NYMR and Esk Valley line musings

[ricj]

As a local, I often think about the interesting relationship between the Esk Valley Line and the NYMR and the (to me at least), blurred (and unique??) lines between national network and preserved railway on the section between Grosmont and Whitby. The fact NYMR can now promote Whitby as their terminus (which they were even able to build their own infrastructure at) and the general logistics and politics of sharing national rail metals (which I fully admit I know little to nothing about). And then the rare occurrence that the much longer, most scenic part of the line to Battersby is sometimes used by NYMR trains on rare occasions. And that led me to the following thought process and the main reason for this post:

Since the line between Whitby and Grosmont is used daily and successfully by the NYMR throughout the season, what would prevent the entire line between Whitby and Battersby being used in the same way one day? If a second platform and adequately sized passing/runaround loop were added at Grosmont (Esk Valley) and facilities added/improved at Battersby, surely NYMR services and National Rail services could happily use the line in tandem on a daily basis? This would therefore create an absolute behemoth of a heritage railway, essentially two lines in one that cover the whole of The North York Moors. Steam trains operating separately from Whitby to Battersby and Grosmont to Pickering with trains scheduled to give passengers the opportunity to change trains at 'Grosmont Junction' and experience a whole day of long distance heritage travel through some of the most stunning scenery in the country. And in relative terms, the infrastructure based logistics would be 'small' - a new platform and loop at Grosmont (already achieved successfully at Whitby) and there are already a choice of potentially up to three platforms at Battersby. And the rest I guess, would be purely down to politics which I have no idea about. Oh and the potential issue of extra motive power but I'm sure that could be overcome quite easily - maybe initially only a couple of trains per day on the Esk Valley line?

But in my mind, it would only benefit the Esk Valley Line and the beautiful villages along it. In the most basic terms, if it can be done between Grosmont and Whitby, surely it can also be done between Whitby and Battersby? But I look forward to being educated on why it cannot!

 

[Iskra]

It's a nice idea, but it doesn't add anything to the NYMR that they don't already have (they already have a scenic/coastal route), while adding a shed load of infrastructure and fuel costs for little additional patronage in a sparsely populated area away from the main North Yorkshire tourist travel axis. Equally, it wouldn't be great for residents as I doubt the NYMR would want to run any loss-making services (such as on a Tuesday evening in January), so they'd lose the little service that they have. All it would do for NYMR is increase costs, while barely gaining any revenue to cover it. The NYMR has been quite enterprising in gaining access to Whitby for obvious revenue reasons, if it wanted to try get to Battersby, you'd think they'd have trialled a heritage DMU service already, but they haven't...

 

[ricj]

Really? I get the impression the railway is incredibly lucrative over the running season, especially during the summer holidays and seems to be going from strength to strength. I wasn't talking about them running heritage 'service trains' over the winter months. Just supplementing their existing services over the busy seasons. It would just give passengers two options and twice as much scenery to explore. Apart from the previously mentioned, 'relatively' small additions to infrastructure, the track itself is already well maintained by heritage rail. The existing platform(s) between the heritage and Esk Valley lines at Grosmont could easily be modified/widened to take trains on both sides and then a smaller one for the Esk Valley DMU's could be constructed on the car park side of the trackbed as part of the passing loop.

I mean, there was a time around 12 years ago when there was briefly a regular NYMR Santa special service on the Esk Valley (I believe it was during the period where the bridge between Grosmont and Goathland was being replaced) using Glaisdale as a passing point for the Middlesbrough-Whitby service trains. So it has and can be done!

 

[yorksrob]

I'd like to see a decent frequency between Middlesbrough and Whitby to enable people (i.e. me) to enjoy a day out without having to return four hours later at 16:00 or chance the last train with extremely dodgy connections back at 19:42.

Perhaps this could be half and half (maybe heritage DMU) for ordinary NR fares.

 

[zwk500]

Really? I get the impression the railway is incredibly lucrative over the running season, especially during the summer holidays and seems to be going from strength to strength. I wasn't talking about them running heritage 'service trains' over the winter months. Just supplementing their existing services over the busy seasons. It would just give passengers two options and twice as much scenery to explore. Apart from the previously mentioned, 'relatively' small additions to infrastructure, the track itself is already well maintained by heritage rail. The existing platform(s) between the heritage and Esk Valley lines at Grosmont could easily be modified/widened to take trains on both sides and then a smaller one for the Esk Valley DMU's could be constructed on the car park side of the trackbed as part of the passing loop.

I don't know what the timetable implications would be of your suggestion without serious thought but the economics of it wouldn't add up - the occasional trip to Battersby works as a special fine-dining experience, but it's not a route that is going to seriously boost the NYMR's ridership for the additional (considerable) operating cost - not least keeping more locos in mainline condition (and even then the NYMR have a very generous deal with their mainline fleet). When I had anything to do with it my impression was that the NYMR and NR had quite a good working relationship, both on the planning/office side and the operations themselves, so I wouldn't anticipate massive issues there.

