What could be done to make the Whitby line better?

[Darandio]

If they want frequency, use the half hourly scarborough bus/hourly middlesborough bus

Have you tried getting on an afternoon/evening bus out of Whitby in the summer?

 

[zwk500]

If you liok at the majority of tourist resorts (Brid, Eastbourne, Margate etc) visitors tend to want a choice of times to arrive and leave. Yes, most will be out in the morning and back in the evening/afternoon, but that itself contains a lot of potential variation as to when people actually want to leave/arrive.

But the issue is really for Whitby you want a succession of 3 or 4 trains across a short period, then a long break, then a group of 3 or 4 trains spread over a slightly longer period (with maybe a couple of last-orders extras). However there's no way the operational costs could justify the infrastructure and service pattern to do that.
I personally agree that a 2-hourly service is sensible as with longer trains it's a reasonable compromise for the times when the line isn't so busy on the infra costs. A few Linespeed tweaks and an intermediate token instrument for the NYMR may well allow a 2-hourly service with the passing move alternating between Battersby and Glaisdale without any significant extra infrastructure. It wouldn't be massively good on staff and stock utilisation with a reasonable layover in Whitby, but you could skip some lunchtime trains as part of the PNB and use the same crews throughout.

 

[yorksrob]

But the issue is really for Whitby you want a succession of 3 or 4 trains across a short period, then a long break, then a group of 3 or 4 trains spread over a slightly longer period (with maybe a couple of last-orders extras). However there's no way the operational costs could justify the infrastructure and service pattern to do that.
I personally agree that a 2-hourly service is sensible as with longer trains it's a reasonable compromise for the times when the line isn't so busy on the infra costs. A few Linespeed tweaks and an intermediate token instrument for the NYMR may well allow a 2-hourly service with the passing move alternating between Battersby and Glaisdale without any significant extra infrastructure. It wouldn't be massively good on staff and stock utilisation with a reasonable layover in Whitby, but you could skip some lunchtime trains as part of the PNB and use the same crews throughout.

No, not at all.

I believe that something like a two-hourly service would be enough to provide a greater element of choice for Whitby passengers. It's never going to be the Brighton line, but it can be better.

 

[zwk500]

No, not at all.

Is there a specific part of my suggestion you're objecting to or the idea in general, because your below statement seems like we are broadly in agreement that a 2-hourly base is a reasonable starting point for the Whitby line

I believe that something like a two-hourly service would be enough to provide a greater element of choice for Whitby passengers. It's never going to be the Brighton line, but it can be better.

 

[deltic08]

Profitable, you mean?

Given the tens of millions of pounds needed for around twenty miles of railway, over what timescale do you think we’d pay off the infrastructure investment?

We’ve had this argument a few times on here but the Whitby line seems to have some individual trains that carry more people than the average *daily* ridership on the branch (a full and standing four coach DMU)

It is, on a long branch line with lots of single track, plus the complication of reversal at Battersby and the paths allocated to the NYRM east of Grosmont

(Rejigging the ECML services to prioritise the Wakefield to Whitby market would bring “taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut” to a whole new level)

The Government used to have a timescale of paying back over 60 years. Is it still the case?

I agree ridership figures are low in winter but makes up for it in summer so it is impossible to just divide the annual figures by the number of trains. That only gives an average loading over the whole year per train and not individual services. I assume the busiest train is the midday arrival in Whitby and the 4 pm departure. These are the ones I use. Four hours in Whitby is just right for me. Good job as it cannot be shorter unless the return working is taken.

I didn't mean rejig times on the branch but beyond Middlesbrough to West Yorkshire generally and not Wakefield in particular.

 

[yorksrob]

Is there a specific part of my suggestion you're objecting to or the idea in general, because your below statement seems like we are broadly in agreement that a 2-hourly base is a reasonable starting point for the Whitby line

It's the assertion that I'm implying that there would need to be a quick succession of three or four trains over a short period that I'm disagreeing with. Whitby doesn't need that.

But yes, a 2 hourly base - we seem to be in agreement.

 

[zwk500]

It's the assertion that I'm implying that there would need to be a quick succession of three or four trains over a short period that I'm disagreeing with. Whitby doesn't need that.

Sorry, poor phrasing - I'm not trying to put words into your mouth. It's entirely my own assertion that you would want an approximately hourly service for the School/Commute traffic that extends into the start of the leisure day, then a break until school finishes, then an approximately hourly service until early evening.

But yes, a 2 hourly base - we seem to be in agreement.

Good good.

