When the heritage line is in the way...

[InterCity:125]

What happens when a heritage railway has opened on an old line then network rail decide to re-open it?

 

[Ianno87]

I don't think that has ever happened.

In most/all cases, the line is no longer in Network Rail ownership, so it's not up to them to reopen it. Usually, if there is a traffic need on the line, it's an opportunity for the railway concerned to make some money by selling access to (say) freight trains for a specific flow.

 

[pdeaves]

Studies, business cases, funding bids, legislation, etc. It's never simple choice to 'just do such-and-such'.

 

[bluenoxid]

It is very unlikely that just Network Rail would want to reopen a railway line. There is usually a customer or major stakeholder who wants to reopen the railway line for certain traffic.

 

[yorksrob]

Reopenings are so woefully rare, the situation hasn't arisen.

 

[Tobbes]

There have been some cases of freight coming on/off the heritage lines (e.g., Mid-Norfolk, Eden Valley at Warcop, sea defenses at Minehead on WSR, others?). Swanage or West Somerset could ultimately host regular timetabled passenger services, I suppose, but that may or may not require purchase by NR.

Presumably if it were to happen, it would be a negotiation or a CPO (as well as the ultimate compliment to and vindication of the preservationists!) I guess it what NR would be acquiring is essentially the solum and some structures, but any serious reopening would entail a substantial rebuild to move from 25mph to 75/100mph with new signalling and potentially electrification.

Which lines were you thinking of? Lavender Line for Lewes-Uckfield is the only one I can think which would be required for a reinstatement campaign that is regularly spoken of resulting in reincorporation into the national network. Unless you want to rebuild Peterborough - Wellingborough - Northampton or something.

 

[The_Train]

Isn't there a case at the moment of a heritage line being used for storage of mainline units? Vaguely remember reading it somewhere (probably on here) and the Norfolk area comes to mind but can't be sure.

 

[pdeaves]

Isn't there a case at the moment of a heritage line being used for storage of mainline units? Vaguely remember reading it somewhere (probably on here) and the Norfolk area comes to mind but can't be sure.

Yes, Mid-Norfolk Railway at Wymondham.

 

[Ianno87]

It is very unlikely that just Network Rail would want to reopen a railway line. There is usually a customer or major stakeholder who wants to reopen the railway line for certain traffic.

It's not really Network Rail's purpose or remit. Route Studies are focused on developing future capacity requirements on the existing network, not reopenings (unless it happened to be a way of meeting a strategic need that is a better case than an intervention on the existing railway).

Re-openings are usually locally pushed, chosen for funding by DfT/WAG/Transport Scotland if a decemt case exists.

Re-openings may be *delivered* by Network Rail (e.g. Airdire-Bathgate, Borders), but to a client (Transport Scotland in these cases)

 

[Spartacus]

I can't really see any lines being of THAT much use that they'd need to be bought out, they'd have to have quite a extensive potential passenger flow for that to happen, for freight it's easy for operators to just run on the heritage line metals, and their flows so far tend to be either short term or of a pretty occasional nature.

Even two that are sometimes talked of, involving Peak Rail and the Gwili, are I think pretty unlikely.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

Okehampton is an interesting case - one the snags getting a trial weekday service up and running is the ownership of the line from Coleford Jcn by Aggregate Industries (former operators of the now moribund Meldon Quarry). AI are unwilling to sell in case the quarry is reactivated, so it is unclear how this is going to be resolved - maybe Network Rail will have to resort to a CPO?

Another possible Devon example was the suggestion by ATOC, as then was, for a extension of Paignton services to Churston over the Dartmouth Steam Rly (is that its name this year?) to act as P&R for Brixham. Given the chronic traffic congestion in the Torbay area (all-year round these days) I would like to see the whole line used for commuter traffic - unlike many heritage lines it is a very useful transport link.

