South Yorkshire Joint Line - Local MP Wants to reopen for passengers

[Harpers Tate]

MP delighted at rail company’s support for campaign to reopen line

ALEXANDER Stafford hailed Northern Rail’s support for reopening a line shut to passengers since 1929.

www.rotherhamadvertiser.co.uk

ALEXANDER Stafford hailed Northern Rail’s support for reopening a line shut to passengers since 1929.

The Rother Valley MP first called for the South Yorkshire Joint Railway to be brought back into action last March.

The Worksop to Doncaster line — via North and South Anston, Laughton Common, Dinnington and Maltby — has only carried freight since 1929.

But a £500 million government fund will aim to bring such lines — closed by the Beeching cuts — back into passenger use.

Mr Stafford, who has criticised public transport in the south of the borough, said: “I am delighted that Northern Rail have given their backing and support to the campaign.

“Northern Rail have recognised the benefit of reopening the line and what that will offer the community.

“The South Yorkshire Joint Railway offers the potential to provide greater access and opportunity to residents, boosting employment and education choices.”

He added: “The South Yorkshire Joint Railway will greatly improve connectivity and offer huge benefits to all residents, reducing carbon emissions and congestion on our roads.

“Rother Valley has long suffered from a lack of genuine transport links, and the chance to access funding will provide the opportunity to level up communities so that they can realise their potential.”

A spokesperson for Northern said: “We understand the desire to reopen the railway in South Yorkshire and would welcome conversations with interested parties to explore possible options.”

(See also this closed thread: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/south-yorkshire-joint-line-what-future.145151/)

Passenger services here went in 1930-odd but the settlements en route have all grown hugely since then and nowadays form substantial dormitory comminities for (mainly) Sheffield and Doncaster. If bus services are any indication of likely usage (and I don't claim any evidence on that one way or the other) in normal times Maltby has something like a 10 or 15 minute service to Rotherham and Sheffield and Dinnington/Anston would have 3x per hour Sheffield and 1/2 x per hour Rotherham.

 

[pdeaves]

The Worksop to Doncaster line — via North and South Anston, Laughton Common, Dinnington and Maltby — has only carried freight since 1929.

But a £500 million government fund will aim to bring such lines — closed by the Beeching cuts — back into passenger use.

Beeching made an impact, but not that much. The line closed when he was 16!

 

[Aictos]

Point of order, what is the business case like for reopening for passenger services?

We can't just reopen every bit of line just because the local MP wants it done, we have to be realistic and get the lines reopened that give us the best value for our money and if that means less lines reopening then so be it.

We have to concentrate on our existing lines and only consider reopenings to passenger services if it has a strong business case.

 

[wallan]

Extend the Nottingham - Worksop Service to Doncaster

 

[Llandudno]

Extend the Nottingham - Worksop Service to Doncaster

Or certainly to Retford.

 

[Whistler40145]

Extend the Nottingham - Worksop Service to Doncaster

If you run a service to Doncaster, is there a bay platform for terminating in?

 

[zwk500]

Point of order, what is the business case like for reopening for passenger services?

We can't just reopen every bit of line just because the local MP wants it done, we have to be realistic and get the lines reopened that give us the best value for our money and if that means less lines reopening then so be it.

We have to concentrate on our existing lines and only consider reopenings to passenger services if it has a strong business case.

Agree. If the demand is to Sheffield and there are already good bus links, as mentioned above, will the railway be able to capture that traffic given the likely journey length? I doubt it. Not to mention that the line itself is usually on the edge of most of these towns (no doubt because planning policy and house builders favoured the reduction in noise from the freight trains). If you'd need to get a bus or drive to the local station, you may as well just keep going into Doncaster.

If you run a service to Doncaster, is there a bay platform for terminating in?

Yes, Platform 5 is a south-facing bay, easily accessible from the West Slow Lines, 1 of which is reversible to allow the train in and out without touching the fast lines. Whether it's free when the train turns up and long enough for what would be running the service I don't know.

 

[_toommm_]

Agree. If the demand is to Sheffield and there are already good bus links, as mentioned above, will the railway be able to capture that traffic given the likely journey length? I doubt it. Not to mention that the line itself is usually on the edge of most of these towns (no doubt because planning policy and house builders favoured the reduction in noise from the freight trains). If you'd need to get a bus or drive to the local station, you may as well just keep going into Doncaster.

