speeding up existing services with a bulldozer

[Railcar]

Ardingly to Horsted keynes (enabling East Grinstead to Haywards Heath on the Bluebell)

Arundel to Angmering to avoid reversals at Littlehampton or Bognor when the Brighton Main Line is closed south of Three Bridges

 

[zwk500]

Ardingly to Horsted keynes (enabling East Grinstead to Haywards Heath on the Bluebell)

Is there demand for this

Arundel to Angmering to avoid reversals at Littlehampton or Bognor when the Brighton Main Line is closed south of Three Bridges

That's a very expensive solution to a problem that only exists a handful of times a year (and would prevent solutions to bigger problems in the area)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Marston Vale: build an east to north curve and extra track, bypassing Bletchley and taking people to MKC where they really want to go. No housing demolition needed, just some industrial units.

 

[alf]

The 60mph curve at Crofton on the B&H would save a minute or two if it could be straightened.

The western region had a plan to do this. It would have run through the track bed of High Level station Savernake, now a private house with 3 acres of grounds. My cousin owned it from 1978 to 1997.

 

[EastisECML]

Killingworth to Acklington cutting out the Morpeth curve.

Darlington to Gateshead on the ECML.

A York cut off links up to Leeds, into Sheffield and the ECML south of Doncaster.

A direct line from Hartlepool to Middlesbrough.

A couple of cut offs between Hexham and Carlisle closely following the A69.

And maybe a new line into Edinburgh Airport and provides a new Forth crossing before taking a direct path to Perth and Dundee.

 

[alf]

Is there demand for this

That's a very expensive solution to a problem that only exists a handful of times a year (and would prevent solutions to bigger problems in the area)

This was zwk’s Reply to a suggestion of a chord south from Arundel towards Brighton....Originally a Southern railway idea & then embraced by Connex to upgrade the mid Sussex line as a second mail line to the coast.

As this the the speculative thread what are the bigger problemS in the area & what is the solution?

 

[zwk500]

This was zwk’s Reply to a suggestion of a chord south from Arundel towards Brighton....Originally a Southern railway idea & then embraced by Connex to upgrade the mid Sussex line as a second mail line to the coast.

As this the the speculative thread what are the bigger problemS in the area & what is the solution?

Bigger problem: current layout forces conflict between all trains at Arundel Junction, and proximity of junctions on the triangles holds linespeeds to 20mph. The solutions to these are grade-separation (exactly which configuration is debatable), which a north-to-east chord would likely prevent suitable alignments for.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Morpeth avoiding line

+1 from me

 

[Meerkat]

Morpeth avoiding line

Be more ambitious - avoid Cramlington as well, starting the HS line as near Newcastle as practicable. Speed up express services and enable a more frequent local service.

 

[Killingworth]

Be more ambitious - avoid Cramlington as well, starting the HS line as near Newcastle as practicable. Speed up express services and enable a more frequent local service.

HS3 for Scotland, needs starting somewhere.

 

[EastisECML]

Be more ambitious - avoid Cramlington as well, starting the HS line as near Newcastle as practicable. Speed up express services and enable a more frequent local service.

May as well start from Newcastle Central and restore the 4th track to Heaton. I think there's room for an additional two track alignment to Benton junction at least. From there some tunneling might be required as the line goes past Killingworth and branches away from the ECML towards the A1. Then follow the A1 past Morpeth before heading back east to rejoin the ECML at Acklington.

That would allow fast trains to bypass freight trains slowly turning off the ECML at Benton. And allow for 2-4tph from Newcastle to Widdrington and Ashington/Newbiggin.

Then there could be another cut off following the A1 leaving the ECML just south of Berwick and ideally getting as close as possible to Waverley.

 

[SouthernR]

I doubt the Lancaster one would be much of an issue provided you went to the eastern side of the M6 as a lot of housing is basically right next to the motorway (including, bizarrely, the quite desirable area of Hala Hill). On the other hand digging up Shap would be rather strongly opposed.

I'm sure there was opposition to the Bay Gateway, but it wasn't really through an area of outstanding natural beauty, just a bit of extra-urban farmland and an industrial estate. There's similarly room to the west of Lancaster along the old railway for a western bypass and third bridge if one is considered necessary* - again, this isn't exactly an AONB, though the inhabitants of rural-feeling Aldcliffe won't approve.

