• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

My idea for reopening Buxton-Matlock

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
3,970
Triangular junction at Penistone????!!!! Where are you planning on putting the third axis? Deepcar to Barnsley? Woodhead to Denby Dale? Both would be pointless! There have been some pretty outrageous suggestions posted on this forum over the years but axing Standedge upgrade in favour of reopening Woodhead has to be up there... especially with presumably using the Huddersfield to Penistone line as a way of getting from Leeds to Manchester! Can I have some of whatever you've been drinking?

I wish there was a like button... Its blind nostalgia. There is no point arguing with it.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Senex

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2014
Messages
2,752
Location
York
Funny, there's a design for a third track but no third platform ... Northern Hub shelved scheme (another one).
Third track without platform for the up or down main, with the present platform line to become the loop?
 

70014IronDuke

Established Member
Joined
13 Jun 2015
Messages
3,686
If you live in Belper and need to head north by train you are better off driving to Alfreton and catching the train there.

Well, that's hardly suprising, is it, with only one train per day on the main line! With that service, you'd probably be better HITCHING to Alfreton!

I wouldn't call Belper with a population of 22,000 a sizeable town. ...

Well, it's all relative. What I wanted to say is that if you ran a new, limited stop Derby - Manchester service via Peak Forest (or Chesterfield, for that matter) putting a stop in at Belper should be considered.

It has a similar population to Matlock. And, according to the ORR figures, has slightly more passengers - at 225,000 pa, average of 620 per day - than Matlock too (although not more than Matlock + Matlock Bath).

Puttng a stop in might cause pathing difficulties, of course, which might preclude any such idea.
 

70014IronDuke

Established Member
Joined
13 Jun 2015
Messages
3,686
Hazel Grove to Manchester Central via Cheadle Heath and Chorlton in the 1960s was a fast main line as far as Throstle Nest Junction. Today's route from Hazel Grove to Piccadilly is 30mph over the Hazel Grove chord, 40mph from Hazel Grove to Edgeley Junction, 25mph over the junction, then a stop at Stockport.

Thanks for confirming my suspicions.

To get back the speed and capacity benefits of the ex-Midland Main Line from Derby to Manchester, you would have to reopen not only Matlock to Great Rocks but also Cheadle Heath to Manchester Central. Much of the latter alignment has been converted to Metrolink. Manchester Central is now a convention complex and the viaduct across the Mersey valley from Cheadle Heath to Heaton Mersey has been demolished.

I don't think I've ever seen a suggestion to re-instate Hazel Grove to Man Central! I didn't mean to imply that, as that's clearly never, ever, ever going to happen.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
I wish there was a like button... Its blind nostalgia. There is no point arguing with it.

I don't really see how proposing a triangular junction at Penistone can be considered 'nostalgia', given that there has never been a triangular junction there before.

Of course, the word 'nostalgia' is popular amongst those who will look for any possible excuse not to reopen a railway including alternately:
- There isn't a bus service, so there can't be any demand, and
- There's already a bus service, so there won't be any demand for a railway.
 

70014IronDuke

Established Member
Joined
13 Jun 2015
Messages
3,686
An interesting question. The RIO net time for passing Chesterfield to stopping in Stockport was 42½ minutes, so let's assume 44 minutes start-to-stop. Add on a minute for a Stockport set-down stop and then 10 minutes on to Piccadilly (to include recovery time) and you have 55 minutes Chesterfield to Manchester—and I'd suggest there'a a good 5 minutes to come out of that from realtively small route improvements, some of which have already been suggested (like getting back up to the old line-speed between Stockport and Hazel Grove). The best time I've found on a quick check for Nottingham to Chesterfield is 31 minutes.

I suggest that if we're thinking of a connection between Nottingham and Manchester, this could be provided in a bit less than 1½ hours via the Erewash Valley and Dore South Jn, and that this would be significantly faster than anything possible via Derby and Matlock.
Yup. That's what I was surmising. YorksRob didn't agree.

If we are thinking about Leicester and Derby to Manchester, then I think the Dore route could be at least as good as anything possible over a restored Matlock route. ...

Over to YorksRob.
Restoration of the Matlock route, even if it were restored to take the route via Buxton and Whaley Bridge rather than via Peak Forest, seems unlikely to justify the investment when a very much smaller investment in the Hope Valley line would give much better system benefits.

(And I do remember what a wonderful run it was through the Peak District, especially when having dinner north of Derby on a down express from St Pancras—the 4:25 p.m. was rather a nice one!)

In summer, I suppose? Somehow struggling up to Peak Forest behind a 5X in the freezing rain/snow at 19.15 on a January evening doesn't sound quite to appealing to yer average passenger (I'd give it a go, of course!). :)
 

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,912
Location
Richmond, London
Well, that's hardly suprising, is it, with only one train per day on the main line! With that service, you'd probably be better HITCHING to Alfreton!

Well no because you can catch the train to Derby and then head north. However Alfreton is probably more convenient if you're heading to Manchester.
 

