Route closure leading to greatest strategic loss

[Taunton]

By those measures surely Oxford-Cambridge is the greatest strategic loss.

Contrary to so much discussion, there is little commercial trade between Oxford and Cambridge. Rivalry, yes, but those from one do not visit the other a lot. They are too far apart for commuting. Back when the line was open, few trains actually made the journey throughout, most were intermediate stoppers.

There are a number of these medium-distance connections around the country which have little real relationship. Elsewhere it's discussed that the S&D would have improved links between Bristol and Bournemouth. But Bristol people rarely go to Bournemouth, honestly. Weymouth, yes, a favoured holiday and retirement place with many connections; Portsmouth, yes, for all the naval people etc, and that gives Southampton along the way. But not Bournemouth.

 

[quantinghome]

Contrary to so much discussion, there is little commercial trade between Oxford and Cambridge. Rivalry, yes, but those from one do not visit the other a lot. They are too far apart for commuting. Back when the line was open, few trains actually made the journey throughout, most were intermediate stoppers.

There are a number of these medium-distance connections around the country which have little real relationship. Elsewhere it's discussed that the S&D would have improved links between Bristol and Bournemouth. But Bristol people rarely go to Bournemouth, honestly. Weymouth, yes, a favoured holiday and retirement place with many connections; Portsmouth, yes, for all the naval people etc, and that gives Southampton along the way. But not Bournemouth.

It's not surprising there's little traffic given the lack of transport links.

Anyway, it's missing the point just to focus on Oxford and Cambridge. What's the level of commercial trade between Nottingham and Norwich, or Sheffield and Bristol? Very little I imagine, but the train service which connects them also connects a whole swathe of towns and cities along the way. Likewise with Oxford-Cambridge; we should be thinking of a service running from Bristol to Norwich and serving every major town in between.

 

[Merle Haggard]

The A45 hasn't run to Cambridge since the A14 replaced it as the main route to Ipswich and thence the Suffolk Ports - it now joins the A14 at Thrapston.

The A14 was presumably intended to replace the A45 east of the M1 for through traffic.
However, the A45 in my neck of the woods (Northampton) at least is partly 6 lanes but still comes to a halt (pre Covid) in the morning and evening rush hour. However, the suggestion that the Northampton - Wellingborough - Peterborough line be re-instated is always met with ridicule.
Out of interest, can anyone identify road traffic levels between Oxford and Cambridge, considered a completely worthwhile rail re-instatement?- Some of the route seems to be single-carriageway

 

[Hey 3]

It's not surprising there's little traffic given the lack of transport links.

Anyway, it's missing the point just to focus on Oxford and Cambridge. What's the level of commercial trade between Nottingham and Norwich, or Sheffield and Bristol? Very little I imagine, but the train service which connects them also connects a whole swathe of towns and cities along the way. Likewise with Oxford-Cambridge; we should be thinking of a service running from Bristol to Norwich and serving every major town in between.

Agreed, cross country travel is bad at best, and EWR will bridge some of that gap. What will not is splitting of the Liverpool-Norwich service. The Varsity Line is probably one of the biggest mistakes Barbara Castle made. Cross Country travel should be on an east-west axis and north-south. Another major mistake made with closures was the Waverley Route. It was a diversionary line between Carlisle Citadel and Edinburgh Waverley.

 

[quantinghome]

Agreed, cross country travel is bad at best, and EWR will bridge some of that gap. What will not is splitting of the Liverpool-Norwich service. The Varsity Line is probably one of the biggest mistakes Barbara Castle made. Cross Country travel should be on an east-west axis and north-south. Another major mistake made with closures was the Waverley Route. It was a diversionary line between Carlisle Citadel and Edinburgh Waverley.

There's a balance between running long-distance cross-country services and reliability. So in some cases I can see the logic of splitting services.

The Waverley route would probably be part of the intercity network today if it hadn't been shut. But the route from Carlisle to Edinburgh via Carstairs is a significantly quicker alternative for through traffic; the benefit in reopening would be for local stations on the route.

By contrast, there is no good alternative east-west route in England between London and the Midlands.