Fundamentally, the only way this would be viable for the NYMR is if there was a vast reserve of untapped demand from Middlesbrough way that was willing to change at Battersby, which they already get some of by operating to Whitby. But the NYMR is not going to seriously increase it's revenue from Pickering or Grosmont by offering a fairly ordinary service to Battersby. Whitby is a massive draw - it's a charming seaside town, has the Abbey, Dracula, gothic connections as well as the access to the scenery. I can easily see why Grosmont to Whitby was worth doing. But Battersby is awkward, the station isn't really near anything except Moorland (which the NYMR already has the better off from it's standalone route) and it needs faffing at Grosmont (or starting from Whitby) to serve.

And all of this is before we get to the fact that signalling changes won't be viable for a heritage operation.

The best option is (as @yorksrob has hinted at) a better NR frequency between Middlesbrough and Whitby. This would at least have a chance of justifying another loop.

 

[30907]

Running to Whitby (with good cooperation from BR and successors BTW) has given the NYMR a prime destination of choice for daytrippers, instead of being solely a destination in its own right. Pickering is, despite its parking problems, an accessible starting point from many urban areas (other than the NE of course).
Battersby really adds nothing.

I would rather increase capacity at the Whitby end to allow an additional couple of trains from Middlesborough and perhaps an extra one from Pickering.

Incidentally, one of the reasons the railway has retained reservations post restrictions is to manage the loading of the teatime departure from Whitby which could be seriously overcrowded (source: recent conversation with a working member).

 

[Jan Mayen]

Does the NYMR still actually go to Battersby? I can't find anything to suggest it does.

 

[Darandio]

Does the NYMR still actually go to Battersby? I can't find anything to suggest it does.

Nobody is suggesting it does in this thread?

 

[Jan Mayen]

The OP said it did on rare occasions. I assumed that this meant a few times a year. Perhaps my question should be: when did the NYMR last send a train to Battersby? And are there any plans to do so this year or next?

 

[Darandio]

The OP said it did on rare occasions. I assumed that this meant a few times a year. Perhaps my question should be: when did the NYMR last send a train to Battersby? And are there any plans to do so this year or next?

Ah yes, I see that now. I'm fairly sure it hasn't happened since 2010 as a passenger service, happy to be corrected. I believe they still do training on that section though.

 

[zwk500]

Ah yes, I see that now. I'm fairly sure it hasn't happened since 2010 as a passenger service, happy to be corrected. I believe they still do training on that section though.

They ran dining trains to Battersby in 2019, or at least intended to do so as they sent bids to NR for the paths.

 

[railfan99]

Whitby is a massive draw...

The Captain Cook Museum was a major draw for me, plus the historic rows of B&Bs, one of which I stayed in. Great experiences.

 

[Russel]

Does the track sharing between Grosmont and Whitby only work so well for both parties because there is such an infrequent National Rail service?

If, for example, Northern decided that they wanted to run an hourly service to Whitby, what position would this leave the NYMR in?

 

[zwk500]

Does the track sharing between Grosmont and Whitby only work so well for both parties because there is such an infrequent National Rail service?

If, for example, Northern decided that they wanted to run an hourly service to Whitby, what position would this leave the NYMR in?

AIUI the NYMR have rights to paths in the WTT, therefore any increase in service by another operator would need to work with or around those paths.
It's possible that if there was sufficient will for an hourly service that was completely stuffed by the NYMR service that the heritage line would be told to either take bad paths or get off the line, but I don't see the political will for such a fight being there. The 2nd platform at Whitby has helped a lot with capacity, and a 2 hourly service would be the first stage. If hourly was on the cards you probably see resignalling talked about which would then be able to take account of the NYMR in the design stage.

 

[yorksrob]

2 hourly would be a vast improvement over the inadequate service today.

 

[Harvester]

Did the double track section out of Whitby, singled in the eighties, only ever go as far as Sleights?

 

[railfan99]

If hourly was on the cards you probably see resignalling talked about which would then be able to take account of the NYMR in the design stage.

A decade ago, I travelled on this line, and then on a Sunday Whitby-Pickering-Grosmont, connecting after a slight wait to London via Darlington.

I'd long forgotten the shockingly poor frequency this line has, despite Whitby being a popular tourist destination. Two weekday downs during business hours: pathetic.

What is the signalling and safeworking system used between Middlesbrough and Whitby? Your local version of Automatic and Track Control?

 

[Coolzac]

There's very little chance it would ever be an hourly service - the resignalling requirements would be way too expensive. It's not just the Grosmont section. However, I think a 2 hourly service would be fantastic and give the line the service it deserves.

 

[D6130]

Did the double track section out of Whitby, singled in the eighties, only ever go as far as Sleights?

No....it was double from Whitby to Grosmont - and originally on to Pickering and Rillington Junction. Also until the mid-eighties (?) it was double from Middlesbrough to Nunthorpe - and originally on to Guisborough. The new station at Gypsy Lane was built with two platforms.

 

[zwk500]

What is the signalling and safeworking system used between Middlesbrough and Whitby? Your local version of Automatic and Track Control?

