Possible route reopenings

[bailey65]

I was reading this article earlier today

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...21/Miles-of-rail-line-could-be-re-opened.html

I think it would go a little way to reversing the then tory governments thoughtless obliteration of half the rail network.
The only trouble is most wrongly closed routes are built on for most of their length and have had infrastructure like bridges and embankments removed interesting thought though.

 

[Squaddie]

I think it would go a little way to reversing the then tory governments thoughtless obliteration of half the rail network.

I'm no Tory, but I think it's only to fair to point out that although Labour opposed the Beeching cuts while in opposition they did nothing to halt them when they came to power in 1964. At the time they gained office many of the lines that had been closed were still intact and could have been re-opened quite easily and cheaply had they so wished: instead, they continued to close railways throughout their entire term in office, closing far more route miles than the Conservatives had done.

 

[SS4]

I'm confused, the Tories say there is no money for infrastructure yet their party paper suggests reopening lines?

It won't surprise you to learn that none of the potential lines to reopen are near the midlands, let alone the north or Scotland :roll:

 

[Nym]

And Anti-HS2 meterials linked from that Article, Hmmm....

 

[tbtc]

I'd support some of these re-openings

* - The East-West line will happen, bit by bit, although running all the way to Cambridge won't happen for some time
* - Lewes to Uckfield ought to work, especially if electrified
* - Bourne End to High Wycombe may depend on Crossrail/ electrification of Thames Valley branches (too many unknowns to say how this would work)

However I suspect that this is really just a diversion ahead of the Tory Spring Conference I presume they are having one - the LibDems are having theirs at the moment) - it ought to go down well with the Middle England voters (investing in the Home Counties - good for both commuters/ business and environmental credentials). There are enough problems with existing lines before we try reopening everything that Beeching cut.

(the cynic in me wonders whether opening routes like Bourne End to High Wycombe would be a way of keeping 165/166s in the South East - which wouldn't allow any planned cascade to the south west or the north of England)

 

[LE Greys]

I'd support some of these re-openings

* - The East-West line will happen, bit by bit, although running all the way to Cambridge won't happen for some time
* - Lewes to Uckfield ought to work, especially if electrified
* - Bourne End to High Wycombe may depend on Crossrail/ electrification of Thames Valley branches (too many unknowns to say how this would work)

However I suspect that this is really just a diversion ahead of the Tory Spring Conference I presume they are having one - the LibDems are having theirs at the moment) - it ought to go down well with the Middle England voters (investing in the Home Counties - good for both commuters/ business and environmental credentials). There are enough problems with existing lines before we try reopening everything that Beeching cut.

(the cynic in me wonders whether opening routes like Bourne End to High Wycombe would be a way of keeping 165/166s in the South East - which wouldn't allow any planned cascade to the south west or the north of England)

Aren't they too big for anything other than GWR lines anyway?

Most of these routes link two or more other lines, so there's probably more scope for repoening than other routes. The Dunmow link makes sense, since it runs parallel with a coach link anyway. Wycombe-Bourne End might enable a Maidenhead-Aylesbury service, which might be useful. Some of the others are already announced in parts, so it's more of an extension than a new plan.

 

[Eagle]

It won't surprise you to learn that none of the potential lines to reopen are near the midlands, let alone the north or Scotland :roll:

Not that the Conservatives get much say in Scottish (or Welsh) reopenings anyway.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

— The Okehampton-Bere Alstom link, which would provide a second route between Exeter and Plymouth

Is this a new branding thing? (Does it mean it'll get Adelantes or something?)

 

[IanXC]

Aren't they too big for anything other than GWR lines anyway?

Someone will be along with the link to that route clearance map before too long, but didn't that show scope for 165/166/168 to operate around Newcastle?

I think the last thread concluded that 168/166 fleets should go to Bristol and the south west, and the 165 fleet to Newcastle.

 

[swt_passenger]

Aren't they too big for anything other than GWR lines anyway?

No.

How do you think they get to Redhill, Gatwick, Woking, Basingstoke, East Croydon, Selhurst etc? By shaving a bit off the sides perhaps?

 

[Wath Yard]

I'm confused, the Tories say there is no money for infrastructure yet their party paper suggests reopening lines?