 

[HSTEd]

Because the country lane needs replacing if you want to turn it into a railway? And because the structures in use on a country lane are unlikely to be able to carry trains?

I don't want to put a railway onto a country lane?




The country lane (blue) goes over a pre-existing bridge provided for the movement of agricultural equipment.
The railway (orange) crosses a largely flat, empty field.

The red circle is a ~140m radius curve, which is adequate elsewhere on the railway system (Syston)

Not clear what you're going to do about objections to the closure of the station or the enormous disruption caused by the building works either. Just steamroller them and fingers crossed there's no application for Judicial Review?

Do you really think there will be particularly vociferous objections to a station used by 5 people per day on average? Even before coronavirus?

 

[Starmill]

Do you really think there will be particularly vociferous objections to a station used by 5 people per day on average? Even before coronavirus?

Yes? Otherwise no stations between Great Ayton and Grosmont would be served by any trains at all, as there's no reason for any more people than that to use them. Incidentally skipping all of those stops would save more time than building a new chord.

I don't want to put a railway onto a country lane?

OK so this approach would be less in concrete or steel structures and far more in earthworks, which are even more expensive?

Have you tried getting on an afternoon/evening bus out of Whitby in the summer?

Yes, and nobody got left behind. A number of additional services run on summer weekends.

 

[zwk500]

The red circle is a ~140m radius curve, which is adequate elsewhere on the railway system (Syston)

I have it in my head that 250m is the recommended minimum curve radii (and you'd need to add transition/Euler curves on each end), but somebody with an RSSB login will need to confirm if that's 'best practice' or a standard which would need a derogation (or if I've got the number wrong, quite possible).

I also believe your line+ would lead to a reverse curve that isn't permitted in the distance, so the bridge needs to go one way or another.

 

[Starmill]

But yes, a 2 hourly base - we seem to be in agreement.

Sadly this is way beyond what could be achieved in terms of drivers and conductors because it would more than double the cost of providing the train crew, maintenance miles and diesel fuel, even if units could be identified and infrastructure didn't need any changes.

 

[mangyiscute]

Have you tried getting on an afternoon/evening bus out of Whitby in the summer?

And that is exactly why any funding should be spent on improving the bus service. The infrastructure upgrades and cost of running 2-hourly would be at least 10s of millions, imagine what you could provide buses wise with that sort of money.

 

[yorksrob]

Sadly this is way beyond what could be achieved in terms of drivers and conductors because it would more than double the cost of providing the train crew, maintenance miles and diesel fuel, even if units could be identified and infrastructure didn't need any changes.

Yes, admittedly if you're going from one train in steam to two, you'll increase operating costs.

I would say that for a remote rural area with an important tourist destination, that might be worthwhile in the long run.

 

[Marton]

There are generally way more than thirty passengers on the 10:19 off of Middlesborough, let alone a day.

The reason Northern gave for withdrawing the early train was to enable the remaining services to be 4 car. That implies the need for space for passengers.

Just a pity not all the platforms are long enough for all doors to be used.

 

[Darandio]

Yes, and nobody got left behind.

People clubbing together to get a minibuses back up the coast must have all been in my imagination.

A number of additional services run on summer weekends.

And they haven't always been enough.

 

[mangyiscute]

People clubbing together to get a minibuses back up the coast must have all been in my imagination.



And they haven't always been enough.

So the way to fix the issue is more buses! A much cheaper solution providing much better flexibility (if there are the numbers that you're talking about, surely it would support every 15 mins Middlesborough to Scarborough? And if not, clearly there isn't the demand for more trains)

 

[D6130]

The country lane (blue) goes over a pre-existing bridge provided for the movement of agricultural equipment.
The railway (orange) crosses a largely flat, empty field.

The red circle is a ~140m radius curve, which is adequate elsewhere on the railway system (Syston)

What the advocates of a new curve by-passing Battersby seem to be forgetting is that Battersby is one of the few remaining passing places/remote block posts on the line. Therefore this idea would entail the huge expense of providing an alternative passing loop and second platform - with all the associated points and signalling equipment - at one of the other stations....probably Kildale.

 

[yorksrob]

The reason Northern gave for withdrawing the early train was to enable the remaining services to be 4 car. That implies the need for space for passengers.

Just a pity not all the platforms are long enough for all doors to be used.

Yes, I read that as well.

Of course, on weekdays that train has been four carriages for sometime anyway for the school children.

It says something about the state of rolling stock provision if Northern are having to withdraw services to strengthen a train. Should have kept some 153's afterall !

