Transport Secretary to announce study into re-opening of line between Skipton and Lancashire

[deltic08]

There are so many competing requirements for available money. New stations, new lines, reopenings, Electrification etc. I suppose we all have our biases but to get back On Topic, my personal view is that this scheme would be lower down the priority list.

Also imho on topic, I have no problem with studies - call it GRIP 0 if you like - so many cases throughout the country. Do studies for them all then make the decision based on BCR and PVR ( potential votes ratio) - tongue only slightly in cheek

I believe this will be GRIP 3 as 1 and 2 have already been done.
Estimate of reinstatement cost is £10m/mile. Value for money I say as this is cheaper than improving the road between Skipton and Colne.

 

[Rail Ranger]

Blackburn-Manchester via Bolton went half-hourly in December 2017.

 

[Bevan Price]

Yes - it was a mistake to close Colne - Skipton, but now can we justify the cost of reopening ?

Skipton is not a huge town, and the preferred destinations for local residents are probably Bradford & Leeds rather than Burnley, Blackburn or Manchester. I doubt that there would be enough regular / commuter traffic to support a railway.

Between Colne & Skipton, the only largish settlement is Barnoldswick - not served by the direct rail route, and too small to justify reopening the branch to/from Earby - and Earby itself is too small to generate a lot of passenger traffic.

Burnley already has trains to Bradford, Leeds & Manchester, no advantage to people going via Skipton instead. Colne & Nelson are probably not large enough to generate large numbers of regular travellers to Skipton & beyond. Occasional surges of passengers visiting Skipton Market will not support the cost of a railway. As posted above, a semi-fast service from Colne/Burnley would be a worthwhile improvement, but possibly going to Bolton & Manchester rather than Preston or Blackpool.

Freight ? What freight ? Since the end of coal mining and closure of power stations, there is no freight originating in the Burnley / Colne area. About the only regular freight in the area is the Lindsey/Preston tanks, typically once or twice a week, and adequately served by the Copy Pit route.

Freight traffic through Blackburn to the north is adequately served by the Hellifield line - and in any case has declined due to loss of coal traffic to power stations. So I fear it will be very difficult to get money to reopen Colne - Skipton.

 

[furnessvale]

Freight ? What freight ? Since the end of coal mining and closure of power stations, there is no freight originating in the Burnley / Colne area. About the only regular freight in the area is the Lindsey/Preston tanks, typically once or twice a week, and adequately served by the Copy Pit route.

Freight traffic through Blackburn to the north is adequately served by the Hellifield line - and in any case has declined due to loss of coal traffic to power stations. So I fear it will be very difficult to get money to reopen Colne - Skipton.

Why do people immediately jump in about originating traffic, be it freight or passenger, when through traffic from elsewhere can be more relevant.

I suggest you read the press release issued by Drax Power.

 

[edwin_m]

The provision of an alternative freight route is the only part of this idea which lifts it above crayonista level. I know it should never have been shut, but its reinstatement will be horrendously expensive.

Is there that much need for freight? I note also that any freight running via Skipton-Colne continuing south or east of Leeds would have to run through Leeds station and via Micklefield or across the entire station and via Woodlesford. It would also involve at the very least extra loops between Rose Grove and Colne, more likely full re-doubling. The alternative Copy Pit route has none of these disadvantages, although it does use the main Transpennine line for a short distance through Mirfield.

 

[furnessvale]

Is there that much need for freight? I note also that any freight running via Skipton-Colne continuing south or east of Leeds would have to run through Leeds station and via Micklefield or across the entire station and via Woodlesford. It would also involve at the very least extra loops between Rose Grove and Colne, more likely full re-doubling. The alternative Copy Pit route has none of these disadvantages, although it does use the main Transpennine line for a short distance through Mirfield.

Although you would need to station a banker at Copy Pit or substantially reduce train weights if the biomass was to be routed that way.

 

[158756]

Lets look at the traffic the line could serve.

Earby: Population 4500. Would struggle to justify if the line was still open.

Skipton-Lancashire: Some demand, but doesn't involve any major population centres. Railways in the North really struggle on such routes - see the service between Colne and Preston.

Skipton - Manchester: Would probably take around 90 minutes with a change. Not likely to create huge numbers of passengers.

Lancashire-Yorkshire: Really Nelson and Colne to Yorkshire. From Burnley and beyond to Bradford and Leeds would no faster than the Calder Valley. Probably an hour's journey to Leeds, again not going to be huge numbers of passengers. Driving to Steeton & Silsden would still be quicker. Probably no better than the bus for travel to Airedale Hospital, a major destination for travel from Colne to Yorkshire.

