Wisbech-March line reopening cost increase to £200m

[DynamicSpirit]

To reiterate, unless there is some sort of sea change in how bus services are regulated and specified, which there is absolutely no sign of, and unless that is achieved with cross-party consensus, which there is also no sign of, and this change is seen to work over a number of years so people have confidence in it, it will always be bus = temporary, train = permanent.

I agree with with that. But wouldn't an appropriate response be to start campaigning for a change in Government attitudes to buses and how buses are regulated, rather than to give up and say 'OK, train must always be better'.

 

[Aictos]

Indeed. You're certainly more likely to see modal shift to a train service than a bus over such distances.



It's over 30k, which is enough to justify a railway station.



Really. Where is this evidence that a service would struggle to fill a 153 ?

The population of Tweedbank is around 2k and Galashiels 14k, yet the Borders line certainly wouldn't struggle to fill a 153.

We've had "new railways shouldn't be long rural routes" ok, Wisbech is short.

We've had "new railways shouldn't go to the middle of nowhere". Ok, Wisbech is a town of 30k.

We've had "new railways should link an area with need with a major employment centre" ok, Wisbech is a market town with limited public transport options, Cambridge is a major employment centre.

Yet "Surprise Surprise" (as Cilla would have said) the usual suspects on here suddenly can't see any justification for a rail link.

The reality is that there are a hardcore of people on here for whom heavy rail will never be the solution, and they will go through whatever contortions of logic it takes to argue against one.

The difference between you and me is that I'm being realistic and not trying to connect every place in the UK with a rail service by not accepting there are viable alternatives that can be used.

Dunstable has a population of 35K by your own words is enough to justify a rail link so where is it?

Instead residents who live there use either Luton or Leagrave as their nearest railheads using buses to travel to those railheads to get a train.

Those buses not only give direct links between Luton and Dunstable but also to Leighton Buzzard, Milton Keynes and of course the airport.

So why is this suddenly not acceptable for Wisbech?

A frequent and reliable bus service that runs every 15 minutes from 5am to 10pm then every 30 minutes to a hour outside those times with buses fitted to similar standards as Stagecoach Gold or Arriva Sapphire interiors running Peterborough - March - Wisbech - Cambridge is a perfectly acceptable solution especially with tickets equal in price or cheaper then rail.

Because with a frequent and reliable bus operation if you miss one bus then you haven't got long to wait for another which would be a improvement on existing buses.

 

[duffield]

I agree with with that. But wouldn't an appropriate response be to start campaigning for a change in Government attitudes to buses and how buses are regulated, rather than to give up and say 'OK, train must always be better'.

A lot of people have been campaigning for bus re-regulation in some form for many years, and so far they have got exactly nowhere, services have been cut and cut again, the evidence of the ill-effects have been presented to various governments with no effect; the only way it will change is if the government is actually listening. The current government I believe has made some bus related pledges so we shall see what the details are but I won't hold my breath.

 

[yorksrob]

The difference between you and me is that I'm being realistic and not trying to connect every place in the UK with a rail service by not accepting there are viable alternatives that can be used.

Dunstable has a population of 35K by your own words is enough to justify a rail link so where is it?

Instead residents who live there use either Luton or Leagrave as their nearest railheads using buses to travel to those railheads to get a train.

Those buses not only give direct links between Luton and Dunstable but also to Leighton Buzzard, Milton Keynes and of course the airport.

So why is this suddenly not acceptable for Wisbech?

A frequent and reliable bus service that runs every 15 minutes from 5am to 10pm then every 30 minutes to a hour outside those times with buses fitted to similar standards as Stagecoach Gold or Arriva Sapphire interiors running Peterborough - March - Wisbech - Cambridge is a perfectly acceptable solution especially with tickets equal in price or cheaper then rail.

Because with a frequent and reliable bus operation if you miss one bus then you haven't got long to wait for another which would be a improvement on existing buses.

You're prepared to accept a status quo that was designed in the 1960's by people who believed the railway was in terminal decline.

The best thing for Wisbech would be a direct train to Cambridge, or if possible further.

 

[Meerkat]

You're prepared to accept a status quo that was designed in the 1960's by people who believed the railway was in terminal decline.

The best thing for Wisbech would be a direct train to Cambridge, or if possible further.

Not the best thing for those who have to pay for it though!
Would they ever get more than hourly train? As opposed to a 15 minute bus service to connect with multiple trains and will go much nearer where they live.

 

[yorksrob]

Not the best thing for those who have to pay for it though!
Would they ever get more than hourly train? As opposed to a 15 minute bus service to connect with multiple trains and will go much nearer where they live.

Well, presumably they could run fifteen minute bus servises now, but they don't because dodging traffic to get dropped off at a railhead where you may or may not connect with a train to your destination, clearly isn't enticing enough.

It's amusing. According to the bus enthusiasts, we can run buses to connect with trains willy nilly, completely ignoring de-regulation, yet when it comes to funding railway routes, the rules for constructing the business case were apparently sent down to Moses on stone tablets.

 

[berwicksfinest]

I would suggest that you also drive to work because there is no public transport alternative.

I never suggested that all the Wisbech residents work in Cambridge. Clearly they wouldn't, given the current transport options. I'm merely suggesting that given Cambridge is one of the main employment centre in the region, it might benefit the town to have a rail link to it.

Actually the public transport isn't bad excel "B and C" are pretty regular for Peterborough, Also March 9 miles away has not a bad service, Having said that it is not viable for me personally thats why I drive.
I also submit to you today I started at a more acceptable 07.10 BUT its been a 9 and half hour shift, I can hop in the car and 32 mins (yes I timed myself this morning) can public transport do that? also much as I am sure to the dismay of Miss Thunberg before and after sitting on my metal box for nigh on 10 hours do I want to stand waiting for a bus/train that may or may not be on time for a longer ride 46 mins by bus + walk time, 15 mins by train + 25 mins drive too.
NO I do not, I just want to get home after my shift.