 

[tbtc]

I'd define the extent of strategic loss by:

1. Population and freight market (no longer) served
2. Ability of other existing routes to compensate

By those measures surely Oxford-Cambridge is the greatest strategic loss. Serving significant population centres in the heart of the country, its loss means there are no east-west routes between London and Leicester. It's no surprise that this is the only long distance route where serious work at reinstatement is being undertaken.

That sounds like good logic and therefore the best conclusion that I've seen on this thread - it's a shame that Milton Keynes wasn't build slightly further south, so that the central station was where the WCML and EWR cross, which might have kept the line open (only "might" sure, but you never know)

It certainly seems a more important "loss" than a lot of the others suggested on here - so as things stand, Oxford to Cambridge gets my vote here. The only thing counting against it IMHO is the fact that the whole service from Birmingham/ Leicester through to Peterborough/ Cambridge is only an hourly Turbostar, which doesn't suggest a *huge* market for east-west links in the Midlands - but Oxford and Cambridge are significant draws in their own right, even if there's not a huge amount of actual "Oxford to Cambridge" trade (I agree with @Taunton regarding the way that people suggest there'd be more actual end--to-end demand than there would really be)

Another major mistake made with closures was the Waverley Route. It was a diversionary line between Carlisle Citadel and Edinburgh Waverley.

I suppose pretty much everywhere is a diversionary line for another line (other than branch lines).

The countryside is lovely between Hawick and Carlisle but also very empty - and there's not a great deal of demand from the Borders to Carlisle (Carlisle isn't a particularly big place - it just appears big since there's nowhere else of size anywhere near it).

There are diversionary routes from Edinburgh to the WCML (e.g. via Shotts if the main line to Carstairs is closed), so there'd really be pretty few times that you'd be diverting Edinburgh trains via the Waverley.

Or, put it another way, if the GSW had been closed fifty years ago, we'd have regular threads on here suggesting that it'd have provided "resilience" in the event of the main Glasgow - Carlisle route being closed - but how many days in the past five years have Glasgow - Carlisle services been diverted that way? (and the GSW serves Kilmarnock and Dumfries, which mean that it's at least got some regular local trade, rather than just being there in the even that diversions were necessary)

 

[Ianno87]

The A14 was presumably intended to replace the A45 east of the M1 for through traffic.

From Cambridge to Felixstowe the present day A14 used to be the A45.

 

[Hey 3]

That sounds like good logic and therefore the best conclusion that I've seen on this thread - it's a shame that Milton Keynes wasn't build slightly further south, so that the central station was where the WCML and EWR cross, which might have kept the line open (only "might" sure, but you never know)

It certainly seems a more important "loss" than a lot of the others suggested on here - so as things stand, Oxford to Cambridge gets my vote here. The only thing counting against it IMHO is the fact that the whole service from Birmingham/ Leicester through to Peterborough/ Cambridge is only an hourly Turbostar, which doesn't suggest a *huge* market for east-west links in the Midlands - but Oxford and Cambridge are significant draws in their own right, even if there's not a huge amount of actual "Oxford to Cambridge" trade (I agree with @Taunton regarding the way that people suggest there'd be more actual end--to-end demand than there would really be)



I suppose pretty much everywhere is a diversionary line for another line (other than branch lines).

The countryside is lovely between Hawick and Carlisle but also very empty - and there's not a great deal of demand from the Borders to Carlisle (Carlisle isn't a particularly big place - it just appears big since there's nowhere else of size anywhere near it).

There are diversionary routes from Edinburgh to the WCML (e.g. via Shotts if the main line to Carstairs is closed), so there'd really be pretty few times that you'd be diverting Edinburgh trains via the Waverley.

Or, put it another way, if the GSW had been closed fifty years ago, we'd have regular threads on here suggesting that it'd have provided "resilience" in the event of the main Glasgow - Carlisle route being closed - but how many days in the past five years have Glasgow - Carlisle services been diverted that way? (and the GSW serves Kilmarnock and Dumfries, which mean that it's at least got some regular local trade, rather than just being there in the even that diversions were necessary)

Shotts is less direct than Waverley

 

[Bevan Price]

That sounds like good logic and therefore the best conclusion that I've seen on this thread - it's a shame that Milton Keynes wasn't build slightly further south, so that the central station was where the WCML and EWR cross, which might have kept the line open (only "might" sure, but you never know)

It certainly seems a more important "loss" than a lot of the others suggested on here - so as things stand, Oxford to Cambridge gets my vote here. The only thing counting against it IMHO is the fact that the whole service from Birmingham/ Leicester through to Peterborough/ Cambridge is only an hourly Turbostar, which doesn't suggest a *huge* market for east-west links in the Midlands - but Oxford and Cambridge are significant draws in their own right, even if there's not a huge amount of actual "Oxford to Cambridge" trade (I agree with @Taunton regarding the way that people suggest there'd be more actual end--to-end demand than there would really be)



I suppose pretty much everywhere is a diversionary line for another line (other than branch lines).