I don't know where you get that from as they have said the exact opposite in that money can and should be spent on infrastructure projects that will benefit the economy. There are a large number of infrastructure projects that have been approved, HS2 being the largest.

 

[Eagle]

How do you think they get to Redhill, Gatwick, Woking, Basingstoke, East Croydon, Selhurst etc? By shaving a bit off the sides perhaps?

Woking and Croydon? Are these ECS movements?

 

[tbtc]

Someone will be along with the link to that route clearance map before too long, but didn't that show scope for 165/166/168 to operate around Newcastle?

I think the last thread concluded that 168/166 fleets should go to Bristol and the south west, and the 166 fleet to Newcastle.

Agreed re: the 165/166s, but I was under the impression that 168s are "normal" body size so could run anywhere that a 170/171 does (ideal for plenty of places - 3/4 coach 100mph DMUs),

166s would be decent stock for Middlesbrough - Sunderland - Newcastle - Carlisle

 

[Eagle]

Agreed re: the 165/166s, but I was under the impression that 168s are "normal" body size so could run anywhere that a 170/171 does (ideal for plenty of places - 3/4 coach 100mph DMUs)...

168s aren't going anywhere. At least not until Chiltern electrification (which admittedly is quite high on Network Rail's wishlist).

 

[swt_passenger]

Woking and Croydon? Are these ECS movements?

They have been when Reading is closed, as in the 2010/11 Christmas blockade. The route clearance was achieved in autumn 2010, it reported to have been basically a paperwork exercise, with no changes needed to any of the infrastructure. Units were stabled at Selhurst for a few days.

 

[IanXC]

Agreed re: the 165/166s, but I was under the impression that 168s are "normal" body size so could run anywhere that a 170/171 does (ideal for plenty of places - 3/4 coach 100mph DMUs),

166s would be decent stock for Middlesbrough - Sunderland - Newcastle - Carlisle

Ah it was from memory, but thats even better! Perfect for cascading to franchises that currently run 170s in multiple.

To try to come a bit more back on topic, I'd like to mention the case for the Minsters Line. Hull-York via Beverley, those of you who have had the misfortune to see the state of the A1079, and who have seen how many packed buses run up and down all day know why its needed!

Proposal is for a 2 track railway with 2 tph service of (Hull-Cottingham-Beverley) Market Weighton - Pocklington- Stamford Bridge - Haxby - (York), which (in 2005) it was suggested would get annual usage of around 584,000, or 622,000 if 1 tph were extended to Leeds.

 

[The Planner]

Still think Bourne End - Wycombe is a pipe dream, a fair old bit of it is built on.

 

[tbtc]

168s aren't going anywhere. At least not until Chiltern electrification (which admittedly is quite high on Network Rail's wishlist).

True, though their suitability elsewhere is one reason I'd be in favour of wiring the Chiltern route (as well as the obvious extension of doing the Snow Hill lines with their frequent DMUs too).

 

[yorksrob]

I have to say it's about time. Norman Baker has been talking about re-opening Uckfield - Lewes for some time, so now he's in Government, it would be a very good place to start.

This idea always seems to come out when the politicians are trying to curry favour. I want to see actual track on the ground rather than more warm words. Until then it's very much in the "I'll believe it when I see it" file.

 

[ReverendFozz]

Would like to see the Leamside Line Re-Opened, although not for T&W Metro...Open as a new Tyne-Tees route and freight from Nissan and Tyne Dock.

Is the Stillington Line still open, as for a Tyne-Tees link it would probably go that way to Stockton

 

[Drsatan]

I have to say it's about time. Norman Baker has been talking about re-opening Uckfield - Lewes for some time, so now he's in Government, it would be a very good place to start.

This idea always seems to come out when the politicians are trying to curry facour. I want to see actual track on the ground rather than more warm words. Until then it's very much in the "I'll believe it when I see it" file.

Aye, many of these reopenings have been discussed for years and then shelved. I think someone proposed reopening Brockenhurst to Ringwood (the formation is largely intact) a few years ago but that's been shelved, along with Uckfield-Lewes which I think either the DfT or NR said there'd be no business case for. One candidate for reopening Norman Baker hasn't mentioned is Totton - Hythe. The track's still intact, the stations at Marchwood and Hythe are still intact and there are far fewer trains to Fawley oil refinery than there used to be since most of the refinery's products are now distributed by pipeline or road tanker, so it would be a lot easier to path an hourly passenger service from Platform 5 at Southampton Central to Hythe.

