When will something be done about the Whitby branch ?

[Bald Rick]

I guess working in the Rail industry for 33+ years isn't much use then.

Apologies, I thought you were suggesting that’s all of ‘us’ (forum contributors) were speculators not experts. Some people are clearly more expert than others!

 

[deltic08]

No - the STOP applies only in the direction for trains starting from the platform. In the other direction, ie approaching the platform wit hthe crossing first, the speeds are 20 (Gypsy Lane), 10 (Sleights) and 20 (Ruswarp).
.

Hardly noticeable, especially non-stopping passenger trains, charter trains and occasional freight!

 

[ainsworth74]

It's not a zero sum game!

It kinda is though isn't it? The transport budget is finite and I doubt we'll be seeing much more spent on the railway than we already do even if we fudge around the edges by taking money from other budgets and give it to the Esk Valley (in which case we're depriving other projects of funds).

 

[Bald Rick]

European countries with TGV-type lines are all far bigger and less densely populated than UK

Like Belgium and the Netherlands?

Hardly noticeable, especially non-stopping passenger trains, charter trains and occasional freight!

Are there any of these between Boro’ and Whitby on anything more than a very occasional basis?

 

[deltic08]

Like Belgium and the Netherlands?
Are there any of these between Boro’ and Whitby on anything more than a very occasional basis?

Belgium and Netherlands wouldn't have them without being extensions of LGVs in France and high speed in Germany. We wouldn't have HS1 either.
Not many at the moment but limited stoppers are needed to reduce journey times to attract more traffic in the future and don't do much for present services. Posters on this site seem to think 60-70 minutes would be the ideal time to Boro. Network Rail's measurement train makes fairly regular visits a couple of times a year. NYMR make non-stop trips. Most 10mph restrictions are between Whitby and Grosmont.
There is a suggestion of Cirrius using some freight from a yard between Sleights and Ruswarp. That would be non stop apart from reversing at Battersby. Presumably another couple of crossing places would be needed not necessarily at stations.
When did you last use the line? Have you ever travelled on it?

 

[AndyHudds]

How many visitors does Whitby get on a November weekday! Apologies for my cynicism, but I struggle with the “let’s get the train to Whitby” idea...though I can imagine some old folk drive over (being able to drive right to your destination and sit in the car being a bit more inviting than cold stations and longer walks on a November day.
Just going to pop to Speculation for a ‘should we keep Pacers’ debate....

How many visitors does any seaside town get in November? That problem is not exclusive to Whitby. Summer is a totally different matter though and things need to improve service and timetable wise.

 

[yorksrob]

It kinda is though isn't it? The transport budget is finite and I doubt we'll be seeing much more spent on the railway than we already do even if we fudge around the edges by taking money from other budgets and give it to the Esk Valley (in which case we're depriving other projects of funds).

Well, I think it's reasonable to question our priorities. As an example, the new roof at Leeds looks lovely and must have cost a few million, but does it really make it easier or more bearable for anyone to get anywhere by train ? There are a lot of snazzy new waiting shelters going up on the Northern network replacing functioning older ones and I've already mentioned the unnecessary new seats on 158's and 160's.

Perhaps some of that money would have been better spent enabling a decent all-day service to Whitby. That is the railway's core business afterall.

 

[Bantamzen]

For the events such as Goth weekends couldn’t they just run a charter set through from York or Leeds, with pre booked tickets from major places on the way?

This has often been discussed with the various organisers over the years. However a single charter train at prescribed time just wouldn't work, people start arriving into Whitby as early as the Wednesday (events usually start on the Thursday), and people travel in from all over the country and at different times subject to personal & work commitments. For a while coaches were hired to run from York across, but even this proved difficult to sustain for the same reasons.

However if there was a reasonably regular service, say every couple of hours & perhaps starting from York, then I suspect more people might use it. Personally this year my wife and I are just getting a TPE to Scarborough (with the hope of a 68 / MK 5a in charge!), then into a taxi to Whitby. We've used the Esk Valley in the past to get there, but previously connections were not great through Middlesbrough (though I note NRE offers a 20 minute connection at Thornaby for the kind of times we'll be travelling) and so the dash to ScarVegas & onward taxi has become the norm for us, mainly because it ends up being at least an hour and a half quicker, and doesn't involve hanging around in Teeside. But again, if one day a reasonably regular York-Whitby service was ever conceived, we might be prepared to rethink.