 

[Tim R-T-C]

I imagine, if there was a sufficient business case, then the heritage line would be able to run services and add to its coffers, or allow a private firm to run services along the route.

There has been suggestion many times of opening the KWVR for commuter services, possibly using a Class 139 type vehicle, for example. However, it has always come to nothing, so whatever obstacles there were, were too great for the financial benefit expected.

 

[trash80]

Didn't Chiltern want to run services through to Bewdley? The problem is the gulf between a heritage line which is run by volunteers as a hobby and a daily service people need to be running for their commute is very large.

 

[MarkyT]

Another possible Devon example was the suggestion by ATOC, as then was, for a extension of Paignton services to Churston over the Dartmouth Steam Rly (is that its name this year?) to act as P&R for Brixham. Given the chronic traffic congestion in the Torbay area (all-year round these days) I would like to see the whole line used for commuter traffic - unlike many heritage lines it is a very useful transport link.

I agree but probably a peak only service, outside the normal steam operating hours in the high summer, as the single line is effectively full when the 45 minute interval tourist service runs. There might be an arrangement for local residents in possession of an appropriate card to be able to use the steam service at the same price as the early morning and evening diesel service, or (horror of horrors!) inter-availability of such tickets on parallel buses during the day. Dartmouth Steam Railway is unusual in having centralised colour light signalling control, with only one member of signalling staff required on duty at Britannia Crossing to run a full timetable. A couple of early morning local Exmouth trains starting back at Kingswear and maybe an hourly extension of Paignton terminators in the evening until 20:00ish and then a single later one around 22:00ish that could form a nice after meal or pub return to Torbay and beyond. Note however there are currently no local buses to Kingswear from Brixham or Paignton after about 18:30 in the evening since Stagecoach removed them as uneconomic. Despite there being plenty of characterful pubs and good restaurants in Dartmouth it appears there's no demand for bus travel to and from the town in the evening so perhaps there would be no demand for trains services either.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

There's been various freight flows that used heritage railways in the past, I have a vague memory of a long-lost service on the Bodmin and Wenford (was it Fitzgerald Lighting?) which was hauled by heritage diesels as far as the exchange sidings at Bodmin Parkway before a (may even have been BR days) mainline loco took the wagons onwards.

One issue with using heritage lines is that mainline freight often runs at night, when the heritage line's (often volunteer) signallers and staff aren't working.

 

[Clayton]

I agree but probably a peak only service, outside the normal steam operating hours in the high summer, as the single line is effectively full when the 45 minute interval tourist service runs. There might be an arrangement for local residents in possession of an appropriate card to be able to use the steam service at the same price as the early morning and evening diesel service, or (horror of horrors!) inter-availability of such tickets on parallel buses during the day. Dartmouth Steam Railway is unusual in having centralised colour light signalling control, with only one member of signalling staff required on duty at Britannia Crossing to run a full timetable. A couple of early morning local Exmouth trains starting back at Kingswear and maybe an hourly extension of Paignton terminators in the evening until 20:00ish and then a single later one around 22:00ish that could form a nice after meal or pub return to Torbay and beyond. Note however there are currently no local buses to Kingswear from Brixham or Paignton after about 18:30 in the evening since Stagecoach removed them as uneconomic. Despite there being plenty of characterful pubs and good restaurants in Dartmouth it appears there's no demand for bus travel to and from the town in the evening so perhaps there would be no demand for trains services either.

No demand for buses to Dartmouth in the evening? Well, I’m sure a decent service would be used. But maybe not enough to make Stagecoach a profit. What a way to run public transport!

 

[deltic08]

There is a muted campaign to rejoin Ilkley to Skipton via Addingham. This would mean buying the Embsay line or building a route alongside as far as the junction with the Grassington line.

 

[satisnek]

I'm sure there was something a few years ago about putting Rossendale (i.e. Rawtenstall) back on the National Rail map, which makes the East Lancs vulnerable (although that's probably too strong a word in practice). Of all heritage lines, I would think it's the one which serves the most populous area, after all.

