New railway lines and stations for South Yorkshire

[TheGuy77]

Being from South Yorkshire, I was wondering what new lines there could be if there was proper funding from the government.

Perhaps we could get a publicly-owned TOC running trains exclusively for South Yorkshire (and maybe a few other places like Leeds and Nottingham). Northern is far too big to operate local trains for both Manchester and Newcastle.

We could include the Barrow Hill and Don Valley lines as well as bringing back the link from Barnsley-Donny, as well as a couple of new stations.

If you have any more ideas, please let me know.

 

[Iskra]

Being from South Yorkshire, I was wondering what new lines there could be if there was proper funding from the government.

Perhaps we could get a publicly-owned TOC running trains exclusively for South Yorkshire (and maybe a few other places like Leeds and Nottingham). Northern is far too big to operate local trains for both Manchester and Newcastle.

We could include the Barrow Hill and Don Valley lines as well as bringing back the link from Barnsley-Donny, as well as a couple of new stations.

If you have any more ideas, please let me know.

Barrow Hill-Stocksbridge is more likely to come back under Supertram with diesel tram trains and is confirmed as under consideration.

Beyond that, a Rotherham mainline station is a possibility and the only other thing that would be any use would be re-modelling Sheffield Midland and the approaches on either side between Dore and Meadowhall, but that would be a vast, expensive project to deliver anything useful.

There is also some limited investment on the Penistone Line too.

 

[TheGuy77]

Barrow Hill-Stocksbridge is more likely to come back under Supertram with diesel tram trains and is confirmed as under consideration.

Why Diesel? Couldn't they use battery or electrify the line?

 

[Iskra]

Why Diesel? Couldn't they use battery or electrify the line?

Diesel is proven technology, available straight off the shelf, doesn’t need recharging and would be significantly cheaper and quicker to get into operation than electrification. Electrification could follow at a later date if the initial service is successful.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Why Diesel? Couldn't they use battery or electrify the line?

Dont forget electeifying lines that have yet to be reoopened or built dramatically increases costs, which undermines any buisness case!

 

[Grimsby town]

Diesel is proven technology, available straight off the shelf, doesn’t need recharging and would be significantly cheaper and quicker to get into operation than electrification. Electrification could follow at a later date if the initial service is successful.

But why not battery. Battery trams are fairly common. Are there more than a couple dozen diesel trams/tram trains across the world?

 

[Iskra]

But why not battery. Battery trams are fairly common. Are there more than a couple dozen diesel trams/tram trains across the world?

It’s an option, but personally I’d not go for those due to the gradient of the line to Stocksbridge, sharing lines with heavy rail services and the fact that the Barrow Hill Line is an existing railway line so charging at tram stops may not be suitable as that could block the line for longer and would require more infrastructure works on the line. Much better to just install diesel pumps at the Supertram depot, passing today it looks like there’s room. I think diesel would be simpler and quicker to start operations.

 

[Grimsby town]

It’s an option, but personally I’d not go for those due to the gradient of the line to Stocksbridge, sharing lines with heavy rail services and the fact that the Barrow Hill Line is an existing railway line so charging at tram stops may not be suitable as that could block the line for longer and would require more infrastructure works on the line. Much better to just install diesel pumps at the Supertram depot, passing today it looks like there’s room. I think diesel would be simpler and quicker to start operations.

To be fair I didn't realised there is a diesel electric version of the city link tram which makes it more realistic. Still we're talking at least 4 or 5 years before any new line is likely to be running so battery technology is likely to continue to progress and diesel likely to become less acceptable. I'd be incredibly surprised if diesel is being considered and don't see it speeding the project up. Planning and funding is likely to be a far bigger constraint on getting a service in operation.

 

[Iskra]

To be fair I didn't realised there is a diesel electric version of the city link tram which makes it more realistic. Still we're talking at least 4 or 5 years before any new line is likely to be running so battery technology is likely to continue to progress and diesel likely to become less acceptable. I'd be incredibly surprised if diesel is being considered and don't see it speeding the project up. Planning and funding is likely to be a far bigger constraint on getting a service in operation.

Time and speed is critically important in this instance as the line to Stocksbridge is deteriorating as we speak, so the longer it takes, the harder it gets to do. Hence, why I believe that diesel trams sooner is better than batteries further down the line.

I’m not against battery technology in principle, I just think it’s not necessarily the right technology for this project to happen speedily.

 

[YorksLad12]

Barrow Hill-Stocksbridge is more likely to come back under Supertram with diesel tram trains and is confirmed as under consideration.

