between Colne and Skipton, I'm guessing that a "full on inter regional service" between Liverpool and Leeds that way is a bit more ambitious - look forward to the reply!

 

[yorksrob]

There's certainly no shame in beginning with a smaller scheme with a view to greater expansion in the future. Provided new infrastructure was built with the provision for double track and the initial alignment was built on one side of the formation, double track could be put in at a later stage if needed.

It wouldn't be the first time that a route which had been written off eventually became singled, only to be redoubled later on.

 

[telstarbox]

@rail2016:

- A major trimodal inland port is already being built at Port Salford next to the M60/M62, an existing railway line, Manchester Ship Canal and Trafford Park. It's absolutely massive. Why would another one be built in the same region in hilly terrain where the transport links are nowhere near as good?

- If a private investor is so keen for this to go ahead, why haven't they been drumming up as much media coverage as possible for the plan?

- The other lines may be steeper but crucially, they have already been built and paid for, and the rolling stock (Class 185) was designed with these gradients in mind

- Rolls Royce and Morrisons staff will not provide enough demand to justify the business case, and it won't help the Rolls Royce night shift workers unless it runs a 24-hour service.