Yes, Platform 5 is a south-facing bay, easily accessible from the West Slow Lines, 1 of which is reversible to allow the train in and out without touching the fast lines. Whether it's free when the train turns up and long enough for what would be running the service I don't know.

Outside of COVID, you don't have a Sheffield to Doncaster occupying Platform 5 for most of the hour - IIRC, it's only the Doncaster to Lincoln EMR service that uses it normally. It's definitely long enough for two cars, maybe three, possibly four.

 

[backontrack]

I think there's a certain appeal in running to Doncaster, where there's such a breadth of ongoing connections.

I wonder if there's any scope for a platform at the road to Tickhill.

 

[Harpers Tate]

If this were ever to get beyond the aspirational level then the thing it would need (in my view) is reinstatement of the ~700 metres of track and pointwork that is the N <> W curve at Brancliffe to allow trains to run directly to/from Sheffield (as opposed to Worksop etc). I'm pretty convinced that is where the latent traffic demand (if any) would be, esp from the southern end of the route. Otherwise, with a reverse (or , worse, a change) at Worksop or Shireoaks it would probably take longer than the faster one of the (non covid) bus routes.

 

[zwk500]

Outside of COVID, you don't have a Sheffield to Doncaster occupying Platform 5 for most of the hour - IIRC, it's only the Doncaster to Lincoln EMR service that uses it normally. It's definitely long enough for two cars, maybe three, possibly four.

I thought the EMR used Platform 2 - it certainly could if it needed to (might need an extension though...)

If this were ever to get beyond the aspirational level then the thing it would need (in my view) is reinstatement of the ~700 metres of track and pointwork that is the N <> W curve at Brancliffe to allow trains to run directly to/from Sheffield (as opposed to Worksop etc). I'm pretty convinced that is where the latent traffic demand (if any) would be, esp from the southern end of the route. Otherwise, with a reverse (or , worse, a change) at Worksop or Shireoaks it would probably take longer than the faster one of the (non covid) bus routes.

Adding 2 extra junctions and building new track (don't be fooled by reinstatement - it will be considered a new railway and go through the same process as all the others) is going to put the cost up, but I agree that the business case won't be viable without direct Sheffield trains. It's too far away from the urban area for tram-trains to be a sensible option so there's not really a sensible alternative.

 

[_toommm_]

I thought the EMR used Platform 2 - it certainly could if it needed to (might need an extension though...)

Most of them use five at the minute. There were talk of it using two permanently but it would have to cross over blocking the ECML for a few minutes.

 

[zwk500]

Most of them use five at the minute. There were talk of it using two permanently but it would have to cross over blocking the ECML for a few minutes.

Anything into Platform 2 needs to use the East Slow, it wouldn't need to cross the fasts at all. Although 2 is only 2 cars I think, so that may be part of the thinking (or the step free interchange to Northbound services).

 

[_toommm_]

Anything into Platform 2 needs to use the East Slow, it wouldn't need to cross the fasts at all. Although 2 is only 2 cars I think, so that may be part of the thinking (or the step free interchange to Northbound services).

If it was coming from Gainsborough/Lincoln, surely it would have to crossover to get to platform two, as there is a flyover which takes it over to the other side of the station?

 

[zwk500]

If it was coming from Gainsborough/Lincoln, surely it would have to crossover to get to platform two, as there is a flyover which takes it over to the other side of the station?

It crosses immediately before the flyover and runs 'wrong road' down the East Slow. There is no crossover from the Down Fast to platform 1/2.

 

[_toommm_]

It crosses immediately before the flyover and runs 'wrong road' down the East Slow. There is no crossover from the Down Fast to platform 1/2.

Ah that explains that. I was looking on Traksy and couldn’t see if it was possible.

 

[55018ballymoss]

The simple answer is that this is pie in the sky stuff from the local MP. The idea of trying to flight a local service into Doncaster without any infrastructure enhancements (including possibly another platform) is a non starter.
At the moment the level of services to and from the iPort terminal at Rossington, as well as other freight and trip workings between Up Decoy and Belmont yards take up most of the capacity available, and if you were lucky enough to get a path to Doncaster station, without another platform, the service would have to be extended to Adwick (and start back from) to use the Skellow lines to turn back to avoid blocking Doncaster station.
I think a better and easier solution would be to extend the Nottingham - Worksop service to Retford. Maltby and Tickhill are not well served by the South Yorkshire line anyway (many miles from each, well outside walking catchment areas), and the buses you would have to use to get to them, you might as well stay on to Doncaster and make the modal change to rail there.