However being as you dodged my questions regarding Wisbech how about trying these

1. Which TOC do you propose takes Wisbech on ?

EMR Liverpool Lime Street to Wisbech or Norwich to Wisbech ?
XC Birmingham New Street to Wisbech or Stansted to Wisbech ?
GA Peterborough to Wisbech or Ipswich to Wisbech ?

Or are we going to create Oik rail March to Wisbech ?

What I here you cry thats just silly we will tag another unit on to detach at Ely/March/Manea International Parkway. Again resources for this extra unit plus crewing arrangements, are coming from where?

2. As I have said we cannot fill the Excel how are we filling a 153 let alone anything else ?

I had asked if you have been to Wisbech ? I am guessing No. Wisbech is very agricultural and we have our fair share of Eastern Europeans and the fact is they work locally in Moy Park/Lambe and Weston and Del Monte etc. There is a "gangmaster" set up for Amazon at Peterborough, they provide a coach. I cannot see a shift to rail.

3. The harsh reality is why spend the forecast £200m on this branch line when, we could have electrification. Peterborough to Ely and beyond, Better sections to increase capacity, Redo Welney Bridges to Heavy Axle Weight traffic can actually use Anglia faster than current 40mph (except Norwich route) Why do you think the Wisbech branch for a few commuters out weigh this ??

I am not against a rail link but, look at the cost/benefit and really what actually needs money spending on it. Once we have a decent system, then look at projects like this, until then its dead in the water.

 

[yorksrob]

Actually the public transport isn't bad excel "B and C" are pretty regular for Peterborough, Also March 9 miles away has not a bad service, Having said that it is not viable for me personally thats why I drive.
I also submit to you today I started at a more acceptable 07.10 BUT its been a 9 and half hour shift, I can hop in the car and 32 mins (yes I timed myself this morning) can public transport do that? also much as I am sure to the dismay of Miss Thunberg before and after sitting on my metal box for nigh on 10 hours do I want to stand waiting for a bus/train that may or may not be on time for a longer ride 46 mins by bus + walk time, 15 mins by train + 25 mins drive too.
NO I do not, I just want to get home after my shift.

However being as you dodged my questions regarding Wisbech how about trying these

1. Which TOC do you propose takes Wisbech on ?

EMR Liverpool Lime Street to Wisbech or Norwich to Wisbech ?
XC Birmingham New Street to Wisbech or Stansted to Wisbech ?
GA Peterborough to Wisbech or Ipswich to Wisbech ?

Or are we going to create Oik rail March to Wisbech ?

What I here you cry thats just silly we will tag another unit on to detach at Ely/March/Manea International Parkway. Again resources for this extra unit plus crewing arrangements, are coming from where?

2. As I have said we cannot fill the Excel how are we filling a 153 let alone anything else ?

I had asked if you have been to Wisbech ? I am guessing No. Wisbech is very agricultural and we have our fair share of Eastern Europeans and the fact is they work locally in Moy Park/Lambe and Weston and Del Monte etc. There is a "gangmaster" set up for Amazon at Peterborough, they provide a coach. I cannot see a shift to rail.

3. The harsh reality is why spend the forecast £200m on this branch line when, we could have electrification. Peterborough to Ely and beyond, Better sections to increase capacity, Redo Welney Bridges to Heavy Axle Weight traffic can actually use Anglia faster than current 40mph (except Norwich route) Why do you think the Wisbech branch for a few commuters out weigh this ??

I am not against a rail link but, look at the cost/benefit and really what actually needs money spending on it. Once we have a decent system, then look at projects like this, until then its dead in the water.

Apologies - I wasn't aware that I'd dodged your previous questions. However, in terms of the above:

1) Which TOC takes on the service.

To me it's a meaningless question. I am not wedded to the franchise model devised at privatisation, therefore I see no reason why its shortcomings should be used as an excuse not to embark on a long term infrastructure improvement. For the sake of argument, roll it into whatever franchise is running the local service this week.

In terms of rolling stocjk resources, correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the incumbent operator just replaced a fleet of servicable rolling stock with nee trains ? This suggests there's not a shortage at the moment.

In terms of crew, train someone.

2) in terms of filling a 153, see my earlier post regarding the much smaller populations filling 2 carriage 158's in the borders.

I don't doubt that Wisbech does have a lot of people toiling the fields, but to suggest that this is the only carreer that local people aspire to, as though the town of 30k people is some sort of a feudal enclave, seems wide of the mark. Has it not occurred to you that some residents might prefer to work in some other field ?

3) in terms of spend, my argument has always been that there needs to be a separate budget for connecting towns to the rail network from ordinary enhancements.

This is not beyond the realms of possibility. We are forever told that the 100 billion for HS2 is separate from the enhancement budget, why not a much smaller budget for reconnecting communities ?

"Once we have a decent system..." is a recipe for not doing anything. You could manage the existing network for a thousand years, and always find something that needs doing.

The network needs to be expanded and the nettle grasped, in and of itself.

 

[johnnychips]

Wisbech is very agricultural and we have our fair share of Eastern Europeans and the fact is they work locally in Moy Park/Lambe and Weston and Del Monte

I have a solution. We ask the man from Del Monte “Will you pay £200M for a rail link to Wisbech?” and see what he says...

 

[alistairlees]

Much to my surprise, I find myself largely in agreement with Yorksrob here. But maybe for a not-so-obvious reason. We (as a country) seem to lack a cohesive transport strategy or vision. There are endless isolated business cases (Blyth, Leven, Hoo, HS2 etc.); but what is the strategy nationally? The network rail route strategies are really just local plans, not strategies. HS2 dwarfs everything else, but affects only some areas.

