My idea for reopening Buxton-Matlock

Discussion in 'Infrastructure & Stations' started by yorksrob, 13 Sep 2017.

  1. yorksrob

    yorksrob Veteran Member

    Messages:
    14,761
    Joined:
    6 Aug 2009
    Location:
    Yorks
    Moderator note: split from East Midlands franchise prospectus
    Which is why they need to reopen Matlock via Bakewell, in spite of the naysayers.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: 13 Sep 2017
  2. class26

    class26 Member

    Messages:
    327
    Joined:
    4 May 2011
    .........but wouldn`t it be cheaper to increase capacity on the Hope line ?
     
  3. A0wen

    A0wen Established Member

    Messages:
    1,618
    Joined:
    19 Jan 2008
    And offer far more benefits.

    I'm not sure avoiding Sheffield is actually a good idea.

    Whilst re-opening Matlock - Buxton might improve journey times between Derby / Leicester than Manchester, I'm not sure that's enough of a justification for that particular reopening.
     
  4. nottsnurse

    nottsnurse Member

    Messages:
    132
    Joined:
    1 May 2014
    Avoiding Sheffield is always a good idea. ;)
     
  5. Mollman

    Mollman Member

    Messages:
    105
    Joined:
    21 Sep 2016
    If we are re-opening routes then the best one would be the Woodhead route, if you can fit a curve into Midland / Pond Street you don't need to re-open Victoria and won't need to reverse in Sheffield either.
     
  6. yorksrob

    yorksrob Veteran Member

    Messages:
    14,761
    Joined:
    6 Aug 2009
    Location:
    Yorks
    How much money do you want to spend on improving capacity on a route that is already fairly indirect for some of the journeys it serves. As well as potentially opening up local/tourism opportunities and additional freight capacity southwards.
     
  7. Chester1

    Chester1 Member

    Messages:
    903
    Joined:
    25 Aug 2014
    The Northern hub proposals for increased capacity are two passing loops to allow express trains to over take the stoppers and freight. I think this would increase capacity to 4tph fast and 1tph stopping. I don't think there has been any serious suggestion of more than 1 extra service during the next several years. If TPE ran another service then it would reduce pressure to split the Liverpool to Norwich service.
     
  8. yorksrob

    yorksrob Veteran Member

    Messages:
    14,761
    Joined:
    6 Aug 2009
    Location:
    Yorks
    But how many people travelling from the North West to the East Midlands and beyond actually need to travel via Sheffield ? With Matlock-Buxton, you could use capacity on the Hope Valley for passengers who actually want to travel between Manchester and Sheffield, rather than dragging a lot of NW/SE passengers out of their way.
     
  9. A0wen

    A0wen Established Member

    Messages:
    1,618
    Joined:
    19 Jan 2008
    Now play nicely ! :D
     
  10. A0wen

    A0wen Established Member

    Messages:
    1,618
    Joined:
    19 Jan 2008
    Operation Rio proved to an extent the lack of demand between Leicester, Derby and Manchester.

    The loadings were diminished because Sheffield wasn't being served.
     
  11. DanTrain

    DanTrain Member

    Messages:
    71
    Joined:
    9 Jul 2017
    Location:
    Sheffield
    Matlock - Buxton is a big tourist attraction these days - there's no way it would be worth re-instating it when you consider the monumental cost and the loss of tourist income from cyclists/walkers. I agree with above that the Woodhead is the way to go - but here I get the feeling a joint road/rail tunnel would be the most cost effective option (but that's a whole other kettle of fish best avoided here!)
     
  12. yorksrob

    yorksrob Veteran Member

    Messages:
    14,761
    Joined:
    6 Aug 2009
    Location:
    Yorks
    A short term service which probably wasn't much advertised and which I suspect didn't even have any advance purchase fares available, proves nothing.

    Travel on a Liverpool to Nottingham service and you'll see that plenty of people travel "through" Sheffield on these services.
     
  13. yorksrob

    yorksrob Veteran Member

    Messages:
    14,761
    Joined:
    6 Aug 2009
    Location:
    Yorks
    No, I don't think that Woodhead has as good a case for reopening. As the crow flies, it's not much shorter than the Hope Valley, it doesn't connect easily withSheffield Midland for connections as the Hope Valley, there aren't as many intermediate settlements as would be linked as the Peak line, the East-West freight traffic isn't as prominent, whereas there is already a substantial source of freight at Peak Forest which can be difficult to contain on the Hope.

    I'm not dismissing Woodhead, particularly for longer distance East-West flows in the longer term. I just think that there are far more potential benefits which would come to the fore far sooner with the Peak line.
     