 

[Mcr Warrior]

What the advocates of a new curve by-passing Battersby seem to be forgetting is that Battersby is one of the few remaining passing places/remote block posts on the line.

Most unlikely to happen now, but why wasn't a "Battersby avoiding curve" ever built back in the day?

 

[zwk500]

Most unlikely to happen now, but why wasn't a "Battersby avoiding curve" ever built back in the day?

potentially because when new lines might have been built, Battersby was a through station and had lines into the Moors that needed the connection facing Middlesbrough and it wasn't justified to build a triangular junction?

 

[HSTEd]

What the advocates of a new curve by-passing Battersby seem to be forgetting is that Battersby is one of the few remaining passing places/remote block posts on the line. Therefore this idea would entail the huge expense of providing an alternative passing loop and second platform - with all the associated points and signalling equipment - at one of the other stations....probably Kildale.

Would we need to?


Nunthorpe to Glaisdale is only 50 minutes when trains don't cross at Battersby. Cut off six or seven minutes and I don't think the cycle time is going to be the limiting factor on the timetable. The time for a train to actually cross at Battersby is painful, it takes nearly fifteen minutes for the train that is first-in-last-out.

I assume the real limiting factor is Grosmont to Whitby due to all the NYMR traffic, but I'm not sure?

 

[Starmill]

Yes, admittedly if you're going from one train in steam to two, you'll increase operating costs.

I would say that for a remote rural area with an important tourist destination, that might be worthwhile in the long run.

Absolutely and I'd personally be in favour of doubling the frequency to either 8 or 9 per day. However it gets us back to the same old same old about operating costs for trains over buses. The bus can achieve a similar journey time and capacity but at far lower cost, because a bus doesn't need a conductor or anything like as much fuel and maintenance.

People clubbing together to get a minibuses back up the coast must have all been in my imagination.

OK - so small handful of people, on one occasion, or possibly on infrequent other occasions, a few days per year, would have had to wait for the next bus? How's that relevant to the topic at hand, which is whether or not it's value for money to run additional train services to Whitby?

And they haven't always been enough.

Sure. But I never said they were always enough. The comment you were replying to, and which I agree with, said that using the bus is more practical than the train for frequency, capacity and journey times, as well as for operating cost. It's since been added that if there's a minor issue with capacity a few days per year then the obvious thing is to subsidse the bus service to run with more buses. I still don't see how this is relevant to this thread i.e. why does any of this mean more trains should run?

 

[D6130]

Most unlikely to happen now, but why wasn't a "Battersby avoiding curve" ever built back in the day?

potentially because when new lines might have been built, Battersby was a through station and had lines into the Moors that needed the connection facing Middlesbrough and it wasn't justified to build a triangular junction?

Yes....the original route through Battersby was the line from Stockton - diverging from the Leeds Northern line at Picton - to Whitby, joining Stephenson's original line from Malton at Grosmont; a large proportion of which was originally double track. The Great Ayton/Nunthorpe branch - which was always single track - was primarily intended as a mineral line to carry iron ore to Middlesbrough from the mines on the Rosedale branch, which trailed in from the South at the East end of Battersby station. In those days, there was no perceived traffic flow from the Nunthorpe direction towards Grosmont; given that the principal double track line Southwards from Nunthorpe curved Eastwards through Guisborough and Brotton to join up with the Saltburn-Whitby coastal route near Lofthus. A bit of a history lesson....but relevant to the development of the present day route to Whitby.

 

[deltic08]

My final question would be to ask why people are using the train for Middlesborough to Whitby journeys when the bus is faster and more frequent. It clearly suggests that there is something wrong with the bus service, and therefore I would argue money should be used to fix whatever this issue is (as suggested earlier, bus stops at Middlesborough station would be very helpful, as well as proper through ticketing) and this would require a lot less money than improving the train service.

I use the Whitby line for pleasure and because it is there as I have said before. The fact that Whitby is at the end is only incidental. If I had to use bus all the way from Middlesbrough, Scarborough or York then I would never see Whitby again as I dislike bus travel. Many feel the same so putting on more buses is futile. If given the option, people will always choose train over bus.
It is also a vital lifeline for the NYMR to save moving in stock by road and visiting charter trains to/from Whitby.

 

[zwk500]

I use the Whitby line for pleasure and because it is there as I have said before. The fact that Whitby is at the end is only incidental. If I had to use bus all the way from Middlesbrough, Scarborough or York then I would never see Whitby again as I dislike bus travel. Many feel the same so putting on more buses is futile. If given the option, people will always choose train over bus.