Greybeard33

Established Member
Joined
18 Feb 2012
Messages
4,229
Location
Greater Manchester
Sorry, "you" in my previous post was intended to be rhetorical, not to refer to your personal views.

My point was/is that the present day network capacity constraints are not only in the Hope Valley, but also between Chinley and Manchester. Reopening just the Matlock to Great Rocks part of the former Midland route could only have a marginal capacity benefit, similar to that achievable by improvements to the Hope Valley route.
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
8,382
Where on earth is there clear blue sky thinking on this topic please? We are into the minutiae of line speeds, loops, line capacity etc when we haven't even got a route.

Perhaps we need to stand back and remember what we had seventy years ago, on nationalisation when effectively the GNR and the LNWR got their own back on the Midland and the Great Central - by closing them down.

London to Manchester was available from Marylebone, St Pancras and Euston. Inter Regional journeys spurred in and out along the way allowing all sorts of exotic journeys such as Bradford to Paignton, Manchester to Bournemouth, the Harwich Boat Train etc. Suggest that now and you get some bean counter telling you what is affordable - result - half of the Borders line built single track - madness!!!

The few miles of line from Millers Dale to Matlock must re-open and the negotiations there are with PPPB and Haddon Hall. We should hear no more about congested WCML. No wonder the poor thing is full - its trying to carry the capacity of three lines and more- see above.

Woodhead needs to follow - with a triangular junction at Penistone and a curve where the current tram depot is at Sheffield to access Midland. No need to electrify Standege. We have an electric tunnel but Network Rail would prefer you forget about it!

Now you have three routes from the Great Wen to civilisation again, plus renewed capacity to the North and North East again, choices of inter regional, diversionary routes, and multifarious reasons why HS2 is not the answer - I know it won't happen - so do you - but at least someone is thinking out of the box!

A train which connected Manchester with East Anglia.

Once a day.

It's now hourly!

I call that progress!
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
3,970
My point was/is that the present day network capacity constraints are not only in the Hope Valley, but also between Chinley and Manchester. Reopening just the Matlock to Great Rocks part of the former Midland route could only have a marginal capacity benefit, similar to that achievable by improvements to the Hope Valley route.

And at many times the cost. Hope Valley needs passing loops and perhaps some small improvement of the route through New Mills Central so it can be decent alternative route into Manchester for services that can't have paths through Stockport (I think Sheffield to Manchester is 6-7 minutes slower during diversions).

On a vaugely realistic note here are two suggestions that *might* one day have a decent business case.

1) build a chord near to Chapel-en-le-Fith to connect Buxton with the Hope Valley line without needing to virtually rebuild the whole freight line to passenger speeds. Build a new station / reopen the station within Chapel-en-le-Fith. Run an hourly fast service Piccadilly-Stockport-Hazel Grove-Chinley-new station-Buxton. This would make Buxton, Chapel and Chinley with much more attractive for public transport commutes into Manchester.

2) NR buy Peak Rail line from Matlock to Darley Dale and build a station just south of the level crossing but make it one platform only so that PR retain tracks to their sheds. Build a big car park and a bus stop nearby to attract commuters avoid them needing to drive into and park in Matlock to catch the train to Derby. Run services Monday to Saturday from Derby to Darley Dale but on Sundays and Bank Holidays cut them back to Ambergate and give Peak Rail free use of the rest of the line as compensation for the loss of Matlock to Darley Dale six days a week.

I am not saying these would have a positive BCR but they would cost a fraction of rebuilding the entire line and if there is so much local demand would be a success.....
 

ChiefPlanner

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2011
Messages
7,768
Location
Herts
Anyone thought of running a fast Derby - Stoke - Manchester via Uttoxeter ?

If it is connectivity being major centres of population - here we are - a very unused line with options of routing via Cheadle Hulme (tricky pathing , if not impossible) - or via Crewe if possible ........
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
And at many times the cost. Hope Valley needs passing loops and perhaps some small improvement of the route through New Mills Central so it can be decent alternative route into Manchester for services that can't have paths through Stockport (I think Sheffield to Manchester is 6-7 minutes slower during diversions)......

Although many times the cost, you end up with a far wider range of travel opportunities both into and out of the local area. Improving the line through New Mills Central is a good idea for whatever option one goes for, but the point is that not everyone in the Buxton area wants to go to Manchester and not everyone in Matlock-Darley Dale wants to go South.

On a vaugely realistic note here are two suggestions that *might* one day have a decent business case.

1) build a chord near to Chapel-en-le-Fith to connect Buxton with the Hope Valley line without needing to virtually rebuild the whole freight line to passenger speeds. Build a new station / reopen the station within Chapel-en-le-Fith. Run an hourly fast service Piccadilly-Stockport-Hazel Grove-Chinley-new station-Buxton. This would make Buxton, Chapel and Chinley with much more attractive for public transport commutes into Manchester.