 

[ainsworth74]

There is a suggestion of Cirrius using some freight from a yard between Sleights and Ruswarp. That would be non stop apart from reversing at Battersby. Presumably another couple of crossing places would be needed not necessarily at stations.

There is? Since when?

Well, I think it's reasonable to question our priorities. As an example, the new roof at Leeds looks lovely and must have cost a few million, but does it really make it easier or more bearable for anyone to get anywhere by train ? There are a lot of snazzy new waiting shelters going up on the Northern network replacing functioning older ones and I've already mentioned the unnecessary new seats on 158's and 160's.

So we'll take money from one of the UKs busiest stations in order to improve the service of a line which probably sees fewer users in a year than Leeds does in a week? Meanwhile more generally we'll allow the existing network to wither on the vine in order to support lines which are used by far fewer people that even if we were to put on an all day metro frequency service would always be used by very few people?

I understand that some people have this burning desire to see a perceived wrong against this quiet branch line fixed (and I agree in as much as the service should be two hourly and more capacity in summer would be welcome) but some of the ideas that are put forward just do not stack up when you compare the costs versus the benefits. If we had that magic money tree then yes sure let's double track the route from Grosmont to Whitby, reinstate passing points, install conventional signalling and run a high frequency service but we do not have that magic money tree and at a time when we have, for example, mainlines like the MML which haven't been electrified yet or even commuter lines like Leeds to Harrogate that are still reliant on diesels I do not see how we can justify an enormous spend on upgrading something like the Esk Valley.

 

[Killingworth]

I was at a conference yesterday when it was suggested that we could help resolve climate change by getting more traffic onto trains. It was pointed out that if we doubled the number of rail journeys the system probably couldn't cope and that would still be only about 4% of journeys. The conference was in Buxton, served by a half hourly train from Manchester. Maybe a few had come by train, but I didn't meet any. One did leave early for a bus.

Leaving aside climate change, places like Whitby will be reliant on road transport for the foreseeable future. The inflexibility of journey timing dictated by the infrequency of the service, added to length of time taken for the journey probably nails it for most, especially when the stations aren't near the starting and finishing points for that journey. If you've access to a car you'll use it.

I note short platforms cited. I seem to recall a day, long gone by, when a train stopped in a wayside station, then moved forward again so the rear carriages could enter the platform. 1950s, North Eastern region. Today's selective door opening should be able to deal with that, or ensure passengers for short platforms only travel in the front half of the train.

 

[yorksrob]

There is? Since when?


So we'll take money from one of the UKs busiest stations in order to improve the service of a line which probably sees fewer users in a year than Leeds does in a week? Meanwhile more generally we'll allow the existing network to wither on the vine in order to support lines which are used by far fewer people that even if we were to put on an all day metro frequency service would always be used by very few people?

I understand that some people have this burning desire to see a perceived wrong against this quiet branch line fixed (and I agree in as much as the service should be two hourly and more capacity in summer would be welcome) but some of the ideas that are put forward just do not stack up when you compare the costs versus the benefits. If we had that magic money tree then yes sure let's double track the route from Grosmont to Whitby, reinstate passing points, install conventional signalling and run a high frequency service but we do not have that magic money tree and at a time when we have, for example, mainlines like the MML which haven't been electrified yet or even commuter lines like Leeds to Harrogate that are still reliant on diesels I do not see how we can justify an enormous spend on upgrading something like the Esk Valley.

Or put it another way, take money away from aesthetic 'nice to haves' and spend it on moving people around instead.

I think you're misrepresenting the argument talking about 'massive spend' and 'high frequency services' on the route. We're talking in the region of a passing loop, or possibly an additional block to enable trains to pass. These are the sort of small projects that should be facilitated all over the network as a matter of course.

You could spend all the money on main lines and still not have enough to make them perfect. Is that an argument never to spend anything on secondary routes ?

 

[03_179]

Or put it another way, take money away from aesthetic 'nice to haves' and spend it on moving people around instead.

Agree whole-heartily with this. Too much money painting things, changing things because it looks old when in fact it's still good and does the job properly.