* The M6 effectively provides a bypass of Lancaster itself, but within the city there's no practical alternative to get from north to south than via the city centre, and traffic, particularly industrial lorries, doing this is a serious blight on Lancaster's historic city centre; moving that traffic out would be of considerable benefit, though getting rid of Marsh industrial estate (the only access to which is via the centre) and putting houses on it instead would also solve most of it. That industrial estate access issue also effectively rules out a ULEZ or ZEZ in Lancaster city centre, with higher emissions traffic to other destinations able to use the motorway but not access to that particular industrial estate.

There were objections to the A683 Bay Gateway, which passes to the north of Lancaster, generally on the basis that new roads should not be built. However, there was a lot of support for the road to be routed to the west of Lancaster. This was rejected, largely on environmental grounds.
One problem at Lancaster is the location of the station, which requires most people to go through the centre to reach it. The P&R bus doesn't even go there.
The western route would have improved access to the Luneside West industrial estate, new housing and the station. Ironically, there is now a campaign for a new bridge over the Lune downstream of the centre to link with the Bay Gateway.
Assuming the Bailrigg garden village goes ahead, we end up with a ring road.

As others have said, I see the proximity of the M6 as a disadvantage to a new HS by-pass, especially at Lancaster. There would be objections on environmental grounds, and also from rail users who would see it as a threat to direct connections with London.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There were objections to the A683 Bay Gateway, which passes to the north of Lancaster, generally on the basis that new roads should not be built. However, there was a lot of support for the road to be routed to the west of Lancaster. This was rejected, largely on environmental grounds.

I can see why that might have been the case - it would certainly change the nature of that side of things (quite literally).

One problem at Lancaster is the location of the station, which requires most people to go through the centre to reach it. The P&R bus doesn't even go there.

Rail users are likely to be in a tiny minority of those driving to Lancaster (particularly as the city is so small and thus walkable), so I doubt they contribute much to the problem compared with shoppers and through traffic, particularly HGV traffic to that industrial estate.

The western route would have improved access to the Luneside West industrial estate, new housing and the station. Ironically, there is now a campaign for a new bridge over the Lune downstream of the centre to link with the Bay Gateway.
Assuming the Bailrigg garden village goes ahead, we end up with a ring road.

That bridge might be useful for the new housing along the river (though given the flood risk and history the mind boggles as to why anyone buys it). However, I think the industrial estate on the city side of the Lune should just be relocated somewhere else. It's old anyway and a lot of it in poor condition, and housing could be built there instead (ideally with the land raised or a dyke constructed to reduce flood risk). That would stop the HGV traffic that is the main cause of the horribly poor air quality along the main roads through the city.

As others have said, I see the proximity of the M6 as a disadvantage to a new HS by-pass, especially at Lancaster. There would be objections on environmental grounds, and also from rail users who would see it as a threat to direct connections with London.

Post HS2 it's already known the 400m Scotland trains won't stop there, replaced by a 200m terminator, so I don't think it would change much in that plan. There isn't room to extend the platforms to 400m (nor really any need) so I think that is now fixed, really. I do think the terminator should be extended all stations to Carlisle (so Oxenholme/Penrith don't lose London services; Lancaster-Scotland is otherwise provided for by the Manchester-Scotland services plus the "via Brum" classic line service which is planned to stay), but that aside it's all a bit moot.

 

[matacaster]

How about taking out a couple of road lanes from the underused humber bridge and laying rail tracks on it. Provides an alternative route south from Hull with a few miles of track neither end!

 

[HSTEd]

How about taking out a couple of road lanes from the underused humber bridge and laying rail tracks on it. Provides an alternative route south from Hull with a few miles of track neither end!

It would be the longest suspension span with rail tracks on it, displacing the Tsing Ma bridge in Hong Kong.

The problem is that suspension bridges don't do well with the concentrated loadings from trains, they have to be designed with an unusually stiff bridge deck to stop them flexing too much.
The Humber Bridge obviously wasn't built with that in mind.

 

[MarkyT]

Bigger problem: current layout forces conflict between all trains at Arundel Junction, and proximity of junctions on the triangles holds linespeeds to 20mph. The solutions to these are grade-separation (exactly which configuration is debatable), which a north-to-east chord would likely prevent suitable alignments for.