The countryside is lovely between Hawick and Carlisle but also very empty - and there's not a great deal of demand from the Borders to Carlisle (Carlisle isn't a particularly big place - it just appears big since there's nowhere else of size anywhere near it).

There are diversionary routes from Edinburgh to the WCML (e.g. via Shotts if the main line to Carstairs is closed), so there'd really be pretty few times that you'd be diverting Edinburgh trains via the Waverley.

Or, put it another way, if the GSW had been closed fifty years ago, we'd have regular threads on here suggesting that it'd have provided "resilience" in the event of the main Glasgow - Carlisle route being closed - but how many days in the past five years have Glasgow - Carlisle services been diverted that way? (and the GSW serves Kilmarnock and Dumfries, which mean that it's at least got some regular local trade, rather than just being there in the even that diversions were necessary)

An alernative question is how many more trains might have been diverted via Dumfries & Kilmarnock,
1. If it had remained double track throughout
2. If Virgin & successors had ensured all local crews had kept route knowledge, rather than take the easy option (for them) of tipping passengers out of trains into buses ?

 

[Bald Rick]

Shotts is less direct than Waverley

Almost certainly quicker, though. And serves a purpose in its own right.

 

[Hey 3]

Almost certainly quicker, though. And serves a purpose in its own right.

Yes, it does as one of the many electrified key routes between Glasgow and Edinburgh.

 

[Bald Rick]

Yes, it does as one of the many electrified key routes between Glasgow and Edinburgh.

My point being that the Waverley route didn’t serve a purpose in its own right. At least not one worthy of being called ‘strategic’.

 

[tbtc]

Shotts is less direct than Waverley

...and Carstairs is a less direct way of getting from Edinburgh to Carlisle than the Waverley route, but significantly faster - very few passengers sit there with GPS to trace the way that the train goes - I'm sure that a lot of long distance passengers couldn't even tell you which places the train passes through in between scheduled station stops - what matters is the journey time

An alernative question is how many more trains might have been diverted via Dumfries & Kilmarnock,
1. If it had remained double track throughout
2. If Virgin & successors had ensured all local crews had kept route knowledge, rather than take the easy option (for them) of tipping passengers out of trains into buses ?

Point taken but then I suppose...

1. Any discussion on the Waverley line presumably presumes that it remained double track throughout too (given that even the re-opened sections have a lot of single track - I think that the lower demand south of Gala would mean a lot of single track at the Carlisle end)
2. If Virgin etc didn't bother to maintain route knowledge on the GSW (for Glasgow passengers) then what guarantee would there be that TOCs would maintain route knowledge for the Waverley route (for Edinburgh passengers)?

It feels a bit like the arguments in favour of Uckfield - Brighton, since that would apparently be a useful diversionary line if the main London - Brighton route was closed - as long as you ignore the fact that the TOCs tend to put passengers on coaches rather than divert trains via the alternative London - Brighton route (through Horsham) - i.e. the "diversionary resilience" sounds great but the reality is that TOCs don't bother with such complications - it's not worth the hassle of maintaining route knowledge via every potential diversion (especially given staff wages) - so it sounds like a nice idea to tag onto people's suggestion that we re-open some "Beeching" cut but it won't actually be used for such (see also arguments like "an Okehampton to Tavistock line will allow trains to divert via Dartmoor in the event of a closure at Dawlish" << nice in theory but I'm not convinced)

 

[Irascible]

I would not call a diversionary route "strategic" myself - surely it would be the main route in that case. In the event that there is literally no other way of moving traffic ( traffic, not rail vehicles ) if there is a problem with the main route, then yes. These days, is there amywhere?