I'd say (with no insider knowledge) that any tram or tram train expansion will be electric only. That allows for two fleets at most and helps with the old net zero thing.

Beyond that, a Rotherham mainline station is a possibility and the only other thing that would be any use would be re-modelling Sheffield Midland and the approaches on either side between Dore and Meadowhall, but that would be a vast, expensive project to deliver anything useful.

There is also some limited investment on the Penistone Line too.

£48m for the Penistone Line, although I haven't seen a firm plan for that either! There's City Region Sustainable Transport Settlement works planned at some stations. Rotherham Mainline was retained by DfT, so it can't simply be built without an operator committing to stop there for example (this isn't Scotland ).

 

[TheGuy77]

Perhaps heavy rail is better. We could initially use old sprinters/turbostars and, if successful, we could electrify the line.

 

[Grimsby town]

Time and speed is critically important in this instance as the line to Stocksbridge is deteriorating as we speak, so the longer it takes, the harder it gets to do. Hence, why I believe that diesel trams sooner is better than batteries further down the line.

I’m not against battery technology in principle, I just think it’s not necessarily the right technology for this project to happen speedily.

But I'm saying that diesel won't lead to faster delivery over battery. The infrastructure works aren't going to be significantly different and the real time constraint will be going through the planning and consultation process which will take years. Its not a case of just buying trams and starting a service.

 

[HST43257]

I’d like to see this happen on heavy rail

Stations out to Dore built
Stations (and housebuilding) on Barrow Hill route built
Stations out to Stocksbridge built
New island platform station at Nunnery (near tram depot) for interchanges (think Thorpe-le-Soken)

 

[TheGuy77]

I’d like to see this happen on heavy rail

Stations out to Dore built
Stations (and housebuilding) on Barrow Hill route built
Stations out to Stocksbridge built
New island platform station at Nunnery (near tram depot) for interchanges (think Thorpe-le-Soken)

I'm sure the government/labour has wanted all of those to happen.

 

[mittyb2]

With the decline in traffic on the South Yorkshire Joint Railway I’ve always thought a service on that line, Sheffield to Doncaster could work? A cutting exists at Brancliffe Junction where a small chord could be reinstated to allow access without reversing at Worksop. Anston, Laughton/Dinnington, Maltby, Tickhill, Doncaster. If the airport ever reopened or business activity increased around there, could also continue on to the airport, through the line that goes through Bessacarr with a new station there perhaps. I’m sure there’s big potential on it and most of the structures on the line were built to make double tracking easy (Brookhouse viaduct for instance)

 

[zwk500]

Time and speed is critically important in this instance as the line to Stocksbridge is deteriorating as we speak, so the longer it takes, the harder it gets to do. Hence, why I believe that diesel trams sooner is better than batteries further down the line.

I’m not against battery technology in principle, I just think it’s not necessarily the right technology for this project to happen speedily.

Given Sheffield Supertram doesn't currently use diesel vehicles and therefore I would suspect doesn't have any diesel handling facilities at it's depots (or certainly not enough for a fleet of trams in service) I wouldn't bet that introducing diesels is any quicker than introducing batteries.
If you want to get a service over the line ASAP, using a lightweight heavy rail DMU with limited mainline signalling is going to be the fastest possible option. Once it's up and running you would then have the time to programme and design the conversion to Tram or Tram-Train.

 

[Grimsby town]

I’d like to see this happen on heavy rail

Stations out to Dore built
Stations (and housebuilding) on Barrow Hill route built
Stations out to Stocksbridge built
New island platform station at Nunnery (near tram depot) for interchanges (think Thorpe-le-Soken)

I think the stations to from Sheffield to Dore are non-starter unfortunately. I've no doubt the demand is there if they are served my multiple trains per hour, but I don't see where those train services are coming from.

There's only one service local stopping service operating south/west of Sheffield. One train per hour isn't going to be frequent enough to make the train attractive. It works more at Dore because the bus takes longer into Sheffield than it would at other interemediate stations, but Dore is mainly used by people travelling to Manchester.

Perhaps if some sort of turn back loop is created at somewhere like Gridndleford and the line between Sheffield and Dore gets more tracks, it might be possible to run some local services from east of Sheffield as through services providing a decent frequency to new station along the route.

Nunnery Square platforms are a decent idea and the Barrow Hill line should be opened to passengers either using tram-trains or heavy rail.