 

[sprinterguy]

Would like to see the Leamside Line Re-Opened, although not for T&W Metro...Open as a new Tyne-Tees route and freight from Nissan and Tyne Dock.

Is the Stillington Line still open, as for a Tyne-Tees link it would probably go that way to Stockton

Yeah the Stillington line is still used by freight traffic. The Leamside line should definitely be reopened as a heavy rail route, although running trains from Tyne Dock over the route would require a reversal at Pelaw which recently stopped being the practice for the regular GBRf coal traffic from Tyne Dock with the reopening of the south curve at Boldon colliery.

 

[Morgsie]

Aye, many of these reopenings have been discussed for years and then shelved. I think someone proposed reopening Brockenhurst to Ringwood (the formation is largely intact) a few years ago but that's been shelved, along with Uckfield-Lewes which I think either the DfT or NR said there'd be no business case for. One candidate for reopening Norman Baker hasn't mentioned is Totton - Hythe. The track's still intact, the stations at Marchwood and Hythe are still intact and there are far fewer trains to Fawley oil refinery than there used to be since most of the refinery's products are now distributed by pipeline or road tanker, so it would be a lot easier to path an hourly passenger service from Platform 5 at Southampton Central to Hythe.

ATOC Report named Connecting Communities Expanding Access to the Rail Network, 2009.

Agree about Lewes-Uckfield, didn't Theressa Villiers rule it out?

 

[Eagle]

ATOC Report named Connecting Communities Expanding Access to the Rail Network, 2009.

Voilà

Some of the reopenings in there are quite bluesky though, such as Brockenhurst to Ringwood/Wimborne, or de-heritagifying the East Lancs Railway.

 

[jones_bangor]

de-heritagifying the East Lancs Railway.

What is the score with a heritage railway...do Network Railway still own the trackbed and can effectively evict them?

I understand that the the trackbed from Caernarfon to Dinas on the WHR is still owned by Network Railway (as an example).

 

[142094]

Yeah the Stillington line is still used by freight traffic. The Leamside line should definitely be reopened as a heavy rail route, although running trains from Tyne Dock over the route would require a reversal at Pelaw which recently stopped being the practice for the regular GBRf coal traffic from Tyne Dock with the reopening of the south curve at Boldon colliery.

An E-S curve at Pelaw to link the Leamside line to the Durham Coast line might be vaguely possible - I'm sure most of the land nearby is just fields.

 

[Stats]

What is the score with a heritage railway...do Network Railway still own the trackbed and can effectively evict them?

Debated in Parliament last week. Current thinking is a joint operation with the heritage railway.

http://www.publications.parliament....20306/halltext/120306h0002.htm#12030628000333

 

[fsmr]

"Eventually, it is hoped, this could restore the “Varsity Line”, linking Oxford and Cambridge. "

Hmm lets think, cant see cambs allowing that to happen
some woolly brained councillors ripped the track up on their other dissused line between Huntingdon and Cambridge and stuck a 160 million quid of concrete bus lane in

Joined up thinking would have seen the railway go back as well as allowing ECML and Xcountry trains to access Cambridge via Huntingdon
Bit late now though

 

[Tomonthetrain]

Hmmm...I'd like to see the South Staffs line reopen, have OHLE (along with the Stourbridge Junction-Worcester bit & The Cotswoulds/Malverns) and operate with possibly 3 car desiros (New build of course!). That then provides a excuse to electrify Walsall - Rugeley TV/Sutton Park - Camp Hill - X City!

 

[AlanFry1]

What they should do is reopen railway lines that serve towns the are not currenly links to the rail network and maybe buying preserved lines like the Bluebell Railway and the North Norfolk Railway

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_towns_with_no_railway_station

 

[ntg]

Would be nice Swanage Railway partially de-heritaged. Already has charter trains travelling through from London and their aim is to operate a constant service as per the original form. It would certainly help de-isolate the town somewhat.