 

[Dr_Paul]

Unfortunately the operating methods left much to be desired. Say household coal from Nottinghamshire to Bristol, a common flow. It would be tripped from the colliery to Annesley, where it would wait to be marshalled into one of the southbound "Windcutter" freights. These were fixed timetable, limited load, so it might wait the best part of a day to get space in one to depart. Although the Windcutter got all the publicity, it only went from Nottinghamshire to Northamptonshire, something that a lorry on the M1 can achieve in an hour. So into Woodford Halse yard, remarshalled into a freight for Banbury, eventually depart for there, no Windcutter speed now, often taken by a WD tender-first. Into the yard at Banbury where it was remarshalled AGAIN. There were a couple of through freights a day on the WR from Banbury to Bristol, via Didcot west curve, so off to Bristol East Depot sidings, where it would finally be remarshalled again for the local trip working.

This is fascinating! I didn't realise that the arranging of freight traffic could be so complicated.

 

[david1212]

While passenger numbers would be much lower than other routes mentioned in terms of the increased journey time by train between two stations retaining a railway service the closure of Bangor - Afon Wen must be at least near to the top of the chart.

Scarborough - Whitby must be close behind.

Stratford to Honeybourne (NOT all the way through to Cheltenham) seems like a stupid loss. Even in the 60s, Stratford was one on the UK's top tourist destinations, and leaving it with no southern rail access was unfortunate.

But the Honeybourne route only took you to Worcester on through services. Connections at Worcester have always been very limited. Connections from Honeybourne towards Oxford were also hit-and-miss.

I did travel south of Stratford (both on the Cheltenham and Worcester services) before closure a few times and they seemed pretty quiet.

Expecting tourists from London and Oxford to change at the outpost of Honeybourne would never generate significant numbers. With a through Birmingham - Oxford service then much more viable. Moreton-in-Marsh is on the route too. While never a direct rail route from Moreton-in-Marsh to Stow-on-the-Wold plus the station for Stow-on-the-Wold was well away from the town I'm sure a bus link would have attracted visitors from the Birmingham area too.

Indeed Worcester has always suffered from being bypassed by the main Birmingham - Bristol trains. So far it is only the Cardiff - Nottingham services that call at Worcester Parkway. Hence to go further south another change at Cheltenham.

If Honeybourne - Stratford is reopened there needs to be an hourly Oxford - Birmingham service ( could some XC services be rerouted to avoid the busy Ayno Junction - Leamington section ) then the Leamington - Stratford shuttle extended to Worcester hourly. I'm sure it would not work in practice but ideally at Honeyboune both of these would connect into the Hereford / Worcester - Oxford / London services effectively giving half hourly services from Stratford.

Honeybourne - Stratford would also be a strategic diversionary route - think back to when Banbury - Leamington was closed due to the landslide at Harbury tunnel as well as routine maintence.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

This is fascinating! I didn't realise that the arranging of freight traffic could be so complicated.

Plus inefficient - a coal train from say Radyr to Severn Tunnel Junction , or Tinsley to York Yard South might have moved the traffic on , but was from a railway point to another railway point and not to the eventual customer - and explains the death of slow wagon load traffic. Nice to see and reminisce about , but the 2 moves mentioned was not far off a days work for driver , secondman and guard.

As a callow youth I was allowed to ride on coal trains thanks to the kindness of the local train crew , and I asked how long it would take for some wagons on one of the trains to get to London suburbia - "over a week was the confident reply -" , when asked about a block train - "ah - different matter there boy"

Off topic - but therein lies the underlying problems of some routes that have died.

 

[Merle Haggard]

Accepting that the transit time for coal wagons was slow in the 1950s/ early 1960s, there were some other factors. Loading at collieries was orientated to rail, and although lorries could be loaded there wasn't the capacity to move much by road. One might suggest that this could be improved, but changes at the NCB tended to be slow and reluctant. Lorry licencing served to restrict the supply of lorries. Lorries were theoretically legally restricted to 20mph and of course there were no Motorways. Lorries were much smaller - the 'Big Bedford' (as described in the publicity) was a 7 or 8 tonner.
The NCB mined all year round but demand for house coal was (obviously) in the winter. Far from wanting quick transits, the merchants wanted to buy coal at Summer prices but not really want it to arrive until Winter. And that gave rise to standage/demurrage disputes (I was there, for a bit!).
Just really pointing out that it was a different world.