A strategy might be to ensure that every town above a certain size has a rail service. Or it might be a more general requirement to have a public transport service. And there might be a requirement for certain frequencies, or time spans (earliest / latest train / bus) and days of the week in order to provide a service that is attractive. There are obviously many potential strategies. Whatever the strategy is, it needs to be people-focused.

At the moment people (politicians, lobbyists, journalists, forum members, etc.) seem content to leave all this to a strange mixture of market forces (in terms of commercial bus operations or business cases for rail reopenings) and the petrified remains of the British Rail services from 1995. In those intervening 25 years how many new railways have been built? And how many new roads?

Yet at the same time many of those people who are pursuing this isolationist argument in Britain will no doubt also be found extolling the virtues of Swiss rail (and bus) transport. Switzerland does have a strategy.

Obviously that strategy comes at a price - rail passenger subsidy in Switzerland is higher than in the uk, no matter how you measure it. But maybe that’s right. Maybe it leads to the optimal outcomes for society. And a transport strategy is not a thing in isolation; it is part of planning, at both a national and local level.

This endless argument about Wisbech in isolation is pointless. What’s needed is a strategy. At least Yorksrob is trying to propose one. Maybe it’s right, maybe it’s wrong. But I think it is most definitely the right idea, and the right approach.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

3) in terms of spend, my argument has always been that there needs to be a separate budget for connecting towns to the rail network from ordinary enhancements.

This is not beyond the realms of possibility. We are forever told that the 100 billion for HS2 is separate from the enhancement budget, why not a much smaller budget for reconnecting communities ?

"Once we have a decent system..." is a recipe for not doing anything. You could manage the existing network for a thousand years, and always find something that needs doing.

The network needs to be expanded and the nettle grasped, in and of itself.

I actually think that the idea of a dedicated fund to connect towns to the rail network that are not already connected is not a bad proposal (and perhaps that's what we should be arguing about rather than Wisbech specifically) - as long as you're coming from with the understanding that the existence of such a fund is motivated by 'levelling up' considerations rather than cost-benefit analysis considerations.

However, I also think that, even if such a fund existed, Wisbech would quickly be de-prioritised because this fund will still only have a certain amount of money available, and would want to spend that money so as to benefit the most numbers of people. I'm pretty sure that fund would evaluate Wisbech, see the estimated £200M to build a line over pretty difficult ground, realise that it's impossible to provide a particularly useful service unless you sort out Ely first (probably another £100M), and then conclude that it can help more people with the available money by prioritising Skelmersdale, Haverhill, Levenmouth, Grangemouth, Abingdon, Witney, Coalville, maybe even Tavistock and so on. Even if you accept the principle of, spending money specifically to reconnect towns to the rail network, you'll still want to spend that money efficiently.

 

[Aictos]

Not the best thing for those who have to pay for it though!
Would they ever get more than hourly train? As opposed to a 15 minute bus service to connect with multiple trains and will go much nearer where they live.

Indeed, sometimes rail is NOT the answer not matter how much some here seem to want to reopen every single section of line to every location possible without thinking it though.

Using the Dunstable Busway as a example, it would have been nice to keep it as a rail link but it would only ever have seen something like a hourly service and then you have the question of where does it go after Luton as well as the layout of Luton itself to cater for the link.

It was a much better idea to put the busway in for a number of reasons:

1. For commuters who use the buses to get to Luton from Dunstable it avoids the traffic congestion going to/from Luton so journey times are faster as the buses on the busway can speed past all those motorists sitting in their cars stuck in traffic

2. The frequency even if you just use one operator offered a fast and reliable service thoughout the whole day even at night.

3. Those buses actually go much more nearer to places that people want to get to rather then being taken to a place nearby then having to get another mode of transport to get to the actual destination.

4. One of the operators in this case Arriva and their A route is very popular with locals as although they use single deckers and a high frequency of services, those buses do and can get very busy indeed full and standing in the peaks, this is because the service is fast and reliable.

You're prepared to accept a status quo that was designed in the 1960's by people who believed the railway was in terminal decline.

The best thing for Wisbech would be a direct train to Cambridge, or if possible further.

Okay as you're not prepared to listen to reason then:

1. Who is going to pay for the work to be done to provide a rail line between March and Wisbech which includes bringing the line to current safety standards, building a new station at Wisbech, reinstating a platform/s at March, remodelling March to allow for the passenger services to Wisbech?

2. Who is going to pay for the work to be done at Ely which includes remodelling to allow for the extra trains to run?

3. Who is going to operate the service?

4. What traction is going to be used because if you struggle to fill the Excel then you will be struggling to fill a Class 153 unless you think a Parry Mover is going to happen?

5. What about the extra costs of having staff such as drivers, guards, ticket office staff etc?

6. Who is going to pay for the resignalling that will need to be done with the remodelling of March station to allow for the new service to run?

You be far better off improving the local roads and running a reliable, inexpensive and frequent bus service that connects Peterborough - March - Wisbech - Cambridge every half hour with a Wisbech to March bus service running every 15 to 20 minutes connecting with a rail service at March. That with the Peterborough - Wisbech - Kings Lynn - Norwich bus route should suffice to provide enough capacity as not everyone in Wisbech wants to work in Cambridge, you do have Peterborough as well that people commute to.

 

[berwicksfinest]

Plus where are the paths coming from ?

March station = hourly EMR, hourly XC, two hourly GA, GBRf / DB / Freightliner freight paths plus any extras

Also the Wisbech line joins at Norwood Road Bridge, merging with Whitemoor Yard. Shunting most times of the day !!