I don't think grade separation is really necessary. Some extra pointwork in the junctions and bi-di working on various lines around the triangle including both lines of the branch to Littlehampton could permit additional parallel movement flexibility, such as Arundel to Barnham at the same time as Brighton - Littlehampton or Littlehampton - Brighton. I doubt a north to east chord will ever be justified, certainly not on the basis of occasional diversions alone.

 

[mike57]

How about taking out a couple of road lanes from the underused humber bridge and laying rail tracks on it. Provides an alternative route south from Hull with a few miles of track neither end!

Even if the engineering obstacles could be overcome, you have to ask why the Humber Bridge is under used. I dont think there is enough business to justify a rail link, and where would the rail link end up, Grimsby, which is maybe 1/3 of the Humber Bridge journeys. Even a light rail solution would be hard to justify, there is a strip of industry along the south bank of the Humber which although physically big isn't high density in terms of employment, and Grimsby and Cleethorpes. Apart from this area and Scunthorpe the area is predominantly rural

The Humber Bridge was a vanity project by the late Barbara Castle to try and keep Hull solidly Labour at a time when the Labour majority in the House of Commons was 2 and they were facing a by-election. It has struggled with debts since it was built.

 

[zwk500]

I don't think grade separation is really necessary. Some extra pointwork in the junctions and bi-di working on various lines around the triangle including both lines of the branch to Littlehampton could permit additional parallel movement flexibility, such as Arundel to Barnham at the same time as Brighton - Littlehampton or Littlehampton - Brighton. I doubt a north to east chord will ever be justified, certainly not on the basis of occasional diversions alone.

Bidi won't help the conflicts, what you might do is put in a two track connection from the arun Valley to the North side of the triangle to allow parallel Brighton <> Littlehampton and Arundel <> Ford moves, but if you don't change the alignment you are stuck at 20mph or so because the reverse curves for every move are a big problem. Because the development on the east side and river on the west the only realistic way to straighten the alignment would require grade separation. I dont think the linespeed will be improved because the cost won't stack up, but that's how you'd do it.

 

[Killingworth]

Even if the engineering obstacles could be overcome, you have to ask why the Humber Bridge is under used. I dont think there is enough business to justify a rail link, and where would the rail link end up, Grimsby, which is maybe 1/3 of the Humber Bridge journeys. Even a light rail solution would be hard to justify, there is a strip of industry along the south bank of the Humber which although physically big isn't high density in terms of employment, and Grimsby and Cleethorpes. Apart from this area and Scunthorpe the area is predominantly rural

The Humber Bridge was a vanity project by the late Barbara Castle to try and keep Hull solidly Labour at a time when the Labour majority in the House of Commons was 2 and they were facing a by-election. It has struggled with debts since it was built.

Maybe a new Humber rail tunnel to the east of Hull would be more use. Single bore bi-directional as traffic wouldn't be great. There was a Humber Tunnel built within the last 10 years and it only cost £150m, £50m more than planned. .

For this bulldozer blue sky thread a look at OS maps and the Humber Gas Tunnel project may be of interest; https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humber_Gas_Tunnel

Maybe a freight and passenger rail tunnel could be built for £2bn. Value for money? Possibly not!

 

[mike57]

Maybe a new Humber rail tunnel to the east of Hull would be more use. Single bore bi-directional as traffic wouldn't be great. There was a Humber Tunnel built within the last 10 years and it only cost £150m, £50m more than planned. .

For this bulldozer blue sky thread a look at OS maps and the Humber Gas Tunnel project may be of interest; https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humber_Gas_Tunnel

Maybe a freight and passenger rail tunnel could be built for £2bn. Value for money? Possibly not!

If you are going to get the bulldozers out in Hull then I would clear a path to the south of the station eastwards, towards the docks, using the out of use platforms at Hull and a new freight line south of it. This would free up a lot of land around Hull used by the current old Hull and Barnsley route, it would enable a practical occasional train service to connect with the ferry which still has a significant amount of foot passengers, and provide a much better link to the docks for freight traffic, which is quite significant. It would also give more platforms at Hull which would ease operations there.

Then seeing as we are in speculation/blue sky area carry on east for a couple of miles and connect with the closed Withernsea route, reopening a basic railway to Withernsea, which has really suffered badly since the railway closed, as traffic and road conditions in the area mean that the bus service take 30mins longer than the steam hauled services from the 1920s. Single track from Hedon onwards, with minimal infrastructure, one engine in operation.