 

[Gloster]

The NCB mined all year round but demand for house coal was (obviously) in the winter. Far from wanting quick transits, the merchants wanted to buy coal at Summer prices but not really want it to arrive until Winter. And that gave rise to standage/demurrage disputes (I was there, for a bit!).
Just really pointing out that it was a different world.

I think that the NCB used to have summer sales to reduce the amount of coal being held at the collieries. Even as late as the end of the 1970s I had to make a note of the time that I ‘phoned the coal merchant to tell them that a wagon had arrived for them, so that they couldn’t claim that they hadn’t been told until after 09.00 and could have another day to unload. Even so, any charge was usually written off as ‘goodwill’.

 

[Merle Haggard]

I think that the NCB used to have summer sales to reduce the amount of coal being held at the collieries. Even as late as the end of the 1970s I had to make a note of the time that I ‘phoned the coal merchant to tell them that a wagon had arrived for them, so that they couldn’t claim that they hadn’t been told until after 09.00 and could have another day to unload. Even so, any charge was usually written off as ‘goodwill’.

You were a star if you wrote off standage or demurrage at an area! My involvement was because Areas would let the outstanding account mount up until it was above the A.M.s authority, then pass to the D.M.. The D.M. did similarly (they had higher levels, so it took a further time) and then passed to the next higher level, a hapless clerk at G.M.s (me!) where the buck stopped... (of course, my boss, not me, had the authority but he used the flattery of 'here's one to get your teeth into' to delegate the tough bit and I was young and enthusiastic then)
Collieries used to load 16t mins. in the Summer and hang on to them until the winter, hiding behind (can't remember if it was standage or demurrage) which took an average of wagon detention, not that of a particular wagon. Wet acidic coal in steel bodied wagons for months - no surprise the state some 16t mins got into.

 

[Gloster]

You were a star if you wrote off standage or demurrage at an area! My involvement was because Areas would let the outstanding account mount up until it was above the A.M.s authority, then pass to the D.M.. The D.M. did similarly (they had higher levels, so it took a further time) and then passed to the next higher level, a hapless clerk at G.M.s (me!) where the buck stopped... (of course, my boss, not me, had the authority but he used the flattery of 'here's one to get your teeth into' to delegate the tough bit and I was young and enthusiastic then)

I have no idea who actually wrote the charge off: this was what I was told by the Goods & Parcels clerk, who generally knew what he was talking about. We only received a couple of wagons of coal a week, even in the peak season, so it would probably have taken quite a while before it was too large a sum for the Station Master. For good measure, one of the companies was efficient at emptying the wagons on time, while the other two weren’t. I gathered that it was the company that only took a handful of wagons a year that was the most likely to argue.

 

[The Planner]

If Honeybourne - Stratford is reopened there needs to be an hourly Oxford - Birmingham service ( could some XC services be rerouted to avoid the busy Ayno Junction - Leamington section ) then the Leamington - Stratford shuttle extended to Worcester hourly. I'm sure it would not work in practice but ideally at Honeyboune both of these would connect into the Hereford / Worcester - Oxford / London services effectively giving half hourly services from Stratford.

Honeybourne - Stratford would also be a strategic diversionary route - think back to when Banbury - Leamington was closed due to the landslide at Harbury tunnel as well as routine maintence.

Oxford to Birmingham via Honeybourne would take an age, its only 60mph from Stratford to Tyseley. XC will never go that way and when E-W is open then that provides the diversionary route if Oxford to Leamington is closed for whatever reason.

 

[randyrippley]

I got the impression the strategic road network puts more emphasis on ports than would be justified by their population alone (see for example Fleetwood and Lowestoft). The same might apply to Southampton, though that is one port big enough to generate enough bulk for rail tranport to be viable. Thinking about it the A34 probably doesn't meet my criteria because it doesn't serve any major place between Oxford and Southampton, which are indeed linked via Reading. The link from Oxford towards Peterborough is more lacking in rail alternative, but EWR partly addresses this.