 

[Bald Rick]

Belgium and Netherlands wouldn't have them without being extensions of LGVs in France and high speed in Germany. We wouldn't have HS1 either.
Not many at the moment but limited stoppers are needed to reduce journey times to attract more traffic in the future and don't do much for present services. Posters on this site seem to think 60-70 minutes would be the ideal time to Boro. Network Rail's measurement train makes fairly regular visits a couple of times a year. NYMR make non-stop trips. Most 10mph restrictions are between Whitby and Grosmont.
There is a suggestion of Cirrius using some freight from a yard between Sleights and Ruswarp. That would be non stop apart from reversing at Battersby. Presumably another couple of crossing places would be needed not necessarily at stations.
When did you last use the line? Have you ever travelled on it?

1) Belgium has 4 LGVs. One is an extension of a French LGV. The other three are not, and nor Are they extensions of ‘German High Speed’. They are relatively short lengths of new line connecting the capital with regional cities, as is HSL Zuid in the Netherlands. With the exception of the short stretch from Liege to Aachen, all are built for 300km/h. Both countries are much smaller, and have a population density greater than Britain, yet have deemed it necessary to build a railway at that speed. Therefore, I’m afraid, your assertions on this point above and earlier (that European countries with TGV type lines are far bigger and less densely populated than Britain) are all incorrect. End of subject.

2) is there any prospect of introducing limited stop services? I have not heard of any proposal from an industry body.

3) NRs measurement train will make regular visits. Note there is a difference between regular and frequent. Upgrading a line for a yellow train twice a year doth not butter the parsnips.

4) Correct, all the 10mph restrictions for passenger trains are indeed between Grosmont and Whitby. That is because there is only one, across one level crossing, in one direction only, and it is right next to a station. As I said earlier, the effect on journey times is minimal.

5) perhaps Sirius (not Cirrius) have suggested using the line directly for freight. More likely is that someone suggested it to them. Regardless, they are not planning to, as it was evidently cheaper and easier to build a tunnel that is 23 miles long. That, more than anything, demonstrates the economics involved in rebuilding a very low spec branchline.

6) I was last on the line around 15 years ago, when I lived up that way. I doubt much has changed, save for the NYMR. Needless to say, most trips to Whitby back then were in the car, partly because coming from the south it was far easier, but primarily because there were plenty of other attractions in the area to see on the way there or back that are not accessible from the railway and needed a car to get to. Robin Hood’s bay for example. Staithes. The Lion Inn at Blakey Ridge. And so on. Believe it or not, when most people - especially families and older couples - go to a small seaside town they want to travel around the area a bit. And for that the car will always win.

 

[yorksrob]

6) I was last on the line around 15 years ago, when I lived up that way. I doubt much has changed, save for the NYMR. Needless to say, most trips to Whitby back then were in the car, partly because coming from the south it was far easier, but primarily because there were plenty of other attractions in the area to see on the way there or back that are not accessible from the railway and needed a car to get to. Robin Hood’s bay for example. Staithes. The Lion Inn at Blakey Ridge. And so on. Believe it or not, when most people - especially families and older couples - go to a small seaside town they want to travel around the area a bit. And for that the car will always win.

Well, actually sometimes people stop off to see the odd sight and perhaps enjoy the odd hostelry when travelling on our delightful railway network.

However, that does require a decent timetable though.

 

[Starmill]

Belgium and Netherlands wouldn't have them without being extensions of LGVs in France and high speed in Germany.

This would be total rubbish even if it were the case, for the record. It's less than 350 miles by rail from Paris to Amsterdam via Brussels. That sustains very significant high-speed running, and is smaller than the scale in Great Britain with (say) London to Edinburgh via Newcastle. Frankfurt to Cologne is less than 150 miles and supports a large number of long-distance mixed high speed services.

A huge number of city pairs in Great Britain are in exactly the right range to be served by high speed rail.

 

[Starmill]

So we'll take money from one of the UKs busiest stations in order to improve the service of a line which probably sees fewer users in a year than Leeds does in a week?

Leeds sees more passengers in 2 days than Whitby does in 12 months.

 

[deltic08]

There is? Since when?


So we'll take money from one of the UKs busiest stations in order to improve the service of a line which probably sees fewer users in a year than Leeds does in a week? Meanwhile more generally we'll allow the existing network to wither on the vine in order to support lines which are used by far fewer people that even if we were to put on an all day metro frequency service would always be used by very few people?

