Old Yard Dog
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Aug 2011
- Messages
- 1,485
The development of railways has in many cases been constrained by geography and in many cases journeys would be much quicker if line builders did not have to take circuitous routes.
Routes such as Hull - Grimsby, West Kirby - Rhyl, Southend - Canterbury, Swansea - Ilfracombe or Skegness - Kings Lynn could have been built if it wasn't for the prohibitive cost of crossing wide estuaries.
But what about purely inland routes? In my opinion, a main line between Hellifield and Darlington would cut a huge amount of time on journeys from Manchester and Liverpool to the north east. But of course that would have meant building through hill and dale across a beautiful part of Yorkshire. Instead passengers have to make a huge detour via York (or Carlisle).
What other routes could have been built if the environment didn't matter and money was no object?
Routes such as Hull - Grimsby, West Kirby - Rhyl, Southend - Canterbury, Swansea - Ilfracombe or Skegness - Kings Lynn could have been built if it wasn't for the prohibitive cost of crossing wide estuaries.
But what about purely inland routes? In my opinion, a main line between Hellifield and Darlington would cut a huge amount of time on journeys from Manchester and Liverpool to the north east. But of course that would have meant building through hill and dale across a beautiful part of Yorkshire. Instead passengers have to make a huge detour via York (or Carlisle).
What other routes could have been built if the environment didn't matter and money was no object?