 

[Aictos]

Plus where are the paths coming from ?

March station = hourly EMR, hourly XC, two hourly GA, GBRf / DB / Freightliner freight paths plus any extras

Also the Wisbech line joins at Norwood Road Bridge, merging with Whitemoor Yard. Shunting most times of the day !!

Indeed, it simply isn't feasible at the time to introduce a rail service and for now they should concentrate on providing a improved bus service which connects with the rail services at March as it's the nearest railhead to Wisbech.

 

[Bald Rick]

Well, presumably they could run fifteen minute bus servises now, but they don't because dodging traffic to get dropped off at a railhead where you may or may not connect with a train to your destination, clearly isn't enticing enough.

That’s not quite right. A bus service isn’t provided because the demand isn’t there to make it profitable. I suppose that’s the whole thrust of my earlier suggestion: if we are to spend taxpayers’ money subsidising a public transport service from March - Wisbech, then it would be better to pay a lower amount of taxpayers’ cash to operate a bus service (at a better frequency, with better accessibility, but longer journey times than trains) than to operate a more expensive rail service ... which would also need £200m and well over half a decade before it could start.

I actually think that the idea of a dedicated fund to connect towns to the rail network that are not already connected is not a bad proposal (and perhaps that's what we should be arguing about rather than Wisbech specifically) - as long as you're coming from with the understanding that the existence of such a fund is motivated by 'levelling up' considerations rather than cost-benefit analysis considerations.

However, I also think that, even if such a fund existed, Wisbech would quickly be de-prioritised because this fund will still only have a certain amount of money available, and would want to spend that money so as to benefit the most numbers of people. I'm pretty sure that fund would evaluate Wisbech, see the estimated £200M to build a line over pretty difficult ground, realise that it's impossible to provide a particularly useful service unless you sort out Ely first (probably another £100M), and then conclude that it can help more people with the available money by prioritising Skelmersdale, Haverhill, Levenmouth, Grangemouth, Abingdon, Witney, Coalville, maybe even Tavistock and so on. Even if you accept the principle of, spending money specifically to reconnect towns to the rail network, you'll still want to spend that money efficiently.

Sensible assessment. One exception - sorting Ely is likely to be a lot more than £100m. It isn’t just Ely, its the whole line from just south of Ely to Peterborough, albeit the Wisbech service would only benefit south and east of March. It’s junction remodellings (at least one of which needs land take), level crossings, signalling headways, bridge strengthening, etc

 

[berwicksfinest]

I have voiced my opinion of the money it would need to re instate the rail link,

HOWEVER

For a sugar daddy to bring this to fruition as a Hertiage line may be a better opinion !! Separate Whitemoor Junction, Yes there is room under Norwood Road bridge and run into dead end March ex Platform 3 or 4.
Tourist attraction for the area, Also could provide Yorksrob he craves, a shuttle service indeed using a redundant Pacer or such like, a crossover could provide a link to Network Rail metals if needed.

I am sure volunteers a plenty would work trains/tickets and P.Way, no need for high speed service and if connections at March for Peterborough and Cambridge so much the better

 

[Aictos]

That’s not quite right. A bus service isn’t provided because the demand isn’t there to make it profitable. I suppose that’s the whole thrust of my earlier suggestion: if we are to spend taxpayers’ money subsidising a public transport service from March - Wisbech, then it would be better to pay a lower amount of taxpayers’ cash to operate a bus service (at a better frequency, with better accessibility, but longer journey times than trains) than to operate a more expensive rail service ... which would also need £200m and well over half a decade before it could start.



Sensible assessment. One exception - sorting Ely is likely to be a lot more than £100m. It isn’t just Ely, its the whole line from just south of Ely to Peterborough, albeit the Wisbech service would only benefit south and east of March. It’s junction remodellings (at least one of which needs land take), level crossings, signalling headways, bridge strengthening, etc

Indeed and this post highlights why I think rail isn't the perfect answer and that's from someone who's Pro Rail!

 

[bspahh]

That’s not quite right. A bus service isn’t provided because the demand isn’t there to make it profitable. I suppose that’s the whole thrust of my earlier suggestion: if we are to spend taxpayers’ money subsidising a public transport service from March - Wisbech, then it would be better to pay a lower amount of taxpayers’ cash to operate a bus service (at a better frequency, with better accessibility, but longer journey times than trains) than to operate a more expensive rail service ... which would also need £200m and well over half a decade before it could start.

The nice thing about a bus service is that it is easier to change the route. Just because you would run trains via March, doesn't mean that a bus route needs to go that way.

I would run a high quality bus service from Wisbech to Downham Market, to connect with the frequent, soon to be 8 car trains to the Cambridge stations and London.

 

[berwicksfinest]

The nice thing about a bus service is that it is easier to change the route. Just because you would run trains via March, doesn't mean that a bus route needs to go that way.

I would run a high quality bus service from Wisbech to Downham Market, to connect with the frequent, soon to be 8 car trains to the Cambridge stations and London.

Currently a No: 60 Go to bus service does this every 1hr 5 mins ish

 

[Bald Rick]

The nice thing about a bus service is that it is easier to change the route. Just because you would run trains via March, doesn't mean that a bus route needs to go that way.

I’d argue that in this case, the ‘nice’ thing about a bus is that it could be up and running in 6 weeks, if the will was there from a public funding body. Whereas, realistically, it’s at least 6 years for a rail link. That’s leaving aside the cost issue.

I do think in cases such as this there should be a trial with a bus service, as part of the rail franchise / concession, linked to the rail ticketing system, and with a bus frequency at least as frequent as any proposed rail service. For at least 5 years. That would give a good indication of what demand there is (numbers, times of day / week / year), destinations, demographic profile etc, which would help provide much better info for a business case (which could be under development in parallel).