I understand that some people have this burning desire to see a perceived wrong against this quiet branch line fixed (and I agree in as much as the service should be two hourly and more capacity in summer would be welcome) but some of the ideas that are put forward just do not stack up when you compare the costs versus the benefits. If we had that magic money tree then yes sure let's double track the route from Grosmont to Whitby, reinstate passing points, install conventional signalling and run a high frequency service but we do not have that magic money tree and at a time when we have, for example, mainlines like the MML which haven't been electrified yet or even commuter lines like Leeds to Harrogate that are still reliant on diesels I do not see how we can justify an enormous spend on upgrading something like the Esk Valley.

All I can say at the moment is the question has been asked at a high level quite recently as an insurance. The 35 mile long tunnel to Teesside is a long way with a lot of plant to go wrong.

Consider the money spent at Leeds over the last 30 years. £millions on electrification, £200m on rebuilding in 1999/2000, £millions on a multistory car park, new trains and now more station improvements. There was nothing wrong with the old concourse and ticket line.

I don't think anybody in Harrogate is complaining about 3 trains an hour to Leeds and soon to be 2 trains an hour to York, after a £13.5m spend on the line to York, in Class 170s when most trains were Pacers or 150s with occasional 158s. They couldn't care less whether diesel or electric.
Electrification with dc and ex London Underground trains was to cost £150m. That was a non-starter as it was an island of dc in a sea of 25kv. Electrification with 25kv was costed at £99m.
With costs this much elsewhere, would you deny the Whitby branch a couple of million pounds per year for ten years for improving such a slow and irregular service.
We have a poster on this site admitting he would rather visit Whitby via Scarborough and then taxi to Whitby on those substandard Moor roads with wandering sheep than train all the way then something must be done to make Esk Valley more attractive.

 

[deltic08]

This would be total rubbish even if it were the case, for the record. It's less than 350 miles by rail from Paris to Amsterdam via Brussels. That sustains very significant high-speed running, and is smaller than the scale in Great Britain with (say) London to Edinburgh via Newcastle. Frankfurt to Cologne is less than 150 miles and supports a large number of long-distance mixed high speed services.

A huge number of city pairs in Great Britain are in exactly the right range to be served by high speed rail.

I am afraid you are talking rubbish. Please read what I wrote. Without the LGV lines built by the French from Paris to Lille expecting the Channel Tunnel to be completed and from Lille towards the Belgian border and on to Brussels again expecting the Tunnel to be completed, the line from Brussels to Amsterdam would not have been built on its own because it is too short. Would we have built a high speed line from York to London as a standalone project? No.

 

[Bald Rick]

Well, actually sometimes people stop off to see the odd sight and perhaps enjoy the odd hostelry when travelling on our delightful railway network.

However, that does require a decent timetable though.

Oh I agree on both counts.

My point was that for the people I know who I have gone to Whitby (all my immediate family, and several friends), all have gone to see not just Whitby, but various other locations /attractions in the surrounding area. For which a car is necessary for flexibility and/or practicality.

I accept, of course, that not everyone has access to a car. But most people who want to make this sort of trip do, and hence they will use it.

This isn’t just a Whitby thing, it applies to most coastal / holiday destinations in this country.

 

[yorksrob]

Oh I agree on both counts.

My point was that for the people I know who I have gone to Whitby (all my immediate family, and several friends), all have gone to see not just Whitby, but various other locations /attractions in the surrounding area. For which a car is necessary for flexibility and/or practicality.

I accept, of course, that not everyone has access to a car. But most people who want to make this sort of trip do, and hence they will use it.

This isn’t just a Whitby thing, it applies to most coastal / holiday destinations in this country.

The Esk Valley Railway development company have produced a handy guide to some of the places that can be visited on the route. Could be a nice change for some of those who normally drive one day:

http://www.eskvalleyrailway.co.uk/line.html

 

[Starmill]

There was nothing wrong with the old concourse and ticket line.

I think it's pretty clear that this isn't true, and that they were replaced for a reason.

 

[yorksrob]

I've not seen any reports to suggest that the concourse roof and ceiling were structurally unsound in any way.

 

[Starmill]

something must be done to make Esk Valley more attractive.