Something people are forgetting
The "strategic road network" comes out of post WWII plans to alleviate the military supply bottlenecks experienced. Much of the motorway and trunk road network is based on a need for strategic feeder routes to/from the west coast and English channel posts.
Part of this stems from a realisation that during the war the railways couldn't cope with the demands required by the military, and strategic roads were needed. Some of this started during the war - for instance the US military rebuilding the ancient Yeovil-Dorchester road (which still had Roman paving stones) south of Clay Pigeon into the A37. Further south, the A37 upgrades around Weymouth for the Olympics derive their origins from a 1950s scheme to drive a trunk road to the key military harbour at Portland.
In the same part of the country, the upgrades to the A303, A35, A30 all result ultimately from military strategic plans, even if in many cases the roads were only built years after the sites they were supposed to service closed

 

[A0wen]

The A14 was presumably intended to replace the A45 east of the M1 for through traffic.
However, the A45 in my neck of the woods (Northampton) at least is partly 6 lanes but still comes to a halt (pre Covid) in the morning and evening rush hour. However, the suggestion that the Northampton - Wellingborough - Peterborough line be re-instated is always met with ridicule.
Out of interest, can anyone identify road traffic levels between Oxford and Cambridge, considered a completely worthwhile rail re-instatement?- Some of the route seems to be single-carriageway

You're being a bit disingenuous when you say the A45 is "6 lanes" - it's between a couple of junctions in Northampton and that's more so the additional lane can act as a feeder onto the junctions than as 'real' capacity.

The reality of the A45 across Northants is it's single carriageway from Dunchurch (just over the border in Warks) to Jnc 16 of the M1. It then shares with the M1 to Jnc 15, is effectively dual carriageway from Northampton to Stanwick and then single to the A14.

The reason reinstating Northampton - Peterborough is met with ridicule is because it won't solve any of the problems which its supporters claim. There isn't a "huge" demand for travel between Northampton and Peterborough. It wouldn't "link" Northants up - it would link Northampton - Wellingborough and would from there head to Oundle (which isn't a very big place) - so no link to Kettering or Corby. And it would be pretty much useless for freight. And EWR will enable most of the journeys - in fact whenever another 'pet' in the Northants area gets offered up - Northampton to Bedford - I've always pointed out that the journey time on that route would be little or no better than going Northampton - Bletchley - Bedford.

 

[edwin_m]

The reason reinstating Northampton - Peterborough is met with ridicule is because it won't solve any of the problems which its supporters claim. There isn't a "huge" demand for travel between Northampton and Peterborough. It wouldn't "link" Northants up - it would link Northampton - Wellingborough and would from there head to Oundle (which isn't a very big place) - so no link to Kettering or Corby. And it would be pretty much useless for freight. And EWR will enable most of the journeys - in fact whenever another 'pet' in the Northants area gets offered up - Northampton to Bedford - I've always pointed out that the journey time on that route would be little or no better than going Northampton - Bletchley - Bedford.

A link from Northampton only as far as Wellingborough would capture most of the benefits at much less cost than going all the way to Peterborough. If capacity could be found on the MML it would link Kettering and Corby to their nearest larger city. But the advent of East West Rail weakens the case by providing an alternative for the longer-distance flows on that axis. It has some strategic importance but purely related to linking Northampton with other major centres such as Leicester.

 

[A0wen]

A link from Northampton only as far as Wellingborough would capture most of the benefits at much less cost than going all the way to Peterborough. If capacity could be found on the MML it would link Kettering and Corby to their nearest larger city. But the advent of East West Rail weakens the case by providing an alternative for the longer-distance flows on that axis. It has some strategic importance but purely related to linking Northampton with other major centres such as Leicester.

Except there isn't that much demand to link Northampton to Leicester. I should know, having lived in Northampton for the best part of 2 decades I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of people I've met who regularly travel to Leicester from Northampton. The two main reasons for travel are work or leisure. On the work front by far the most common place to travel to was Milton Keynes, followed by Coventry, London or Birmingham. On leisure, you're looking at London or Birmingham.

Northampton - Wellingborough is a non-starter for a multitude of reasons, not least the old trackbed runs along the bottom of the Nene Valley, which regularly floods. And there really isn't an alternative route which would be even remotely viable.