 

[Martin23230]

Another thing to remember about reinstating any Barrow Hill/Stocksbridge services as part of the Supertram instead of heavy rail is that the Sheffield trams are low floor. The only current joint tram+train stop on the network is Rotherham Central, which needed new low-floor platforms (3/4) to be built for the tram-train services to stop at. If either line was reopened as a tram-train route then any new stations would have to be built with low platforms, plus the existing stations on the Barrow Hill route (Chesterfield, Woodhouse, Darnall) would have to either be rebuilt or have extensions added like in Rotherham. How would that affect the recent Hull Trains proposal to have King's Cross services stop at Woodhouse? Plus there's the new station at Waverley which already has its own separate application as a heavy-rail station on the Sheffield-Lincoln line, it would also have to be redesigned if tram-train services were to stop there.

Even if new low stops are built and existing platforms replaced/extended then you've really limited any expansion by locking in the low-floor design. There was talk that if Victoria was reopened to serve both Barrow Hill and Stocksbridge lines then the Sheffield-Lincoln services could be redirected there, perhaps other local services within South Yorkshire too, in order to free capacity from the northern throat at Midland. That's clearly a non-starter if it's only built for tram-train stock. Getting even more speculative, if the reopening of the Barrow Hill line is successful then maybe services could be extended south from Chesterfield to Derby or Nottingham, or on the Don Valley end once the line is back up and running there might be an argument to restore the link to Penistone and allow connections to Huddersfield (and to be clear I'm not even going to being up Woodhead). Again these would all only really be feasible if the lines were re-opened as heavy rail rather than as a tram-train route.

If you ask me it would be much more reasonable to see both lines reopen with a simple DMU service running between Chesterfield and Stocksbridge. Spend all the money you save from not electrifying or rebuilding stations on a proper Sheffield Parkway interchange station at Nunnery Square and a new tram spur in the city centre to connect to the reopened Victoria via Castlegate.

 

[Grimsby town]

Another thing to remember about reinstating any Barrow Hill/Stocksbridge services as part of the Supertram instead of heavy rail is that the Sheffield trams are low floor. The only current joint tram+train stop on the network is Rotherham Central, which needed new low-floor platforms (3/4) to be built for the tram-train services to stop at. If either line was reopened as a tram-train route then any new stations would have to be built with low platforms, plus the existing stations on the Barrow Hill route (Chesterfield, Woodhouse, Darnall) would have to either be rebuilt or have extensions added like in Rotherham. How would that affect the recent Hull Trains proposal to have King's Cross services stop at Woodhouse? Plus there's the new station at Waverley which already has its own separate application as a heavy-rail station on the Sheffield-Lincoln line, it would also have to be redesigned if tram-train services were to stop there.

Even if new low stops are built and existing platforms replaced/extended then you've really limited any expansion by locking in the low-floor design. There was talk that if Victoria was reopened to serve both Barrow Hill and Stocksbridge lines then the Sheffield-Lincoln services could be redirected there, perhaps other local services within South Yorkshire too, in order to free capacity from the northern throat at Midland. That's clearly a non-starter if it's only built for tram-train stock. Getting even more speculative, if the reopening of the Barrow Hill line is successful then maybe services could be extended south from Chesterfield to Derby or Nottingham, or on the Don Valley end once the line is back up and running there might be an argument to restore the link to Penistone and allow connections to Huddersfield (and to be clear I'm not even going to being up Woodhead). Again these would all only really be feasible if the lines were re-opened as heavy rail rather than as a tram-train route.

If you ask me it would be much more reasonable to see both lines reopen with a simple DMU service running between Chesterfield and Stocksbridge. Spend all the money you save from not electrifying or rebuilding stations on a proper Sheffield Parkway interchange station at Nunnery Square and a new tram spur in the city centre to connect to the reopened Victoria via Castlegate.

I do agree that there is some solid logic to re-opening Barrow Hill and Stocksbridge as a heavy rail route. Extensions north to Penistone would reduce journey times from Sheffield to Huddersfield and a heavy rail Victoria would help relieve Midland at the cost of slightly worse connectivity. Generally I favour light rail conversions but Barrow Hill and Stocksbridge is certainly a more complicated situation.

I don't think running tram train alongside heavy rail is a huge issue though. Converting Woodhouse and Darnall to low floor would be fine. Waverley could perhaps have both high floor and low floor platforms due to the employment opportunities it offers. Hull Trains could stop at Waverley instead of Woodhouse.

 

[Mat17]

Train would be preferable on the Don Valley and Barrow Hill lines. Although low platforms have been mentioned as a future stumbling block, the other issue is with net zero stuff. If the Don Valley and Barrow lines had to go electric it'd be problematic installing overheads (battery trams notwithstanding). The MML electrification is supposed to reach Sheffield Midland station at some point, presumably the Old Road would be an important diversionary route to string up as well. Which would then mean any DC tram overheads would have a short operational life as they'd have to make way for AC ones.