Continuing to repeat something again and again doesn't add to its veracity. A Sunday enhancement has already been implemented. An enhancement to the service has been proposed in the form of an additional return journey and is now scheduled for introduction. I'm sure further tinkering, especially including additional capacity in Summer, additional NYMR services and maybe running the Friday evening service on other days of the week and all year round are very possible. Making the sixth train permanent and preferably daily would be something I would support, although I wonder if 2120 isn't a bit late for it to leave Middlesbrough - perhaps a 2020 departure would be more popular? Nothing more than this is justifiable on grounds of cost and number of actual and potential users.

 

[Starmill]

I've not seen any reports to suggest that the concourse roof and ceiling were structurally unsound in any way.

Nobody said they were. What's this to do with Whitby?

 

[Starmill]

Without the LGV lines built by the French from Paris to Lille expecting the Channel Tunnel to be completed and from Lille towards the Belgian border and on to Brussels again expecting the Tunnel to be completed, the line from Brussels to Amsterdam would not have been built on its own because it is too short.

Bald Rick has already explained to you that you've got this wrong. Even if you were right about that, though, it wouldn't make your argument any more accurate - Great Britain is the right size for high speed rail between cities , as is the North Western area of the continent occupied by part of France, Belgium and the Netherlands. There is not all that much difference.

 

[yorksrob]

Continuing to repeat something again and again doesn't add to its veracity. A Sunday enhancement has already been implemented. An enhancement to the service has been proposed in the form of an additional return journey and is now scheduled for introduction. I'm sure further tinkering, especially including additional capacity in Summer, additional NYMR services and maybe running the Friday evening service on other days of the week and all year round are very possible. Making the sixth train permanent and preferably daily would be something I would support, although I wonder if 2120 isn't a bit late for it to leave Middlesbrough - perhaps a 2020 departure would be more popular? Nothing more than this is justifiable on grounds of cost and number of actual and potential users.

I believe the aim of having two trains operating the service at any one time is justifiable, otherwise it wouldn't have been included in the package of measures to be funded by Sirius minerals.

 

[yorksrob]

Nobody said they were. What's this to do with Whitby?

The disussion regarding the new roof at Leeds station goes back to when @ainsworth74 invited me to suggest what other projects might have been sacrificed to fund improvements on local routes such as Whitby.

 

[PeterC]

All I can say at the moment is the question has been asked at a high level quite recently as an insurance. The 35 mile long tunnel to Teesside is a long way with a lot of plant to go wrong.

Consider the money spent at Leeds over the last 30 years. £millions on electrification, £200m on rebuilding in 1999/2000, £millions on a multistory car park, new trains and now more station improvements. There was nothing wrong with the old concourse and ticket line.

I don't think anybody in Harrogate is complaining about 3 trains an hour to Leeds and soon to be 2 trains an hour to York, after a £13.5m spend on the line to York, in Class 170s when most trains were Pacers or 150s with occasional 158s. They couldn't care less whether diesel or electric.
Electrification with dc and ex London Underground trains was to cost £150m. That was a non-starter as it was an island of dc in a sea of 25kv. Electrification with 25kv was costed at £99m.
With costs this much elsewhere, would you deny the Whitby branch a couple of million pounds per year for ten years for improving such a slow and irregular service.
We have a poster on this site admitting he would rather visit Whitby via Scarborough and then taxi to Whitby on those substandard Moor roads with wandering sheep than train all the way then something must be done to make Esk Valley more attractive.

The A171 is fenced between Scarborough and Whitby and is a perfectly reasonable single carriageway A road with a frequent bus service in the tourist season. Checking on Traveline for both my home in the South East and my daughter in West Yorkshire the bus from Scarborough is the preferred route,

 

[R G NOW.]

Am I right in assuming that you have token machines in those cabinets, rather than in a proper Signalbox?. To me needs to be upgraded to etcs and controlled from the nearest roc. As for the track, sounds like some needs relaying and a better timetable and longer trains. Why isn't Whitby council raising so much funds and local people. Then as happened with the Portishead line near Bristol, the dft paid the rest.

 

[cactustwirly]

Keeping on a 153 which would otherwise go, and running it attached to the current service, must be a marginal cost in the scheme of things.

Not really, said 153 would have to be modified to be PRM-TSI compliant, plus Northern would still have to pay for fuelling, tanking and maintenance of the 153. These are not insignificant costs, especially for a line which is loss making, operated by an operator which has a 60% subsidy.