 

[Accura]

Seems to work okay for the weekly bitumen train on the Ribble Steam Railway, but I believe a company was set up to haul the train for the last section of its run.

 

[The Ham]

There could be a selection of options:
- build on a new alignment (given the likely level of work required to improve the existing route this may not be that much more, except into urban areas)
- upgrade key parts of the line to allow both to run (would probably require a new signal system which was controllable remotely by NR so that services could run outside of operating hours of the heritage line)
- build a new alignment for party of the way and then just share the line in the areas where it would be costly to build a new line (

 

[Steptoe]

Isn't there a case at the moment of a heritage line being used for storage of mainline units? Vaguely remember reading it somewhere (probably on here) and the Norfolk area comes to mind but can't be sure.

There is a thread about this in the heritage section:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-rolling-stock-on-mid-norfolk-railway.166542/

 

[adamedwards]

The Ordsall Curve took out the main line connection for the Manchester Museum of Science and Industry. Parliamentary approval and payments sorted it all out. So I would think this would be a likely model for other lines.

 

[Ianno87]

The Ordsall Curve took out the main line connection for the Manchester Museum of Science and Industry. Parliamentary approval and payments sorted it all out. So I would think this would be a likely model for other lines.

Good example - hadn't thought of that one! Did Ordsall Chord actually acquire land from MoSI, or was the compensation purely for severance of its main line access/shortening of the internal demonstration line?

 

[edwin_m]

There have been some cases of freight coming on/off the heritage lines (e.g., Mid-Norfolk, Eden Valley at Warcop, sea defenses at Minehead on WSR, others?).

Freight trains access the gypsum plant at East Leake over the GCR(N) from Loughborough. There have also been numerous railtours to or from heritage lines including Minehead, Alton, East Lancs. Not to mention the NYMR Whitby service. So it's entirely possible to run passenger trains although all of them have been aimed at tourists rather than regular travellers.

I'm sure there was something a few years ago about putting Rossendale (i.e. Rawtenstall) back on the National Rail map, which makes the East Lancs vulnerable (although that's probably too strong a word in practice). Of all heritage lines, I would think it's the one which serves the most populous area, after all.

I did a feasiblilty study into this about 10 years ago. It would be a peak-hour commuter service such as MarkyT suggested above, but it's difficult to make the economics stack up on this basis.

 

[gg1]

Most heritage lines are single track, if there was a genuine business case for adding the line or a section of it to the national network, doubling the line (assuming the original alignment pre-closure was double track) would generally solve the capacity issues.

Bewdley is a possibility on this basis, helped infrastructure wise by the fact the Bewdley station has 3 platform when the SVR only actually needs 2.

 

[diffident]

Didn't Chiltern want to run services through to Bewdley? The problem is the gulf between a heritage line which is run by volunteers as a hobby and a daily service people need to be running for their commute is very large.

I believe in the not too distant pass that test runs were made up and down the SVR with 168's.

 

[MarkyT]

Most heritage lines are single track, if there was a genuine business case for adding the line or a section of it to the national network, doubling the line (assuming the original alignment pre-closure was double track) would generally solve the capacity issues.

Bewdley is a possibility on this basis, helped infrastructure wise by the fact the Bewdley station has 3 platform when the SVR only actually needs 2.