 

[Teaboy1]

Pie in sky I think.
Only way those stations at Tickhill, Maltby and Dinnington would work is if they were Park-and-Ride. They are simply too far away from the villages they serve. Passenger service failed due to lack of numbers [and WW1] back then and most likely will fail again.
Take for example the Park-and-Ride bus services from Rossington and Woodlands, they are virtually empty and never used as predicted.
Nice idea but a non runner imho.

 

[Llandudno]

Agree. If the demand is to Sheffield and there are already good bus links, as mentioned above, will the railway be able to capture that traffic given the likely journey length? I doubt it. Not to mention that the line itself is usually on the edge of most of these towns (no doubt because planning policy and house builders favoured the reduction in noise from the freight trains). If you'd need to get a bus or drive to the local station, you may as well just keep going into Doncaster.

Yes, Platform 5 is a south-facing bay, easily accessible from the West Slow Lines, 1 of which is reversible to allow the train in and out without touching the fast lines. Whether it's free when the train turns up and long enough for what would be running the service I don't know.

Good bus links in Sheffield and Doncaster areas...?

Most of the routes are operated by First, so I suspect the trains may do rather well!

 

[zwk500]

Good bus links in Sheffield and Doncaster areas...?

Most of the routes are operated by First, so I suspect the trains may do rather well!

I have no local knowledge or passing experience of the buses in the area, I was only going by what others had posted.

 

[tbtc]

Passenger services here went in 1930-odd but the settlements en route have all grown hugely since then and nowadays form substantial dormitory comminities for (mainly) Sheffield and Doncaster. If bus services are any indication of likely usage (and I don't claim any evidence on that one way or the other) in normal times Maltby has something like a 10 or 15 minute service to Rotherham and Sheffield and Dinnington/Anston would have 3x per hour Sheffield and 1/2 x per hour Rotherham.

Agree. If the demand is to Sheffield and there are already good bus links, as mentioned above, will the railway be able to capture that traffic given the likely journey length? I doubt it.

The main bus services from Dinington and Maltby are west towards Rotherham and Sheffield rather than north to Doncaster, so re-opening a railway line would be more about "ticking a box so that we can say that we've put these towns on the map" rather than "actually giving local people a service in the direction that they'd want to go in".

Not the only proposal like this - e.g. there's occasionally a thread suggesting that we put Forfar back on the rail network by re-opening the line from Perth towards Aberdeen, which ignores the fact that the demand from Forfar is significantly more for Dundee than Aberdeen and Perth combined - it'd be a box ticking exercise - I'm sure the local MP will want to be seen to encourage that kind of spending - the first Tory in what used to be a traditional Labour seat - so probably keen to show some largesse being extended towards a "red wall"/ "blue wall" seat.

I've colleagues who live in the seat - it's gone from being "traditional mining villages" to "lots of new housing estates convenient for the M1/ A57/ Sheffield Parkway etc" - it's an interesting neck of the woods - possibly a future "bellwether" seat.

The philosopher Julian Baggini wrote an interesting book called "Welcome To Everytown" about the S66 postcode area around Maltby (which is the English "average" in many demographics - urban and rural, old and young, that kind of thing) - it's a combination of old and new (Victorian terraces and modern semis, pensioners who worked in heavy industry like steel and Generation X who might not have a connection to where they now live but it's convenient for commuting to white collar jobs elsewhere) but the main demand is for Sheffield and Rotherham rather than Doncaster

The (pre-Covid) buses were as follows:

• Maltby to Rotherham - six buses per hour - the X1 and X10 - the X1 continues to Meadowhall and Sheffield
• Maltby to Sheffield - two buses per hour - the X1 (there was the regular X7 via the Parkway but I think that's now scrapped)
• Dinnington to Rotherham - the Stagecoach 19s were four per hour but I think two of them now only run Thurcroft to Rotherham?)
• Dinnington to Sheffield - three buses per hour plus peak extras - the X5/X55 (the 208 was recently cut back to only Whiston to Sheffield)

...whereas Doncaster has no buses to Dinnington (the 18 was cut back to just Hellaby - Maltby - Doncaster every hour) and the main service from Maltby to Doncaster (the 10) is essentially just a way of covering the gap between the Doncaster town services (as far as Edlington) and the local Rotherham services (i.e. Maltby to Rotherham) when First were looking at closing the Midland Road depot - it's more there for operational convenience (since Doncaster drivers cover a significant proportion of local Rotherham services) than significant demand.