Freight: Looking at last Wednesday as an example, Drax had 25 arrivals - so an hourly path on the Calder Valley would do, and some of them are presumably coal, with two units not currently planned for biomass conversion. Plus overnight they can run via Huddersfield. If they won't all fit through Manchester they can use the Copy Pit route. Running round at Hellifield would avoid the Transpennine route altogether. If they want more they can provide a financial contribution to the project.

 

[Bevan Price]

Freight: Looking at last Wednesday as an example, Drax had 25 arrivals - so an hourly path on the Calder Valley would do, and some of them are presumably coal, with two units not currently planned for biomass conversion. Plus overnight they can run via Huddersfield. If they won't all fit through Manchester they can use the Copy Pit route. Running round at Hellifield would avoid the Transpennine route altogether. If they want more they can provide a financial contribution to the project.

25 trains - but only 5 of those crossed the Pennines from Liverpool. The others came from places like Immingham, Tyne Yard, North Blyth, etc., and went nowhere near cross-pennine routes.

 

[158756]

25 trains - but only 5 of those crossed the Pennines from Liverpool. The others came from places like Immingham, Tyne Yard, North Blyth, etc., and went nowhere near cross-pennine routes.

I know, I was considering their potential demand if as they say traffic to Liverpool is to grow. I think biomass requires more trains than coal for the same amount of electricity, but only one of the three remaining coal units is planned for that conversion, and that is only planned to operate to meet peak capacity requirements so will require less wood than the existing units.

 

[snowball]

Incidentally it has been announced (yesterday I think) that Eggborough power station will close, having failed to win a contract to act as a top-up next winter.

 

[158756]

Eggborough's coal appears to be coming from Redcar and Killoch in Ayrshire, 1-3 trains per day. It appears to be Killoch's only rail traffic, so without a new customer Ayrshire's coal industry may be very near it's end.

 

[deltic08]

Lets look at the traffic the line could serve.

Freight: Looking at last Wednesday as an example, Drax had 25 arrivals - so an hourly path on the Calder Valley would do, and some of them are presumably coal, with two units not currently planned for biomass conversion. Plus overnight they can run via Huddersfield. If they won't all fit through Manchester they can use the Copy Pit route. Running round at Hellifield would avoid the Transpennine route altogether. If they want more they can provide a financial contribution to the project.

It is creating another trans Pennine route without steep gradients for freight flows of biomass from Liverpool to Drax. Less steep gradients produces greater payload for a given traction and cheaper unit price to the generating company. As someone has already mentioned, biomass has less than half the calorific value of coal so at least twice the amount of biomass is required by weight to generate the same amount of electricity.
Look up the report published June 2017 of the multimodal corridor study between Burnley and Skipton. The business case for reinstating the railway was as good as the case for extending the M65 motorway to Skipton and down the Aire Valley.

 

[deltic08]

Is there that much need for freight? I note also that any freight running via Skipton-Colne continuing south or east of Leeds would have to run through Leeds station and via Micklefield or across the entire station and via Woodlesford. It would also involve at the very least extra loops between Rose Grove and Colne, more likely full re-doubling. The alternative Copy Pit route has none of these disadvantages, although it does use the main Transpennine line for a short distance through Mirfield.

The gradient of Copy Pit is a huge obstacle to heavy freight trains. Why would loops at Rose Grove be needed for via Skipton any more than via Copy Pit? Illogical.
Yes redoubling if increase in traffic justifies this? Again illogical.
42 coal trains daily were routed off the Aire Valley line onto the Woodlesford route and as many return empties, so why not biomass trains from Skipton now coal traffic has reduced? Your argument against reinstating Skipton-Colne is frail. Your prejudice towards reinstatement is obvious. Have you considered a job in the DfT?

 

[158756]

The gradient of Copy Pit is a huge obstacle to heavy freight trains. Why would loops at Rose Grove be needed for via Skipton any more than via Copy Pit? Illogical.
Yes redoubling if increase in traffic justifies this? Again illogical.
42 coal trains daily were routed off the Aire Valley line onto the Woodlesford route and as many return empties, so why not biomass trains from Skipton now coal traffic has reduced? Your argument against reinstating Skipton-Colne is frail. Your prejudice towards reinstatement is obvious. Have you considered a job in the DfT?

You'd need loops if the freight went via Colne because the line is single track, whereas Copy Pit isn't. That wouldn't be a massive issue though - a length of a third track still exists at Rose Grove which was the start of the branch to Padiham power station (originally the line to Blackburn via Great Harwood).