I don't know how UK systems compare to Australian, apologies:

Middlesbrough to Nunthorpe is Track Circuit Block (TCB) from Middlesbrough Box (according to NESA although I thought it moved to York ROC a few years ago). Nunthorpe station may still be under local control with semaphores (it's been a while since I saw a signalling diagram).
From Nunthorpe Station to Whitby is No Signaller Token Remote, or NSTR, where there are machines on the platform at Token exchange points and the driver gets out of the cabe to request the token from the signaller at Nunthorpe. Exchange points are at Battersby, Glaisdale and Whitby. There is an additional short/intermediate section token instrument at Grosmont for trains on/off the NYMR, however if a Northern service from Whitby has the token, the NYMR must wait until it has arrived at Glaisdale before they can retrieve the token for Grosmont to Whitby.
The Junction at Battersby is linked to the token that is withdrawn, so the points will set for the route of the token (arriving trains should be detected immediately).

 

[robvulpes]

Ah yes, I see that now. I'm fairly sure it hasn't happened since 2010 as a passenger service, happy to be corrected. I believe they still do training on that section though.

I did a NYMR service to Battersby during the early May Gala in 2011.

 

[ricj]

Interesting replies thanks. I knew that the NYMR do run services to and from Battersby from time to time but basically just wondered what the implications of running something more regular would be.

I also get that Battersby doesn't really work if it was ever to become a true destination/starting point for steam services. Would my idea hold more weight if the line was ever extended to Stokesley? I don't THINK there are any big hurdles to overcome along that section of trackbed? I guess the only issue is that the line didn't actually go very near to the centre of the town..

 

[kje7812]

Did the double track section out of Whitby, singled in the eighties, only ever go as far as Sleights?

No....it was double from Whitby to Grosmont - and originally on to Pickering and Rillington Junction. Also until the mid-eighties (?) it was double from Middlesbrough to Nunthorpe - and originally on to Guisborough. The new station at Gypsy Lane was built with two platforms.

Erm, Sleights is between Whitby and Grosmont so was double track.

 

[D6130]

Erm, Sleights is between Whitby and Grosmont so was double track.

Exactly what I was saying!

 

[zwk500]

Interesting replies thanks. I knew that the NYMR do run services to and from Battersby from time to time but basically just wondered what the implications of running something more regular would be.

I also get that Battersby doesn't really work if it was ever to become a true destination/starting point for steam services. Would my idea hold more weight if the line was ever extended to Stokesley? I don't THINK there are any big hurdles to overcome along that section of trackbed? I guess the only issue is that the line didn't actually go very near to the centre of the town..

I think the only viable place for the NYMR to even consider extending to would be Middlesbrough, and even then it's pretty much a non-starter.

The NYMR has previously had to distance itself from suggestions of reopening Pickering-Malton as being unsustainable on their operational department. Regular running to Battersby would place a greater strain on the NYMR than operating to Malton.

 

[Coolzac]

I think the only viable place for the NYMR to even consider extending to would be Middlesbrough, and even then it's pretty much a non-starter.

The NYMR has previously had to distance itself from suggestions of reopening Pickering-Malton as being unsustainable on their operational department. Regular running to Battersby would place a greater strain on the NYMR than operating to Malton.

Absolutely. Whilst I am a massive fan of both the NYMR and the Esk Valley Line, I think we need to be realistic about what is achievable. I would absolutely love the section from Rillington Junction to Pickering to re-open, or the NYMR to operate to Middlesbrough, but it's just not necessary or feasible. The NYMR is now an ideal heritage line- it has attractions at both ends, a national rail connection, a long line with lots of beautiful scenery and interesting stations. Realistically there's not much you can ask for! Maybe a quicker bus connection from York/ Malton to Pickering, but that's not really in the NYMR's control.

I don't see much point in extending the old Battersby line towards Stokesly either, especially for the cost.

 

[zwk500]

Absolutely. Whilst I am a massive fan of both the NYMR and the Esk Valley Line, I think we need to be realistic about what is achievable. I would absolutely love the section from Rillington Junction to Pickering to re-open, or the NYMR to operate to Middlesbrough, but it's just not necessary or feasible. The NYMR is now an ideal heritage line- it has attractions at both ends, a national rail connection, a long line with lots of beautiful scenery and interesting stations. Realistically there's not much you can ask for! Maybe a quicker bus connection from York/ Malton to Pickering, but that's not really in the NYMR's control.

I don't see much point in extending the old Battersby line towards Stokesly either, especially for the cost.

Yes, the only thing that can really help the NYMR at this point would be to increase the Middlesbrough-Whitby frequency.

 

[unslet]

It's all hypothetical anyway. The NYMR has not renewed its passenger carrying safety case between Grosmont and Battersby this year. The line's capacity is severely constrained by the long block sections and also,possible plans by Northern to improve the service.

 

[Skutter]

It's all hypothetical anyway. The NYMR has not renewed its passenger carrying safety case between Grosmont and Battersby this year. The line's capacity is severely constrained by the long block sections and also,possible plans by Northern to improve the service.

Do they still have access to Glaisdale, in case they need to divert from Grosmont?

 

[unslet]

I would think not.