 

[zwk500]

I don't think running tram train alongside heavy rail is a huge issue though. Converting Woodhouse and Darnall to low floor would be fine. Waverley could perhaps have both high floor and low floor platforms due to the employment opportunities it offers. Hull Trains could stop at Waverley instead of Woodhouse.

Running Tram-Train on a route only used by non-passenger heavy rail would be fine, as the stations would just be set up for the trams. However if you were mixing mainline trains and tram-trains it gets a bit more awkward (although far from impossible) as you need setups like Rotherham Central with the 2 different platform levels. If you were doing something like that you'd presumably put in some stations as tram-only and some as mixed tram/heavy rail.

Train would be preferable on the Don Valley and Barrow Hill lines. Although low platforms have been mentioned as a future stumbling block, the other issue is with net zero stuff. If the Don Valley and Barrow lines had to go electric it'd be problematic installing overheads (battery trams notwithstanding). The MML electrification is supposed to reach Sheffield Midland station at some point, presumably the Old Road would be an important diversionary route to string up as well. Which would then mean any DC tram overheads would have a short operational life as they'd have to make way for AC ones.

The class 399s are built with provision for Dual-voltage AIUI. The Rotherham Wires are I think 750v DC but with provision for later conversion so it's not seen as a particularly bad issue. The Old Road would not justify 25KV AC electrification unless there was a heavy rail passenger service - it'd be a short enough hop for locos 'last-mile' battery or bi-mode capabilities to cover the distance to Chesterfield.

 

[HST43257]

I think the stations to from Sheffield to Dore are non-starter unfortunately. I've no doubt the demand is there if they are served my multiple trains per hour, but I don't see where those train services are coming from.

There's only one service local stopping service operating south/west of Sheffield. One train per hour isn't going to be frequent enough to make the train attractive. It works more at Dore because the bus takes longer into Sheffield than it would at other interemediate stations, but Dore is mainly used by people travelling to Manchester.

Perhaps if some sort of turn back loop is created at somewhere like Gridndleford and the line between Sheffield and Dore gets more tracks, it might be possible to run some local services from east of Sheffield as through services providing a decent frequency to new station along the route.

Nunnery Square platforms are a decent idea and the Barrow Hill line should be opened to passengers either using tram-trains or heavy rail.

My theory is to have a mini metro sort of system with

2tph Lincoln to Dore or Chesterfield via Sheffield Midland
2tph Stocksbridge to Chesterfield via Sheffield Victoria and Barrow Hill

There would be the appropriate interchanges at Nunnery to ensure, for example, a Midland to Stocksbridge journey

 

[TheGuy77]

2tph Lincoln to Dore or Chesterfield via Sheffield Midland
2tph Stocksbridge to Chesterfield via Sheffield Victoria and Barrow Hill

Perhaps we could merge the Sheffield-Adwick route on Northern with a new Sheffield-Nottingham service (via Alfreton), calling at the new Sheaf Valley line stations and a proposed new Clay Cross station. Increase frequency to 2tph.

 

[zwk500]

2tph Stocksbridge to Chesterfield via Sheffield Victoria and Barrow Hill

The problem with both Stocksbridge and Barrow Hill routes is that the stations aren't particularly well sited to serve the passenger demand. Given the Tram P&R sites already along these lines, I'm not sure the modal shift potential is very good on these lines.

There would be the appropriate interchanges at Nunnery to ensure, for example, a Midland to Stocksbridge journey

If you have to interchange at Nunnery, is it any better for an end-to-end journey than driving to Middlewood Tram Stop? The railway isn't going to be massively fast with a sharp curve out of Stocksbridge and following the valley. Especially as you'll need to take 2 trams from Nunnery Square to Midland (changing at Ponds Forge) or would you introduce an additional Rotherham/Meadowhall-Halfway route?

 

[HST43257]

If you have to interchange at Nunnery, is it any better for an end-to-end journey than driving to Middlewood Tram Stop? The railway isn't going to be massively fast with a sharp curve out of Stocksbridge and following the valley. Especially as you'll need to take 2 trams from Nunnery Square to Midland (changing at Ponds Forge) or would you introduce an additional Rotherham/Meadowhall-Halfway route?

It’s another train to get to Nunnery, using an island platform.

 

[daodao]

Adding main line platforms at Dore and Totley, allowing trains also serving Dronfield to call, would give 2 tph from Sheffield and thus a more useful service.