I am very sceptical of any benefits from freight. The trains already run. 1 more generating unit will switch. That will not require more trains than the existing network can accommodate. The new line would not generate new traffic. It may well be that if built, trains to Drax would travel via Colne and Skipton, but the benefit to the general public of them going that way rather than the existing route would be negligible. Peel want it for flexibility and speed. They already have the choice of multiple routes, speed is solely of benefit to Peel. As I've said already if they want Colne-Skipton they can pay for it. They could also fork out a few quid for an extra loco for Copy Pit if they want, or to faff around with a reversal.

Having a better case than an Aire Valley motorway isn't a high bar to clear. The chance of one ever being built is nil. If Colne wants it's traffic problems sorted they should just have a simple bypass, but even that can't get funding.

Building the new line would cost a lot of money, for which there are many competing demands. If it happened trains from Skipton would probably stop at my local station. I must however recognise that realistically, only exceptional schemes, or political schemes, which this might be moving towards, will get funding. Maybe someone will make the sums add up one day.

 

[philthetube]

Lets look at the traffic the line could serve.


Skipton-Lancashire: Some demand, but doesn't involve any major population centres. Railways in the North really struggle on such routes - see the service between Colne and Preston.

Skipton - Manchester: Would probably take around 90 minutes with a change. Not likely to create huge numbers of passengers.

Skipton Leeds?

Why with a change? could be direct Leeds or Bradford Manchester

 

[158756]

In terms of what missing structures and other problems there are, easy problems to fix would be the sports pitch on the trackbed in Colne, gardens on the line in Foulridge, farm access tracks near Broughton and a couple of small industrial sheds. More expensive would be bridging Vivary Way in Colne, the Aire, and getting under the A629 at Skipton (this last one in particular). The biggest problem looks to be that if level crossings are out, the route through Earby is near unusable. On the existing lines, I don't know what state Burnley and Colne viaducts are in, whether their current condition is suitable for heavy freight.

 

[158756]

Skipton Leeds?

Why with a change? could be direct Leeds or Bradford Manchester

Skipton-Leeds has the big draw of Leeds at the end. The area is quite well off by Northern standards and the roads very congested. It is exactly the sort of route where rail does relatively well, though still not spectacularly by national standards. Burnley doesn't have quite the same appeal.

You could run through trains to Manchester but it's still 18 minutes Colne-Rose Grove, ~5 for reversal, 50 Rose Grove- Manchester (when stops South of Rochdale are removed), so 73+ however long Colne - Skipton takes.

 

[PR1Berske]

A thread on here about reopening turned me from major support to luke-warm. The cost was the killer argument for me: while I prefer focusing on local rail infrastructure projects and think the DfT should too, the money required in this case turned me off from believing that it's justified.

I'd be very surprised if it's reopened at all

 

[yorksrob]

A thread on here about reopening turned me from major support to luke-warm. The cost was the killer argument for me: while I prefer focusing on local rail infrastructure projects and think the DfT should too, the money required in this case turned me off from believing that it's justified.

I'd be very surprised if it's reopened at all

Personally, I'd say the lack of re-openings whilst use of the railways has been booming, has been the most crushing disappointment of the last twenty years.

 

[lejog]

Is there that much need for freight? I note also that any freight running via Skipton-Colne continuing south or east of Leeds would have to run through Leeds station and via Micklefield or across the entire station and via Woodlesford. It would also involve at the very least extra loops between Rose Grove and Colne, more likely full re-doubling. The alternative Copy Pit route has none of these disadvantages, although it does use the main Transpennine line for a short distance through Mirfield.

42 coal trains daily were routed off the Aire Valley line onto the Woodlesford route and as many return empties, so why not biomass trains from Skipton now coal traffic has reduced? Your argument against reinstating Skipton-Colne is frail. Your prejudice towards reinstatement is obvious. Have you considered a job in the DfT?

edwin_m is correct. Whatever happened in the past is not relevant to today with the current level of passenger services. An Aire Valley to Woodlesford service would be crossing passenger services from Huddersfield, Westgate and Bradford Interchange, about 20 tph in each direction from 2019, so a train around every 90seconds. As has been explained to you previously, an Aire Valley to Micklefield train would be crossing from lines A and B to lines C and D on the approaches to Leeds crossing trains from Westgate and Bradford Interchange - 12tph in each direction from 2019 or a train every 150secs.

 

[AndrewE]

An Aire Valley to Woodlesford service would be crossing passenger services from....