 

[Helvellyn]

Except there isn't that much demand to link Northampton to Leicester. I should know, having lived in Northampton for the best part of 2 decades I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of people I've met who regularly travel to Leicester from Northampton. The two main reasons for travel are work or leisure. On the work front by far the most common place to travel to was Milton Keynes, followed by Coventry, London or Birmingham. On leisure, you're looking at London or Birmingham.

Northampton - Wellingborough is a non-starter for a multitude of reasons, not least the old trackbed runs along the bottom of the Nene Valley, which regularly floods. And there really isn't an alternative route which would be even remotely viable.

Unfortunately very true. The trackbed has been built over in Wellingborough (not least the A45), and houses on part of the demolished embankment that joined the line up with the MML. You can add in the Water Works (including access road) built over the trackbed between Ditchford and Irthlingborough plus various sites where gravel extraction has taken place. The latter means that not only are there now large manmade lakes adjacent to the former track bed but it seems to help increase the amount of flooding (see the various Nature Reserves that now exist along the route at these old gravel pits).

If the Midland's Wellingborough - Rushden - Higham Ferrers branch had been extended down to Irthlingborough to join the route to Peterborough then you'd have added another couple of conurbations to the route, but as you rightly point it it largely follows the Nene and doesn't serve lots of populous places inbetween. Even Stagecoach send the X4 Northampton-Peterborough bus via Kettering and Corby rather than along the A45 from Wellingborough to Thrapston.

Of more use would be sometimes mooted reopening of Irchester station on the MML as Rushden Parkway. If done on the slow lines only the EMR Electric service could serve it but that would be sufficient. (Rushden, Higham Ferrers and Irchester have a population combined of over 40,000 on top of over 60,000 for Wellingborough, Finedon and Irthlingborough).

 

[A0wen]

Unfortunately very true. The trackbed has been built over in Wellingborough (not least the A45), and houses on part of the demolished embankment that joined the line up with the MML. You can add in the Water Works (including access road) built over the trackbed between Ditchford and Irthlingborough plus various sites where gravel extraction has taken place. The latter means that not only are there now large manmade lakes adjacent to the former track bed but it seems to help increase the amount of flooding (see the various Nature Reserves that now exist along the route at these old gravel pits).

If the Midland's Wellingborough - Rushden - Higham Ferrers branch had been extended down to Irthlingborough to join the route to Peterborough then you'd have added another couple of conurbations to the route, but as you rightly point it it largely follows the Nene and doesn't serve lots of populous places inbetween. Even Stagecoach send the X4 Northampton-Peterborough bus via Kettering and Corby rather than along the A45 from Wellingborough to Thrapston.

Of more use would be sometimes mooted reopening of Irchester station on the MML as Rushden Parkway. If done on the slow lines only the EMR Electric service could serve it but that would be sufficient. (Rushden, Higham Ferrers and Irchester have a population combined of over 40,000 on top of over 60,000 for Wellingborough, Finedon and Irthlingborough).

The A45 has only taken a very small amount of the trackbed - effectively the site of Wellingborough London Road station. The road runs East <> West whereas the railway ran South West - North East, so the road's formation cut across the rail line rather than used the rail line. The bigger problem is the valley floor - I understand the route used to be susceptible to flooding when it was open as a railway. The reality is nobody would seriously agree to rebuilding a railway which has a significant flood risk - and its trackbed is the Nene's flood plain which flooded as recently as December 2020.

Completely agree about an Irchester & Rushden station though. That would do a lot to help, though it would slow the EMR electrics down by circa 5 mins in getting to Wellingborough & Kettering.

I think the only rail closure in Northants which could be classed as a 'strategic loss' was our old friend the Great Central. The other lines in the county which succumbed (not counting small branch lines) were the S&MJR which was always a secondary route and succumbed pre-Beeching, Bedford - Northampton, which was slow, meandering and didn't serve anywhere particularly important en-route, Kettering - Huntingdon, closed in the 1950s not particularly well used, Rugby - Stamford which cut through the edge of Northants and didn't serve anywhere in particular and lastly Northampton - Harborough, which is often peddled as another re-opening, but one I struggle to see any sensible benefit for. Yes, it allows for links from the MK / Northampton area to Leicester / East Mids, but so does a change at Nuneaton or Tamworth. There's nowhere between Northampton & Harborough which is crying out for a station.