  14. Kettledrum

    Kettledrum Member

    Messages:
    474
    Joined:
    13 Nov 2010
    Perhaps better use could be made of an upgraded Derby to Stoke line. This would enable Nottingham - Derby - Stoke - Manchester services.

    The line is currently too slow with lots of level crossings, so needs serious upgrading. It still might be easier to upgrade this than re-open routes closed many years ago.
     
  15. DanTrain

    DanTrain Member

    Messages:
    71
    Joined:
    9 Jul 2017
    Location:
    Sheffield
    The problem is that the peak line would be very slow, and would risk being the S&C to the WCML, it is scenic but rambling.

    Derby-Stoke is an interesting idea, I could see the case for an hourly train down there, although it is still very indirect and wouldn't be much/any quicker than the current service
     
  16. ChiefPlanner

    ChiefPlanner Established Member

    Messages:
    3,444
    Joined:
    6 Sep 2011
    Location:
    Herts
    From memory it was about £50k a month - not enough to pay for a train service on it's own ....(this was carefully monitered BTW)
     
  17. johnnychips

    johnnychips Established Member

    Messages:
    1,440
    Joined:
    19 Nov 2011
    Location:
    Doncaster
    I'm sure we had a gigantic thread on this topic before but I'm too tired to look for it now.
     
  18. Mugby

    Mugby Established Member

    Messages:
    1,059
    Joined:
    25 Nov 2012
    Location:
    Derby
    We'd all like to see the Woodhead route re-opened but the cost of some sort of connection into Sheffield Midland would be astronomical, in fact I can't see how it would even be possible.

    I don't agree that the Peak line would be slow, some parts of the line would perhaps have low speeds but the end to end journey times in BR days were really quite good, the fastest times from Derby to Manchester in 1964 were about 1hr 22mins. and, of course, no doubt that could be improved upon today.

    I do agree that Project Rio fell short of expectations in terms of numbers but circumstances have changed considerably since then. The sheer volume of people travelling between Sheffield and Manchester now continually amazes me and it's a situation which really needs to be addressed in the near future. A re-opened Peak line could relieve some of the pressure and trains could continue through to Liverpool.
     
    Last edited: 14 Sep 2017
  19. Flying Snail

    Flying Snail Member

    Messages:
    701
    Joined:
    12 Dec 2006
    Buxton, Matlock and Bakewell are very congested, the road links are poor, particularly from the north and the bus service is pretty bad.

    The idea that it is too popular to re-open the rail line is rubbish, there would be considerable demand in particular for travel to Matlock and Bakewell from the North which is now being stifled by the long bus or car only options.

    I have no doubt that if the line had remained open it would now be busy with both fast and stopping services.
     
  20. Scouseinmanc

    Scouseinmanc Member

    Messages:
    94
    Joined:
    7 Jan 2009
    Location:
    Manchester
  21. yorksrob

    yorksrob Veteran Member

    Messages:
    14,761
    Joined:
    6 Aug 2009
    Location:
    Yorks
    I agree with Mugby's point that in practice, the route wasn't/wouldn't be half as slow as people make out. Plus I'm not so sure that Derby-Stoke is laid out for particularly fast running either.
     
  22. DanTrain

    DanTrain Member

    Messages:
    71
    Joined:
    9 Jul 2017
    Location:
    Sheffield
    The thing is, whilst I could see a local service being beneficial on a single line, I don't see that the Peak Park would grant permission for a fast line which would destroy PeakRail and various other businesses, and the fast trains would have little/no ecenomic impact in the peaks unless they were to stop at Matlock/Bakewell/Buxton, slowing them down.

    A good idea, and indeed it may have been a busy line if it had never closed, but re-opening it would be very hard - look at how hard the Hope Valley capacity scheme was, this would be 10x worse.
     
    Last edited: 14 Sep 2017
  23. A0wen

    A0wen Established Member

    Messages:
    1,618
    Joined:
    19 Jan 2008
    ??????

    Liverpool - Nottingham's don't serve Derby or Leicester, which were the places I cited.

    Re-opening Matlock - Buxton would provide a link from Leicester, Loughborough and Derby to Manchester. It would remove traffic from Sheffield and make precisely no difference to Nottingham, which already has direct services to the NW.

    And I restate, when Rio was in place, MML found that any incremental passengers to Manchester were more than off-set by those who wanted to travel from London to Sheffield or Nottingham.

    If it was that attractive to have an E-Mids - Manchester service avoiding Sheffield, I think MML / EMT would have already pitched for it. As it stands they've focused on improving the Sheffield and Nottingham services......
     