But if the freight route was really needed (rather than just being a temporary accident of current shipping and fuel use patterns) could a link not be put in so they can go from the Aire Valley via Outwood, Wakefield and Castleford?

 

[KevinTurvey]

There was quite a reasonable piece on this on BBC North West News last night, so now 10,000's more people will at least know about it. The figure of £100m was mentioned which seems quite cheap in infrastructure terms when compared to road improvements and regeneration budgets.

 

[bluenoxid]

Is this £100m a quantified figure or an inflationary figure pushed on to the unrealistic figures set out a number of years ago. Do we know what £100m will deliver.

It will be interesting to see how mainline costs would play against other forms of transport.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Why do people immediately jump in about originating traffic, be it freight or passenger, when through traffic from elsewhere can be more relevant.

I suggest you read the press release issued by Drax Power.

Instead of just reading the press release from Drax it would be more productive to critically assess it. There is absolutely no way biomass trains from Liverpool Docks – Drax via Colne & Skipton would take 3 hours. 5 – 6 hours more like and that isn’t much different to today.

 

[furnessvale]

Instead of just reading the press release from Drax it would be more productive to critically assess it. There is absolutely no way biomass trains from Liverpool Docks – Drax via Colne & Skipton would take 3 hours. 5 – 6 hours more like and that isn’t much different to today.

I agree the 3 hour figure is wishful thinking, but the main point is the availability of extra paths AND the ability to put existing trains on other routes as pressure mounts.

Of course, the alternative has been proposed by Lord Adonis, HGV platoons!

 

[lejog]

But if the freight route was really needed (rather than just being a temporary accident of current shipping and fuel use patterns) could a link not be put in so they can go from the Aire Valley via Outwood, Wakefield and Castleford?

Are you serious? What would the cost of any such a scheme be given that such a Chord/ Curve would have to built running above busy dual carriageways and the giant Wortley roundabout? And unless it were grade separated, which is unlikely to be possible, its still going to cross Bradford Interchange and Wakefield Westgate trains at a flat junction.

I've spent far too much of my life sitting in Calder Valley trains at red signals outside Leeds. I don't see why I should be expected to spend even more time there just so Drax can knock an hour or two off timings of their freight trains.

 

[Bertie the bus]

I agree the 3 hour figure is wishful thinking, but the main point is the availability of extra paths AND the ability to put existing trains on other routes as pressure mounts.

Of course, the alternative has been proposed by Lord Adonis, HGV platoons!

There is no need for additional freight paths across the north Pennines. There is virtually no freight.

I think the main thrust of Drax's argument is if the biomass trains were speeded up it would allow each train to make more round trips per day. As routing via Colne and Skipton wouldn't speed them up it would be pointless.

 

[furnessvale]

There is no need for additional freight paths across the north Pennines. There is virtually no freight.

I think the main thrust of Drax's argument is if the biomass trains were speeded up it would allow each train to make more round trips per day. As routing via Colne and Skipton wouldn't speed them up it would be pointless.

Could this be chicken and egg? Just look at the convoluted paths that have been generated to accommodate the handful of biomass trains on offer. More biomass may be on offer when Drax converts more coal to biomass. What chance Liverpool Port expansion plans, including the use of rail?

 

[Bertie the bus]

No I don’t believe it is chicken and egg. I simply don’t believe there is a vast amount of freight waiting to transfer to rail. Firstly, DRS trialled a Ditton – Tees Port intermodal. It lasted a few months. Secondly, not Pennine related but relevant, when the HS2 case was being developed one of the main points was it would create more freight paths. It was stated at the time that if FOCs used electric traction on WCML freights that would also free up paths for additional freight. Since this analysis was done Freightliner, DRS and DBC have all switched to using electric traction on Daventry – Scotland intermodals. There are no more services now than when they used diesel traction.

 

[deltic08]

edwin_m is correct. Whatever happened in the past is not relevant to today with the current level of passenger services. An Aire Valley to Woodlesford service would be crossing passenger services from Huddersfield, Westgate and Bradford Interchange, about 20 tph in each direction from 2019, so a train around every 90seconds. As has been explained to you previously, an Aire Valley to Micklefield train would be crossing from lines A and B to lines C and D on the approaches to Leeds crossing trains from Westgate and Bradford Interchange - 12tph in each direction from 2019 or a train every 150secs.

I didn't mention Micklefield at all. You imagined that one. Coal trains off the Settle-Carlisle to Yorkshire power stations have been accommodated at more than two an hour through the Leeds outskirts for years until very recently. Biomass traffic would replace reduced coal traffic paths.