 

[EastisECML]

Perhaps along time from now we might see the case for an additional high speed line which runs from a station in the city of London or Stratford and runs to Cambridge, Lincoln and then crosses the Humber with a branch into Kingston-upon-Hull, Leeds and York?

 

[mike57]

Perhaps along time from now we might see the case for an additional high speed line which runs from a station in the city of London or Stratford and runs to Cambridge, Lincoln and then crosses the Humber with a branch into Kingston-upon-Hull, Leeds and York?

Certainly if you wanted a proper high speed alternative to the ECML towards York then keeping (substantially) to the east would mean you have less habitation to worry about and its flatter. You could proably use some of the existing alingments as well. I would follow the existing Doncaster Gainsborough initially, by pass Gainsborough, and make for March and then south and west of Ely probably using bits of the abandonded Spalding March line. Mind you would need a pretty big fleet of bulldozers.

 

[Mikey C]

Being a Londoner, I particularly remember the squatters protesting against the A12 extension from Redbridge to Hackney. (In those days it was misleadingly labelled the M11 Link Road)

I wouldn't say that was a misleading name, as that's exactly what it does. If it had been built 40 years ago, it would have been the M11 that went down that route!

Perhaps along time from now we might see the case for an additional high speed line which runs from a station in the city of London or Stratford and runs to Cambridge, Lincoln and then crosses the Humber with a branch into Kingston-upon-Hull, Leeds and York?

You could also build a branch from Cambridge to Norwich to become the new express Norwich to London route.

 

[snowball]

Perhaps along time from now we might see the case for an additional high speed line which runs from a station in the city of London or Stratford and runs to Cambridge, Lincoln and then crosses the Humber with a branch into Kingston-upon-Hull, Leeds and York?

Sounds like a rail version of the East Coast Motorway, which was never a government proposal but was promoted by various bodies about 30 years ago, partly as an excuse for the existence of the Humber Bridge.

 

[Killingworth]

Sounds like a rail version of the East Coast Motorway, which was never a government proposal but was promoted by various bodies about 30 years ago, partly as an excuse for the existence of the Humber Bridge.

The Humber Bridge took so long from inception to opening that the A63/M62 negated much of it's purpose. Those using that road today won't appreciate how bad it was.

I well recall how isolated Hull seemed to be when driving west through Selby, south via Boothferry Bridge, or north via York. If a major north south route including the Humber Bridge had been built it would have been a different story.

 

[mike57]

The Humber Bridge took so long from inception to opening that the A63/M62 negated much of it's purpose. Those using that road today won't appreciate how bad it was.

I well recall how isolated Hull seemed to be when driving west through Selby, south via Boothferry Bridge, or north via York. If a major north south route including the Humber Bridge had been built it would have been a different story.

And prior to Clive Sullivan Way opening in the mid 80s the run into Hull down Hessle Road would be a nightmare. I can remember doing a project at BP Chemicals at Saltend in the late 70s and getting across Hull was a nightmare. As the junior engineer I always got lumbered with taking the van into the station to collect parcels and people as a lot of the senior engineers were London based. Hull traffic was horrible, and if one or both bridges opened you could waste an hour.

 

[Mikey C]

Sounds like a rail version of the East Coast Motorway, which was never a government proposal but was promoted by various bodies about 30 years ago, partly as an excuse for the existence of the Humber Bridge.

Ah yes, the road equivalent of rail "crayonistas", proposing to spend a fortune on a road, just so that one piece of underused infrastructure gets more use

 

[snowball]

Ah yes, the road equivalent of rail "crayonistas", proposing to spend a fortune on a road, just so that one piece of underused infrastructure gets more use

I didn't say it was solely for that purpose. A number of local authorities and regional development bodies supported it, if I remember correctly.

 

[MattRat]

Ah yes, the road equivalent of rail "crayonistas", proposing to spend a fortune on a road, just so that one piece of underused infrastructure gets more use

Everything is only a 'fortune' when you refuse to spend a penny. It's relative.

 

[geoffk]

A favourite for these Forums is surely Bradford Interchange to Bradford Forster Square via the new shopping centre (and various heritage buildings as collateral damage) to expedite the vast number of Low Moor to Frizinghall journeys.

More likely Halifax to Keighley and Skipton journeys!