  24. Ash Bridge

    Ash Bridge Established Member

    Messages:
    2,518
    Joined:
    17 Mar 2014
    Location:
    Stockport Cheshire
    On top of that surely any through services to/from Manchester are going to be struggling for paths going via Macclesfield? Also regarding the Hope Valley route, are there not restrictions on the amount of capacity improvements that can be implemented on the stretch that runs within the Peak National Park, I seem to recall the authorities weren't too keen on one of the passing loops proposed within this section?
     
  25. yorksrob

    yorksrob Veteran Member

    Messages:
    14,761
    Joined:
    6 Aug 2009
    Location:
    Yorks
    You might have a fixation on Project Rio, however that doesn't negate the fact that reopening the Peak Forest route would have a transformative effect on travel between the North West and the whole of the East Midlands and beyond.

    And Derby, Leicester and Loughborough are fairly sizeable settlements. Given decent marketing and enough time for people to get to know that it exists, I've little doubt that this could grow into a decent flow in itself. Maybe not enough to fill a HST, but a decent flow nevertheless.

    I agree wholeheartedly with your point that lots of people want to go to Sheffield. This proposal would provide more capacity to go to Sheffield for those people, not less.

    A last thought on Project Rio. It was an excellent idea, but from what I understand, it wasn't as heavily loaded from the Manchester area as was expected. This might have been a lack of publicity, perhaps Virgin didn't want people getting used to a rival TOC. Either way, if it didn't entirely reach the target audience it was marketed at, it's hardly likely to reach an entirely new passenger flow with much less promotion.
     
  26. 70014IronDuke

    70014IronDuke Established Member

    Messages:
    1,428
    Joined:
    13 Jun 2015
    As I remember it, Operation Rio had reports of quite poor passenger numbers from Leicester.

    Except there were very good reasons for that - the launch was a disaster - FGW did not transfer the promised HSTs. And for months there seemed to be regular cancellations. Maybe if the launch and marketing had been seriously better, the figures would have been better?

    Rio did not serve Derby directly. You had to change at Chesterfield. So it improved the overall service, but not in the way that a restored route via Peak Forest would.

    Whether or not a case could be made for a restored route via Peak Forest is a big question - but I don't think any conclusions to answer that question should be taken based on the results of a botched operation enacted more than a decade ago.

    I think it would affect Nottingham a bit - in terms of probably diverting some passengers eg from Beeston, away from current services. And reducing the numbers from Leicester/Lbro/Derby changing into EMT services at Sheffield.
    Making EMT trains less crowded west of Sheffield.
     
  27. lejog

    lejog Established Member

    Messages:
    1,112
    Joined:
    27 Feb 2015
    As you say given the high level of local opposition to a few passing loops in the Hope Valley within the National Park boundaries, which has effectively brought this project to a grinding halt, I think any thought of reopening the Matlock/Buxton line is fanciful in the extreme. Local (Tory) MPs will face a lynching if the Hope Valley TWAO is approved, which is probably why it sits in Whitehall gathering dust.

    The incredibly popular Monsal Trail is owned by the National Park Authority, closing it would cause uproar, let alone rebuilding a railway.
     
  28. 70014IronDuke

    70014IronDuke Established Member

    Messages:
    1,428
    Joined:
    13 Jun 2015
    Well, they can't have their cake and eat it too, can they? One minute people want better public transport to take cars off the roads, the next they're (would be) complaning about a new rail route, or new loops, designed to do exactly that. With every indecision on eg new loops on the Hope Valley, the problems get incrementally worse and/or new road projects which only relieve the situation in one place to pass it on to the next get implemented.
     
  29. 70014IronDuke

    70014IronDuke Established Member

    Messages:
    1,428
    Joined:
    13 Jun 2015
    The idea for re-opening the line has been around for decades, probably since the 1980s if not earlier. I don't think anyone has ever advocated a non-stop Derby - Manchester service - that wouldn't carry enough passengers. Any new service would surely include a 1 TPH semi-fast stopping at exactly the stations you mention, plus a 1 TPH 'all stations' - whatever they would be, north of Matlock.
     
  30. Greybeard33

    Greybeard33 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,342
    Joined:
    18 Feb 2012
    Location:
    Greater Manchester
    Any new service via Buxton would have to fight for a path on the chockablock line between Stockport and Piccadilly. If it operated as an extension of the existing Buxton service, or the coming New Mills Newtown service, it would be very slow.

    The LNW Stockport to Buxton branch line was not designed for through services and would be slow even non-stop.
     

Share This Page