If the bus service doesn’t work, then the cost ‘sunk’ would be rather less than even the design cost for a new railway. But if it does work, then works well enough to retain it; and if it works really well then there’s the evidence for a new line. I can’t think of any downside.

 

[A0wen]

2) in terms of filling a 153, see my earlier post regarding the much smaller populations filling 2 carriage 158's in the borders.

I don't doubt that Wisbech does have a lot of people toiling the fields, but to suggest that this is the only carreer that local people aspire to, as though the town of 30k people is some sort of a feudal enclave, seems wide of the mark. Has it not occurred to you that some residents might prefer to work in some other field ?

I've said it before and will say it again. Border's railway was pretty much unique and certainly not comparable to Wisbech in any meaningful way.

The closure of the Waverley line meant that places like Galashiels were far further from the rail network than Wisbech, Tavistock or any of your other pet projects are.

Gala > Edinburgh (circa 30 miles), Berwick (40 miles), Carlisle (60 miles), Carstairs (42 miles). Wisbech to March (10 miles), Peterborough (22miles), Kings Lynn (13 miles), Downham Market (14 miles).

Wisbech does have a better road network connection to all of those places than Galashiels does to the places cited as the nearest railhead - I've driven both the A7 and A47 at various times and whilst the A47 is undoubtedly busier it's also tends to flow more steadily and quickly than the A7 does.

You've also got with Wisbech a regular bus running between Peterboro and Kings Lynn - more regular than the Carlisle - Edinburgh service that was plying the A7. Buses to places like Berwick were far less frequent whereas Wisbech also has regular services to March.

Borders Railway was always likely to be well used - but it ran massively over budget and had various challenges during construction. It was also built as an unelectrified line and was pared back to keep the costs under control. It also only interacted with the rest of the network for the final couple of miles into Edinburgh - whereas to link Wisbech to Cambridge means contention with the existing network from March onwards - so the bulk of the route. So which has the greater benefit ? Connecting Wisbech to March and Cambridge or enhancing existing services from Peterborough to Norwich, Ipswich or Cambridge - all of which have existing aspiration ? And you can't do both - for a simple reason - capacity. You can't run two trains in one path.

 

[A0wen]

I don't think that's correct about no evidence. I don't know of any systematic studies of how the location of a railway station impacts usage, but it's not hard to find individual examples that seem to show that town centre stations get more custom for comparable levels of rail service. For example:

• Ebbw Value Town (260K people/year) vs Ebbw Vale Parkway (40K) in 2018-19
• Woolwich Arsenal (4.4M excluding DLR) vs Woolwich Dockyard (0.5M) (Yes Woolwich Arsenal gets a few more trains, but not 9 times as many trains!. Also note the WWA figure is for national rail entries/exits so is presumably likely to exclude most DLR interchanges)
• Bromley North (505K) vs Sundridge Park (280K)
• Kingston (5M) vs Norbiton (2.5M)
• Morecambe (200K) vs Bare Lane (140K)

Hertford - where North (outside the town centre) does better than East counters that.

It depends on a number of factors - where's the housing for example? If you take the Ebbw Vale example far more of the housing is 'behind' the town centre where Town station is than 2 miles down the road where Parkway is.

In the case of Bromley - why not compare it to Bromley South or Shortlands ? Both a mile or so away yet usage at least double that of Bromley North. In the case of Shortlands, further from Bromley town centre - North and South are about the same distance. Yet more of the housing is around Shortlands and South than North and Sundridge Park.

Bare Lane isn't really Morecambe as a quick look on a map shows. And whilst it might attract a few people on the north side of Morecambe, it's further away if you're south of the town centre - so not really a valid example.

Woolwich could be increased by the tourist trade heading to the barracks etc. With some of the London stations there's no rhyme nor reason as to why one performs better than another - sometimes it's a case that it's simply a nicer walk to station 'x' than station 'y'.

Leigh (which is how this came about) probably doesn't have to worry about such factors and is more like Bromley or Hertford where people are looking to travel out of it and will head to the nearest station or the station with the best service and are not bothered about heading to the town centre to achieve this.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Hertford - where North (outside the town centre) does better than East counters that.

No it doesn't for a couple of reasons. Firstly because in that latest available figures, 2018-19, Hertford East actually did have more passengers (1.312M vs 1.259M) - although that wasn't by much, and it did follow strong growth so previous years showed Hertford North ahead.

But more seriously, to make a fair comparison, you need to compare stations that have broadly the same service levels. A quick check on the current timetable shows that Hertford North has 4tph to London off-peak, whereas Hertford East only has 2tph, taking about the same time - 50 minutes, but to different London termini (I don't know what those levels were in previous years). Further, Hertford North has trains to Stevenage (albeit currently with a replacement bus service), which Hertford East lacks. On Sundays, Hertford East doesn't even have trains to central London - they go to Stratford instead. Those differences alone are enough to strongly favour Hertford North for passengers. So it looks to me like, on the latest figures I can find, Hertford East - closer to the town centre - gets slightly more passengers despite having a worse rail service. So maybe Hertford East's more central location does make a difference!

It depends on a number of factors - where's the housing for example? If you take the Ebbw Vale example far more of the housing is 'behind' the town centre where Town station is than 2 miles down the road where Parkway is.

Sure. And I'd argue that's fairly typical. Town centres don't only have shops and offices. They also often have quite densely packed residential areas, either in the form of flats above the shops or in the form or closely packed housing just around the centre. And that will be one reason why town centres stations often attract better patronage (apart from the question of people do want to go to the town centres, plus there are often good public transport links to them).