Re-opening the Stocksbridge line is problematic and of limited value, given the geography of Stocksbridge, the Don valley and the alignment of the former GC line north of Sheffield city centre. The demand is likely to be poor, given the existing bus frequency and the scrapping of the tram feeder service a few years ago.

 

[JD2168]

Adding main line platforms at Dore and Totley, allowing trains also serving Dronfield to call, would give 2 tph from Sheffield and thus a more useful service.

Re-opening the Stocksbridge line is problematic and of limited value, given the geography of Stocksbridge, the Don valley and the alignment of the former GC line north of Sheffield city centre. The demand is likely to be poor, given the existing bus frequency and the scrapping of the tram feeder service a few years ago.

The problem with the 57/57a buses from Stocksbridge is they can often be unreliable & late as they inter work with the 2 Barnsley service at Sheffield Moorfoot. Even with the removal of the Tram Feeder service & the 72/72a from Ecclesfield cancellations are quite regular at times. Also some of the deckers at Ecclesfield are quite tired with the ex Manchester versions having seen better days. The Scania versions that are used Stagecoach keep taking for Peak Sightseer open top duties.

If the Train is problematic extend the Tram from the Tram Stop via Oughtibridge to Fox Valley or link the Tram line onto the existing railway line using Tram Trains.

 

[Mat17]

Could technically do both. There's no reason there couldn't be a link from Middlewood onto the Don Valley Line, I think this has been looked into before, but it would cost a lot more to set up than using the existing line.

The buses cater for passengers living on the estates and travelling through to Hillsborough and then onto Sheffield if they wish. They are dreadful though for anyone who simply wants to go direct from Stocksbridge through to Sheffield and specifically travel elsewhere beyond Sheffield be that by train or other bus. It's just easier to drive, it's more reliable as well.

The advantage of a rail link is for passengers who want a quick journey to Sheffield to then travel onwards, I suppose it would also bring more people into Fox Valley shopping centre who don't want a diversionary tour of every estate between Hillsborough and Fox Valley. Which was one of the reasons the old Sheffield - Holmfirth bus died a slow death. There was plenty of demand for people who wanted to go from Sheffield for a day out in Holmfirth, it's just none of them wanted the 1 hour and 5 minute trek from Sheffield Interchange to the furthest end of Stocksbridge, before the actual additional journey of 20 minutes to Holmfirth began. If it had run express with only a few stops between Sheffield and Stocksbridge, using main roads only it might have been a better success.

As for the tram feeder buses they went because people got sick of them missing, when they did turn up they would not connect with the tram. They'd get you there in time to watch the tram leave and vice versa. I speak as someone who used the bus services for 20 years and had to battle at every turn. In 2020 I bought a car, I won't use the buses again. I would happily use the train though if it ever gets off the ground. Not keen on a tram diversion via Hillsborough and University though, it can't beat my 30 minutes in the car.

 

[daodao]

The problem with the 57/57a buses from Stocksbridge is they can often be unreliable & late as they inter work with the 2 Barnsley service at Sheffield Moorfoot. Even with the removal of the Tram Feeder service & the 72/72a from Ecclesfield cancellations are quite regular at times. Also some of the deckers at Ecclesfield are quite tired with the ex Manchester versions having seen better days. The Scania versions that are used Stagecoach keep taking for Peak Sightseer open top duties.

If the Train is problematic extend the Tram from the Tram Stop via Oughtibridge to Fox Valley or link the Tram line onto the existing railway line using Tram Trains.

The problem with any passenger train/tram service to Stocksbridge is that it won't be viable to serve a town with a population of only 10k, given that it could not be a simple short branch and connectivity into central Sheffield and the wider rail network would be poor.

 

[zwk500]

It’s another train to get to Nunnery, using an island platform.

The existing service that would serve this connection is hourly. With only 2tph on the Barrow Hill - Stocksbridge route passengers are not going to kick about at Nunnery for up to half an hour when they have better options, such as getting a tram direct to the station. The longer tram journey will be mitigated by the lack of interchange.
I think a Nunnery Square station does have some merit, I just don't think it'll be for interchange between heavy rail but rather a P&R onto the trains or from heavy rail to tram.

Adding main line platforms at Dore and Totley, allowing trains also serving Dronfield to call, would give 2 tph from Sheffield and thus a more useful service.

Although it would likely mean reducing the speed of the bend because it's currently canted right over (this issue is arguably worse if you're using platform loops than stopping on the main line due to the need for points) and stopping at both Dore and Dronfield won't be great for capacity. I agree 2tph should be the intent at Dore though.