I don't think this line was ever double apart from a short section where sidings ran alongside at the Kidderminster end. It looks like the viaduct over the River Stour and canal may have been built with widening in mind however but Bewdley Tunnel was definitely only ever single. The single track might suffice however for an hourly National Rail service as long as that section was under NR signalling control, but I wouldn't want colour lights to take over Bewdley station as the SVRs most interesting signalling installation with its two boxes and AB section through the platforms. Hence I propose a branching chord (yellow) before Bewdley onto the Stourport alignment (orange) where a new 'parkway' station could be established near the A456/B4195 bypass roundabout which could help support options for housing development in fields nearby. A station on the former British Sugar site near Hoobrook to support nearby housing development would be a mistake in my opinion because it would be midway along the shared single track section, with impact on occupancy times and thus capacity and reliability for both NR and SVR, although a new passing loop might be built at this former sidings site to help alleviate this, at considerable cost however. For my Bewdley Bypass option I would also consider extending the line further, partway along the old Stourport line then branching off southward across fields (yellow) to make a new approach to the town centre near the River Severn bridge and Basin with a new terminus in the car parks thereabouts. It looks like such a route might be possible without any significant demolition. Station area signalling at Kidderminster and Bewdley would thus remain SVR administered mechanical as now with slots working to the NR control of the single line between. the shared single track would be about 3.8km in length or 2.4 miles. Even at a typical heritage speed of under 25mph this should be possible to traverse in under 10 minutes so an hourly NR service should be easy to accomodate amongst the heritage traffic. At commuter peaks, when there is usually no (or only limited) heritage running, the NR service could be strengthened to half hourly, although that might require an extra passing facility on the new branch. I'd envisage Stourport trains to be Birmingham - Kidderminster stoppers extended.

 

[bussnapperwm]

Wasn't WMR planning to run half hourly services along part of the Severn Valley as an extension to the existing Kidderminster terminator services?

 

[diffident]

I don't think this line was ever double apart from a short section where sidings ran alongside at the Kidderminster end. It looks like the viaduct over the River Stour and canal may have been built with widening in mind however but Bewdley Tunnel was definitely only ever single. The single track might suffice however for an hourly National Rail service as long as that section was under NR signalling control, but I wouldn't want colour lights to take over Bewdley station as the SVRs most interesting signalling installation with its two boxes and AB section through the platforms. Hence I propose a branching chord (yellow) before Bewdley onto the Stourport alignment (orange) where a new 'parkway' station could be established near the A456/B4195 bypass roundabout which could help support options for housing development in fields nearby. A station on the former British Sugar site near Hoobrook to support nearby housing development would be a mistake in my opinion because it would be midway along the shared single track section, with impact on occupancy times and thus capacity and reliability for both NR and SVR, although a new passing loop might be built at this former sidings site to help alleviate this, at considerable cost however. For my Bewdley Bypass option I would also consider extending the line further, partway along the old Stourport line then branching off southward across fields (yellow) to make a new approach to the town centre near the River Severn bridge and Basin with a new terminus in the car parks thereabouts. It looks like such a route might be possible without any significant demolition. Station area signalling at Kidderminster and Bewdley would thus remain SVR administered mechanical as now with slots working to the NR control of the single line between. the shared single track would be about 3.8km in length or 2.4 miles. Even at a typical heritage speed of under 25mph this should be possible to traverse in under 10 minutes so an hourly NR service should be easy to accomodate amongst the heritage traffic. At commuter peaks, when there is usually no (or only limited) heritage running, the NR service could be strengthened to half hourly, although that might require an extra passing facility on the new branch. I'd envisage Stourport trains to be Birmingham - Kidderminster stoppers extended.
View attachment 51300

A very good idea that. It would certainly further cement Stourport as a tourist destination, and open it up as such to a large cross-section of the West Midlands who don't drive.

 

[MarkyT]

Wasn't WMR planning to run half hourly services along part of the Severn Valley as an extension to the existing Kidderminster terminator services?

Yes I think so. I found a local plan review document that mentioned the possibility of a new station at the former British Sugar site which may refer to that. If such a service went only thus far, a new terminal siding platform could suffice, but I suspect demand would be rather limited to just the local housing in the vicinity which might be very good for the site developer concerned but perhaps not so economic for a TOC or NR with much signalling expenditure required.
http://www.wyreforestdc.gov.uk/media/3024571/-Preferred-Options-Document-June-2017-R.pdf