In the case of Bromley - why not compare it to Bromley South or Shortlands ? Both a mile or so away yet usage at least double that of Bromley North. In the case of Shortlands, further from Bromley town centre - North and South are about the same distance. Yet more of the housing is around Shortlands and South than North and Sundridge Park.

I chose to compare Bromley North and Sundridge Park because they have an essentially identical train service: A shuttle every 20 minutes to Grove Park: The only significant difference between those stations is their location. In other words, the comparison won't be skewed by people favouring stations with better rail services. It would not be reasonable to compare either Bromley North or Sundridge Park with a station that sees 6tph in each direction, and direct trains to Central London, Sevenoaks and Orpington.

Bare Lane isn't really Morecambe as a quick look on a map shows. And whilst it might attract a few people on the north side of Morecambe, it's further away if you're south of the town centre - so not really a valid example.

I disagree. I used to live very close to Bare Lane station and I can assure you I was living in Morecambe. They are two stations, one near the town centre, one in a largely residential area (albeit with some shops) outside the town centre, both served by exactly the same trains, and therefore allowing you to assess what difference being in the town centre makes for that particular town. The conclusion is that the town centre station attracts significantly more custom.

Woolwich could be increased by the tourist trade heading to the barracks etc. With some of the London stations there's no rhyme nor reason as to why one performs better than another - sometimes it's a case that it's simply a nicer walk to station 'x' than station 'y'.

I also once lived in Woolwich, and still live in that general area (There's a reason I thought to check both Woolwich and Morecambe! ). I've certainly not noticed a significant tourist trade. Maybe there's some, but I doubt it can be more than 1% or so of passengers there. I did slightly cheat on the 'exactly the same trains' here because some trains don't stop at Dockyard but the 9x difference in Woolwich Arsenal's passenger figures is so dramatic that that seemed reasonable here. Living there, I'm pretty certain why Woolwich Arsenal attracts so much more custom. Firstly, it's because it's right in the shopping centre and lots of people use the train to get to the shops - whereas, Woolwich Dockyard being in a purely residential area, almost noone will have any reason to use that station unless they live there. Secondly because Woolwich Arsenal is in the centre, it has extremely good bus connections so lots of people travelling to London will get to Arsenal by bus and take the train from there. And thirdly because there are actually a lot of houses and flats (mainly flats) within easy walking distance of Woolwich Arsenal: Like many town centres, Woolwich sees a lot of densely packed housing.

 

[A0wen]

No it doesn't for a couple of reasons. Firstly because in that latest available figures, 2018-19, Hertford East actually did have more passengers (1.312M vs 1.259M) - although that wasn't by much, and it did follow strong growth so previous years showed Hertford North ahead.

But more seriously, to make a fair comparison, you need to compare stations that have broadly the same service levels. A quick check on the current timetable shows that Hertford North has 4tph to London off-peak, whereas Hertford East only has 2tph, taking about the same time - 50 minutes, but to different London termini (I don't know what those levels were in previous years). Further, Hertford North has trains to Stevenage (albeit currently with a replacement bus service), which Hertford East lacks. On Sundays, Hertford East doesn't even have trains to central London - they go to Stratford instead. Those differences alone are enough to strongly favour Hertford North for passengers. So it looks to me like, on the latest figures I can find, Hertford East - closer to the town centre - gets slightly more passengers despite having a worse rail service. So maybe Hertford East's more central location does make a difference!

North has been stronger than East for all but one year. You therefore need to look at whether the 1 year is a 'one off' caused by problems or a longer term shift. Over a 5 year period, North has been the more popular station - look at a map - for the key housing areas Sele Farm and Bengeo, North is more convenient than East.

Sure. And I'd argue that's fairly typical. Town centres don't only have shops and offices. They also often have quite densely packed residential areas, either in the form of flats above the shops or in the form or closely packed housing just around the centre. And that will be one reason why town centres stations often attract better patronage (apart from the question of people do want to go to the town centres, plus there are often good public transport links to them).

Equally, if the town centre has 10% of the housing but estates on one side have 40% then a station outside the town centre is likely to be favoured rather than people traipsing into the town centre to catch a train. And for a majority of places the train is used to travel FROM that place TO somewhere else - not the other way round.

I chose to compare Bromley North and Sundridge Park because they have an essentially identical train service: A shuttle every 20 minutes to Grove Park: The only significant difference between those stations is their location. In other words, the comparison won't be skewed by people favouring stations with better rail services. It would not be reasonable to compare either Bromley North or Sundridge Park with a station that sees 6tph in each direction, and direct trains to Central London, Sevenoaks and Orpington.

Well OK, but that line is a bit of an oddity in London terms being a very short branch line operated with a shuttle - by that virtue its services are less attractive. But the reality is you have several stations within a mile radius and people ARE choosing the others over Bromley North and Grove Park regardless of whether they are town centre or not.

I disagree. I used to live very close to Bare Lane station and I can assure you I was living in Morecambe. They are two stations, one near the town centre, one in a largely residential area (albeit with some shops) outside the town centre, both served by exactly the same trains, and therefore allowing you to assess what difference being in the town centre makes for that particular town. The conclusion is that the town centre station attracts significantly more custom.

Well done for ignoring the point I made. Once again, let's look at a map - the majority of Morecambe is SOUTH of Morecambe station and therefore Bare lane is FURTHER away. So yes, in that case people are favouring the town centre station - because for the majority of people it's more convenient.

Where you've got two stations on different lines - the trend is usually towards the service level or destination - see Yeovil. The town station (Pen Mill) has half the usage of Junction. Yet Junction's in the middle of nowhere.

Where you've got two on the same line then you need to look at the catchment of those stations to see why people might prefer one over the other - an example of which is Shenfield that is more popular than Brentwood - again look on a map at where the housing is compared to where the town centre is.