I think a better and easier solution would be to extend the Nottingham - Worksop service to Retford

Agreed.

If people want to improve connections from North Nottinghamshire to the ECML then you'd only need an extra DMU or two to mean a half hourly Mansfield - Retford service - but modest suggestions don't generate media attention whereas you know that a compliant journalist will publish your eye catching suggestion that we re-open some long abandoned route that doesn't really serve intermediate places very well and doesn't link them to the main places that the people who live there want to commute to.

 

[Martin23230]

It's too far away from the urban area for tram-trains to be a sensible option so there's not really a sensible alternative.

Actually back in 2004 when extending the Supertram was considered one of the proposals went east as far as Hellaby (see below), so within a stone's throw of Maltby. Obviously that never happened, but it does backup tbtc's point that these towns generally look west towards Sheffield/Rotherham rather than north to Doncaster.

Back to the present, and SYPTE's plans for the tram-train are to eventually have it extend from Rotherham as far as Doncaster and through to the airport, so it's not impossible that this line could also be considered for tram-trains. Actually getting the crayons out tram-trains would work well for a line like this, which as previous posters have already pointed out passes rather far from the main towns. If you run tram-trains on it you could use the old alignment in the countryside but then swing off through the centre of places like Maltby and Dinnington with new tram lines on the roads. There's no way the funds would be available for that though.

Finally it's also worth remembering that there's already a similar scheme in South Yorkshire on the other side of the M1 - reinstating services on the Barrow Hill line between Sheffield and Chesterfield - which was actually picked as part of the "Restoring Your Railway" Fund. So I'd think that's another factor working against anything this proposal.

 

[johnnychips]

There is a half-hourly service from Worksop to Doncaster - stagecoach 22 - which would suggest a demand, but really this serves two flows: Worksop to Carlton and Langold; and Doncaster to Wadworth and Tickhill. The bit in the middle carries largely fresh air. Former stations at Tickhill and Maltby are past the edges of town, then you have the problem of trying to get trains in and out of Doncaster. Non-starter.

 

[Kite159]

If people want to improve connections from North Nottinghamshire to the ECML then you'd only need an extra DMU or two to mean a half hourly Mansfield - Retford service - but modest suggestions don't generate media attention whereas you know that a compliant journalist will publish your eye catching suggestion that we re-open some long abandoned route that doesn't really serve intermediate places very well and doesn't link them to the main places that the people who live there want to commute to.

Although in this case the line is still open, but for freight only, so better than some of the pie in the sky suggestions which get thrown up

And having done it a couple times on railtours over the last few years, I recall if isn't the fastest so would need more money thrown at it to upgrade to passenger standard allowing a faster journey.

As for Mansfield isn't there a wish to extend those to Ollerton in the future?

 

[zwk500]

Actually back in 2004 when extending the Supertram was considered one of the proposals went east as far as Hellaby (see below), so within a stone's throw of Maltby. Obviously that never happened, but it does backup tbtc's point that these towns generally look west towards Sheffield/Rotherham rather than north to Doncaster.

Back to the present, and SYPTE's plans for the tram-train are to eventually have it extend from Rotherham as far as Doncaster and through to the airport, so it's not impossible that this line could also be considered for tram-trains. Actually getting the crayons out tram-trains would work well for a line like this, which as previous posters have already pointed out passes rather far from the main towns. If you run tram-trains on it you could use the old alignment in the countryside but then swing off through the centre of places like Maltby and Dinnington with new tram lines on the roads. There's no way the funds would be available for that though.

Just because something's been proposed doesn't mean it's a sensible option.

Finally it's also worth remembering that there's already a similar scheme in South Yorkshire on the other side of the M1 - reinstating services on the Barrow Hill line between Sheffield and Chesterfield - which was actually picked as part of the "Restoring Your Railway" Fund. So I'd think that's another factor working against anything this proposal.

It's also worth pointing out that the Barrow Hill line is already double track, used by through freight and passenger services on a regular basis. Apart from the stations, the track itself does not need any major intervention to bring back passenger services. And the line itself passes through the settlements it's proposed to serve.

 

[backontrack]

I think the best way to serve these places would be to reinstate the curve and run Sheffield-Dinnington-Maltby-Tickhill-Bircotes.

 

[zwk500]

I think the best way to serve these places would be to reinstate the curve and run Sheffield-Dinnington-Maltby-Tickhill-Bircotes.

As in best way to serve these places by rail or best way to serve the travel demand of the population of these places?