2) NR buy Peak Rail line from Matlock to Darley Dale and build a station just south of the level crossing but make it one platform only so that PR retain tracks to their sheds. Build a big car park and a bus stop nearby to attract commuters avoid them needing to drive into and park in Matlock to catch the train to Derby. Run services Monday to Saturday from Derby to Darley Dale but on Sundays and Bank Holidays cut them back to Ambergate and give Peak Rail free use of the rest of the line as compensation for the loss of Matlock to Darley Dale six days a week.

I am not saying these would have a positive BCR but they would cost a fraction of rebuilding the entire line and if there is so much local demand would be a success.....

Nice suggestions, but by the time you've paid for these, and the loops on the Hope Valley, and the new signalling, isn't it worth considering spending a bit more for a step change in public transport in the area, rather than spending lots of money here and there for sticking plaster solutions that together don't amount to much more opportunity for the use of public transport at all.
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
3,970
Although many times the cost, you end up with a far wider range of travel opportunities both into and out of the local area. Improving the line through New Mills Central is a good idea for whatever option one goes for, but the point is that not everyone in the Buxton area wants to go to Manchester and not everyone in Matlock-Darley Dale wants to go South.



Nice suggestions, but by the time you've paid for these, and the loops on the Hope Valley, and the new signalling, isn't it worth considering spending a bit more for a step change in public transport in the area, rather than spending lots of money here and there for sticking plaster solutions that together don't amount to much more opportunity for the use of public transport at all.

Its not a bit more to rebuild the line its several times as much. I am suggesting two new stations, upgrading 2 miles of a heritage line to branch line and building a chord and upgrading a mile of a freight line, combined with some work to other lines that will or should be done at some point. Your suggesting what would basically be a brand new line with the same work required to have paths into Manchester. I don't think either of my suggestions are actually viable the point I am making is that two key markets for the line you propose can be boosted at a fraction of the cost of rebuilding the line. If it hadn't existed a very long time ago no one would seriously suggest building it.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Its not a bit more to rebuild the line its several times as much. I am suggesting two new stations, upgrading 2 miles of a heritage line to branch line and building a chord and upgrading a mile of a freight line, combined with some work to other lines that will or should be done at some point. Your suggesting what would basically be a brand new line with the same work required to have paths into Manchester. I don't think either of my suggestions are actually viable the point I am making is that two key markets for the line you propose can be boosted at a fraction of the cost of rebuilding the line. If it hadn't existed a very long time ago no one would seriously suggest building it.

One of those new stations is for a settlement that already has a station, serving a transport opportunity that already exists. Adding Darley Dale to the network would represent a new travel opportunity albeit a fairly limited one. Even with your suggestions, the two key markets would still not have a viable journey opportunity to eachother, or one of either Manchester or the East Midlands.

Your point that "If it hadn't existed a very long time ago, no one would seriously suggest building it" is utterly meaningless in the context of our railway network where in the current climate, no one would suggest building the vast majority of our routes, regardless of how useful they are.
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
3,970
One of those new stations is for a settlement that already has a station, serving a transport opportunity that already exists. Adding Darley Dale to the network would represent a new travel opportunity albeit a fairly limited one. Even with your suggestions, the two key markets would still not have a viable journey opportunity to eachother, or one of either Manchester or the East Midlands.

Your point that "If it hadn't existed a very long time ago, no one would seriously suggest building it" is utterly meaningless in the context of our railway network where in the current climate, no one would suggest building the vast majority of our routes, regardless of how useful they are.

But they already exist... Thats the point. Spending a small fortune on rebuilding a line basically from scratch and maintaining a line that already exists are not comparable. Whether a line should have closed or not doesn't change the financial case for building it again. Once the old line was closed and taken apart rebuilding it became the financial equivalent of building a new line. That people can remember it operating over half a century ago is irrelevant.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
But they already exist... Thats the point. Spending a small fortune on rebuilding a line basically from scratch and maintaining a line that already exists are not comparable. Whether a line should have closed or not doesn't change the financial case for building it again. Once the old line was closed and taken apart rebuilding it became the financial equivalent of building a new line. That people can remember it operating over half a century ago is irrelevant.

That's why you add in the capacity improvements for longer distance services to help to build the case - capacity improvements that you would have to pay for in terms of passing loops anyway.

And don't forget, we do have a formation with bridges and tunnels which are maintained, so its not going to be the same as building it over again.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,024
Location
SE London
1) build a chord near to Chapel-en-le-Fith to connect Buxton with the Hope Valley line without needing to virtually rebuild the whole freight line to passenger speeds. Build a new station / reopen the station within Chapel-en-le-Fith. Run an hourly fast service Piccadilly-Stockport-Hazel Grove-Chinley-new station-Buxton. This would make Buxton, Chapel and Chinley with much more attractive for public transport commutes into Manchester.

On a side note related to this, isn't the service to Buxton already supposed to be going half-hourly anyway at some point in the new Northern franchise? (Obviously, along the existing line though)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top