I also once lived in Woolwich, and still live in that general area (There's a reason I thought to check both Woolwich and Morecambe! ). I've certainly not noticed a significant tourist trade. Maybe there's some, but I doubt it can be more than 1% or so of passengers there. I did slightly cheat on the 'exactly the same trains' here because some trains don't stop at Dockyard but the 9x difference in Woolwich Arsenal's passenger figures is so dramatic that that seemed reasonable here. Living there, I'm pretty certain why Woolwich Arsenal attracts so much more custom. Firstly, it's because it's right in the shopping centre and lots of people use the train to get to the shops - whereas, Woolwich Dockyard being in a purely residential area, almost noone will have any reason to use that station unless they live there. Secondly because Woolwich Arsenal is in the centre, it has extremely good bus connections so lots of people travelling to London will get to Arsenal by bus and take the train from there. And thirdly because there are actually a lot of houses and flats (mainly flats) within easy walking distance of Woolwich Arsenal: Like many town centres, Woolwich sees a lot of densely packed housing.

As I said - London is a bit of an exception and you can find examples where it's the other way around. So just saying build a station near the town centre as Yorksrob seems to suggest, isn't the right answer and a station outside may be more useful to more people.

 

[tbtc]

Or you could look to the future and make it easier for people to live in Wisbech and work in places like Cambridge that have good well paying jobs

I'm happy to look to the future (it's only just begun), but there are lots of places where "impoverished" villages/towns lack a heavy rail link to the nearest "rich" city - what's special about Wisbech?

The hundreds of millions of pounds it'd cost to reconnect one rural town are hundreds of millions of pounds that could be spent on many better public transport projects (that would remove a lot more cars from the roads).

For example, there are a number of towns with frequent commercial bus services to the nearest big city (hence me saying that Tavistock/ Portishead/ Ashington etc look better bets), whilst Wisbech struggles to justify an hourly bus as far as March (with nothing to Cambridge, as far as I can see?).

Look at what works elsewhere, look at the places with frequent commercial bus services - if you can't fill a minibus each hour then maybe heavy rail isn't the answer.

Or perhaps bus services are poorly used because they can't provide the same quality as a train service

There are a number of factors (partly that heavy rail fares are massively subsidised by taxpayers, whilst most bus passengers of tax paying age are paying the full commercial cost of their bus journey - i.e. working age bus passengers are subsidising the working age rail passengers).

I'm sure that if the heavy rail ticket prices reflected the true cost of the journey, there'd be a bit of a modal switch from heavy rail to buses!

But feel free to compare a journey like Barnsley to Sheffield by Northern Rail Pacer/150 or by the "Stagecoach Gold" X17 and tell me that a bus can't provide the same quality.

Just because someone lives in an area, doesn't necessarily give them an insight into what residents who don't have access to personal transport need, or on what opportunities they're missing out on - particularly if they don't have to rely on public transport themselves.

​

I had asked if you have been to Wisbech ? I am guessing No. Wisbech is very agricultural and we have our fair share of Eastern Europeans and the fact is they work locally in Moy Park/Lambe and Weston and Del Monte etc. There is a "gangmaster" set up for Amazon at Peterborough, they provide a coach. I cannot see a shift to rail

​

I'd trust the view of someone living in the area (@berwicksfinest ) over someone who's kneejerk reaction is to demand the re-opening of each and every abandoned line... looking at the local reasons about where demand actually is to (rather than just quoting a population figure without context)… maybe that's just me though.

e.g. if a lot of those 30,000 are people working locally on the land (or in a distribution centre near Peterborough) then they aren't going to be the target market for a train to March.

Well, they improved bus links from Leigh and guess what - it still takes twice as long to get from Leigh to central Manchester than the train for an equivalent distance. It still isn't as good for onward connections to the rest of the country as the train is

You say this as if (a) there was capacity through central Manchester for additional services ex-Leigh (the well documented problems at Castlefield etc suggest that there are already too many services each hour through central Manchester) and that (b) a large number of Leigh passengers would be travelling long distance (rather than just to/from central Manchester)?

The problem is a bus will always be a bus. I know many people who will simply never consider travel by bus but given the option of a train will take it.

Sure, there are some snobbish people like that.

But these threads oscillate between "there are thousands of people unable to access jobs outside of their rural town/village because of poor public transport, so we must build a railway to restore the social fabric of the region" to "eugh - no way am I getting on a *bus*".

Dunstable has a population of 35K by your own words is enough to justify a rail link so where is it?

I feel sorry for Dunstable - if it was in rural Devon/ East Anglia/ Cumbria etc then people would be clamouring to reconnect it to the network, but the kind of people with a fixation for Okehampton/ Keswick etc seem to have a blind spot when it comes to places like Luton.

However being as you dodged my questions regarding Wisbech how about trying these

1. Which TOC do you propose takes Wisbech on ?

EMR Liverpool Lime Street to Wisbech or Norwich to Wisbech ?
XC Birmingham New Street to Wisbech or Stansted to Wisbech ?
GA Peterborough to Wisbech or Ipswich to Wisbech ?

An important question, which isn't getting enough attention - it's not just a case of opening a line, it's about providing a particular type of service (where would it be to? would it require electrification? are you building infrastructure capable of handling eight coach trains?).

Same goes for other fantasy re-opening projects, of course (e.g. the SELRAP people like to quote just the cost of a simple unelectrified single track line but with all of the benefits of frequent trans-pennine passenger and freight services)

3. The harsh reality is why spend the forecast £200m on this branch line when, we could have electrification. Peterborough to Ely and beyond, Better sections to increase capacity, Redo Welney Bridges to Heavy Axle Weight traffic can actually use Anglia faster than current 40mph (except Norwich route) Why do you think the Wisbech branch for a few commuters out weigh this ??