Is this demonstrably true in absolute? For instance, presumably National Express wouldn't make any money on daytime coaches if it were.

It is also a vital lifeline for the NYMR to save moving in stock by road and visiting charter trains to/from Whitby.

It often costs more to move stock by rail (it's done as it reduces the risk of something going 'ping' when loading/unloading the trailer), and railtours from the national network are very sparse compared to NYMR services.

 

[mangyiscute]

I use the Whitby line for pleasure and because it is there as I have said before. The fact that Whitby is at the end is only incidental. If I had to use bus all the way from Middlesbrough, Scarborough or York then I would never see Whitby again as I dislike bus travel. Many feel the same so putting on more buses is futile. If given the option, people will always choose train over bus.
It is also a vital lifeline for the NYMR to save moving in stock by road and visiting charter trains to/from Whitby.

To be clear I'm not advocating for removing the line, just that its current service is adequate for the fact that it is so slow and very seasonal demand too - yes there's busy trains when you go for days out on sunny summer days, but go on a rainy day in February and you don't get more than 10 per train (except the schoolchildren, who are already served fine with the current times).
The 840 is always very busy on these sunny days too (I took it in march and every double seat got taken) so funding could be used to make this hourly at least, and people love these buses since Transdev has done a great cost of making them comfortable and a pleasure to ride on. Funding could be used to upgrade the Middlesborough to Scarborough buses to something similar to this. And I guarantee most people will happily use whatever route is quicker/requires less changes, so make the bus stop at the stations and people will use that (nowadays people will just search on google maps to find their routes).
The fact we're on a railway forum means that the views expressed on here are very disproportionate - you make take the line for the pleasure (and it is a great ride) but 99.9% of people won't care for that (and the buses offer just as good views anyway).

 

[deltic08]

Is this demonstrably true in absolute? For instance, presumably National Express wouldn't make any money on daytime coaches if it were.

It often costs more to move stock by rail (it's done as it reduces the risk of something going 'ping' when loading/unloading the trailer), and railtours from the national network are very sparse compared to NYMR services.

Perhaps National Express passengers do not have the option? Precovid, coach travel was in decline. It is recovering at the moment because rail timetables have thinned out services and travel is so unreliable due to union strikes and the likes of AWC and TPE.

I agree but you are stating the "Bleeding Obvious"

 

[zwk500]

Perhaps National Express passengers do not have the option? Precovid, coach travel was in decline.

In decline yes but still carrying a large number of journeys, are you honestly claiming every single coach journey had no rail alternative?

I agree but you are stating the "Bleeding Obvious"

Bleeding obvious it may be, but you cited those factors as a reason to keep the line and I'm pointing out they're at best neutral or irrelevant points.

 

[deltic08]

To be clear I'm not advocating for removing the line, just that its current service is adequate for the fact that it is so slow and very seasonal demand too - yes there's busy trains when you go for days out on sunny summer days, but go on a rainy day in February and you don't get more than 10 per train (except the schoolchildren, who are already served fine with the current times).
The 840 is always very busy on these sunny days too (I took it in march and every double seat got taken) so funding could be used to make this hourly at least, and people love these buses since Transdev has done a great cost of making them comfortable and a pleasure to ride on. Funding could be used to upgrade the Middlesborough to Scarborough buses to something similar to this. And I guarantee most people will happily use whatever route is quicker/requires less changes, so make the bus stop at the stations and people will use that (nowadays people will just search on google maps to find their routes).
The fact we're on a railway forum means that the views expressed on here are very disproportionate - you make take the line for the pleasure (and it is a great ride) but 99.9% of people won't care for that (and the buses offer just as good views anyway).

If the Transdev buses to Whitby are as good as you say, why is anybody using the train? They do because they have an option and choose the train.
What is the percentage of people using bus or train travelling between Middlesbrough and Whitby? That may disprove your statement that 99.9% wont care what form of transport they use.
Why has NYCC just wasted £2.4m upgrading the track then?
Where is your evidence to back up your guarantee?

 

[mangyiscute]

If the Transdev buses to Whitby are as good as you say, why is anybody using the train? They do because they have an option and choose the train.
What is the percentage of people using bus or train travelling between Middlesbrough and Whitby? That may disprove your statement that 99.9% wont care what form of transport they use.
Why has NYCC just wasted £2.4m upgrading the track then?
Where is your evidence to back up your guarantee?

Transdev buses literally aren't competing against the trains, so how can you compare the passenger usage?
Do you really think that people would rather take a 1tp4h service compared to an hourly bus?