I am not against a rail link but, look at the cost/benefit and really what actually needs money spending on it. Once we have a decent system, then look at projects like this, until then its dead in the water.

Agreed - if you had hundreds of millions of pounds to spend on Anglian infrastructure then there are much better ways of spending it (which would deliver a lot more bang/buck ratio).​

Much to my surprise, I find myself largely in agreement with Yorksrob here. But maybe for a not-so-obvious reason. We (as a country) seem to lack a cohesive transport strategy or vision. There are endless isolated business cases (Blyth, Leven, Hoo, HS2 etc.); but what is the strategy nationally? The network rail route strategies are really just local plans, not strategies. HS2 dwarfs everything else, but affects only some areas

You mean like a five year "control period" in which a certain amount of infrastructure is committed to?

Someone should suggest it to Network Rail - maybe they could have one from 2024-2029?

At the moment people (politicians, lobbyists, journalists, forum members, etc.) seem content to leave all this to a strange mixture of market forces (in terms of commercial bus operations or business cases for rail reopenings) and the petrified remains of the British Rail services from 1995. In those intervening 25 years how many new railways have been built? And how many new roads?

​

How many new railways did British Rail build? They always seem to get a free pass here - obviously they closed a lot of railways but the "private" railway seems to get a kicking for not building many new railways whilst people turn a blind eye to the fact that British Rail didn't build many (I say "private" as obviously the decision makers and funders of any infrastructure like these are the Government but people like to blame private companies for the Government's inaction)

I actually think that the idea of a dedicated fund to connect towns to the rail network that are not already connected is not a bad proposal (and perhaps that's what we should be arguing about rather than Wisbech specifically) - as long as you're coming from with the understanding that the existence of such a fund is motivated by 'levelling up' considerations rather than cost-benefit analysis considerations.

However, I also think that, even if such a fund existed, Wisbech would quickly be de-prioritised because this fund will still only have a certain amount of money available, and would want to spend that money so as to benefit the most numbers of people. I'm pretty sure that fund would evaluate Wisbech, see the estimated £200M to build a line over pretty difficult ground, realise that it's impossible to provide a particularly useful service unless you sort out Ely first (probably another £100M), and then conclude that it can help more people with the available money by prioritising Skelmersdale, Haverhill, Levenmouth, Grangemouth, Abingdon, Witney, Coalville, maybe even Tavistock and so on. Even if you accept the principle of, spending money specifically to reconnect towns to the rail network, you'll still want to spend that money efficiently.

I think that a fund specifically dedicated to connect places to the rail network *is* a bad proposal (but that's just my personal opinion) - it'd be accepting that such projects have terrible cases and therefore require something to guarantee a certain amount of them (since they will struggle to compete with electrification/ platform extension/ doubling/ power supply upgrades etc).

However, you are right in that spending hundreds of millions of pounds on putting one town back on the network is money that could be spent on much better projects (hence my suggestion about Levenmouth)

 

[Bringback309s]

I think bus services, whilst much more economical to run and instigate, simply don't have the economic kudos a rail service has. People aren't going to relocate because its got a shiny bus - where a rail station might mean the difference, particularly if it has a direct service to a major city (e.g London or Cambridge). It would be good to see the wires extended from Ely to Wisbech and through GN / GA services but that's unlikely to happen. Another alternative where track / track beds largely exist but don't have a service, like Wisbech, Fowey, etc could be community rail groups with hopefully lower overheads and other funding sources, and something like the 230 to operate them.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Could you flesh out why any economic activity might re-locate to Wisbech if it had an hourly diesel rail service in one direction only from an off-centre unstaffed station tucked away in an industrial estate rather than (say) to Ely or Peterborough with far more comprehensive services in several directions?

 

[yoyothehobo]

I think bus services, whilst much more economical to run and instigate, simply don't have the economic kudos a rail service has. People aren't going to relocate because its got a shiny bus - where a rail station might mean the difference, particularly if it has a direct service to a major city (e.g London or Cambridge). It would be good to see the wires extended from Ely to Wisbech and through GN / GA services but that's unlikely to happen. Another alternative where track / track beds largely exist but don't have a service, like Wisbech, Fowey, etc could be community rail groups with hopefully lower overheads and other funding sources, and something like the 230 to operate them.

Whereas you are probably correct in that providing a railway service is likely to be more of an economic boon than a bus, the difference is almost certainly not going to be high enough to generate the extra cost up front, which results in it having a lower BCR than the bus. We may not like it, but that is the case. The railway isn't designed for social mobility, but to move large numbers of people from point A to point B and with the limited amount of money we have to spend on this, is it better to spend the money on improving throughput to allow as many full, long trains as possible to move through the network as possible, rather than run a half full 153 to a small town.

With you last point, I would say the track bed and track if it could be reused would be, but the track and trackbed at Wisbech doesnt exist, its still there, but it essentially meaningless in all engineering purposes.

 

[Kingham West]

Wisbech will need massive stimulus after this Corvus 19 problem, it’s poor now , in a year who knows.

I suspect this strengthens the case for what is a social and regeneration scheme; the cost just needs to come down a bit.

What is needed is access to Cambridge, to boost income. Rail delivers massive civic pride and confidence , just look at the Borders Line Economic analysis.

 

[A0wen]

Rail delivers massive civic pride and confidence , just look at the Borders Line Economic analysis.

Not for the first time - Borders was a pretty unique case. The key places now reconnected were *at least* 30 miles from a railhead - often more. The A7 is not a particularly good road and the other roads are similarly patchy - it really had been "disconnected" - Wisbech on the other hand is about 10 miles from a rail head and has half-decent road connections to Peterborough.