Trains.com

British Railway Operations

122492 views
1906 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Cambridge, UK
  • 419 posts
Posted by owlsroost on Wednesday, August 2, 2006 12:31 PM
Roger Ford's take on the current ROSCO (rolling stock leasing companies) situation is here - http://home.ezezine.com/759/759-2006.07.24.00.01.archive.html (a longer version is in the current 'Modern Railways' mag).

Some archive stuff on ROSCO's here -
http://www.alycidon.com/ALYCIDON%20RAIL/INFORMED%20SOURCES%20ARCHIVE/INF%20SRCS%202004/Informed%20Sources%2010%202004%20p2.htm
http://www.alycidon.com/ALYCIDON%20RAIL/INFORMED%20SOURCES%20ARCHIVE/INF%20SRCS%202006/Informed%20Sources%2003%202006%20p3.htm

The bit the DfT is arguing about is just the capital cost element of the leases, which isn't the major part - the rest is for maintenance (overhauls, refurbishments etc which the ROSCO's pay for).


They could have invested in extra trains (as other TOC's have done since privtisation) but they've been far too risk averse.


The 91's+Mk4's were by far the newest IC stock at privatisation, and GNER had Eurostar sets on lease for some time to supplement them (extra HST's weren't available at the time). Now that spare HST's are around they've leased more of those in place of the Eurostars - the big problem on the ECML is track and electrical supply capacity south of Hitchin at peak periods, rather than lack of rolling stock.

...and TOC's haven't invested in new trains - the ROSCO's have done that....

In fact GNER could have served Sunderland without having to find any extra stock or crews simply by running the Aberdeen and Inverness HSTs via Sunderland - after all why do those trains need to run under the wires?


It's a lot slower running via Sunderland, and the Newcastle - Sunderland stretch is also now shared with T&W Metro trains.

Tony
  • Member since
    July 2005
  • From: Bath, England, UK
  • 712 posts
Posted by Tulyar15 on Wednesday, August 2, 2006 2:02 AM

The other encouraging development is that the Dept. of Transport has finally woken up to what a rip off the Rolling Stock Co's (ROSCO's) are. As I've said before, an example of this is that they charge £500,000 pa for each cl 158 DMU (these cost BR £1million apiece back in 1990) so during their 15 year franchise Wales & Borders will have had to pay £7.5 million (ie £500K times 15!) for trains which cost BR £1 million. So it's good to see the DfT finally waking up to this fact - I hope they order the ROSCO's to cut their charges by a factor of at least 10 or better still confiscate the trains and give them to the Train Operators. The considerable amount of money thus saved could then be spent on improvements to the network.

I am please Grand Central have got the go ahead! GNER are just too complacent - all they've done is sit back and sweat the assets they inherited from BR. They could have invested in extra trains (as other TOC's have done since privtisation) but they've been far too risk averse. So others prepared to take the risks - first Hull Trains, now Grand Central - should be allowed to do so. (In fact GNER could have served Sunderland without having to find any extra stock or crews simply by running the Aberdeen and Inverness HSTs via Sunderland - after all why do those trains need to run under the wires?).

My brother and I took lots of photos during our stay in Carlisle - these will appear on his website in due course.

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, August 1, 2006 10:08 AM

I see GNER and DAft by proxy have lost their court case v the ORR in regards to open access on the East Coast Main Line. So all aboard for Grand Central and direct trains to Sunderland then.

Watch those premiums tumble for the next round of franchising. And watch those subsidies increase. This may actually be the spur which sees the wheel turn yet another notch in its circle. They may actually contemplate Network Rail taking on a franchise just to see how much money they could save.

Would be interesting to say the least.

 

  • Member since
    March 2005
  • From: Sulzerland, UK
  • 337 posts
Posted by Simon Reed on Tuesday, August 1, 2006 9:16 AM

Sounds like a splendid time, Tulyar.

Photos?

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: United Kingdom
  • 732 posts
Posted by John Bakeer on Monday, July 31, 2006 2:48 AM
By Jove!
There are some pedantic people out there. I didn't mean they actually ran between those places, only TO them.
John B.

John Baker

  • Member since
    July 2005
  • From: Bath, England, UK
  • 712 posts
Posted by Tulyar15 on Monday, July 31, 2006 2:07 AM

Hi all,

I've just returned from a very enjoyable week's holiday in Carlisle. My brother and a couple of friends rented a flat for a week in an old brewery (which is now a hall of residence for the University of Central Lancashire's Carlisle campus!) which was right beside the West Coast Main Line, about 1/4 mile north of Carlisle station. All trains have to use this piece of track since the freight avoiding lines were closed in 1983 after a bridge over the River Caldew was damaged by a runaway freight train.

Inevitably most freights were hauled by 66's but other locos seen in action included classes 20, 37, 47, 57/3, 86, 90 and 92. The piece de resistance was freight with 4 locos on it - two 92's and two 66's, but only the leading 92 was under power.

As for heritage railways , we  visited the Ravenglass and Eskdale (very impressive, it runs a 30 min frequency which requires 5 steam locos to be in steam. If you were to scale up this 15" gauge lines 2-8-2's to 4' 8.5" they'd dwarf anything that ran on the mainline here!) and the 2' gauge South Tyndale Railway. In addition to drinking in some of the best pubs in the City we also visited a pub near Wetherall station on the line to Newcastle. I forget it's name but its been local CAMRA Pub of the Year and is by the line. You can get to it from Wetherall station by walking along a footpath besides the lines which takes you over the impressive viaduct over the River Eden - it's about a 10 minute walk. During the half hour in which we drunk our first pint we saw 5 trains - 2 passenger, 3 freight - 2 x 66  and 1 x 37!

All in all a thorough enjoyable holiday, The Old Brewery residence is 10 minutes walk from Carlisle City Centre and rail station and the flats therein are available to hire during the summer holidays. More info at www.impacthousing.org.uk

 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, July 30, 2006 2:13 PM
I would be suprised if Hunslet EMU's ran Stockport-Warrington/Preston as there aren't any wires!
  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: United Kingdom
  • 732 posts
Posted by John Bakeer on Thursday, July 27, 2006 2:05 AM
Hugh,
I understand the Hunslet EMU's currently run Glossop-Piccadilly-Stockport-Warrington-Preston etc.
John B.

John Baker

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, July 26, 2006 4:03 AM
I sure hope the scheme is successful for more traffic diverted from road to rail.
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Southern Region now, UK
  • 820 posts
Posted by Hugh Jampton on Wednesday, July 26, 2006 3:41 AM
Not sure that a through route would actually gain you owt though. With cabs at both ends it's simple to do a reversing move if the train is not terminating.
Generally a lurker by nature

Be Alert
The world needs more lerts.

It's the 3rd rail that makes the difference.
  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: United Kingdom
  • 732 posts
Posted by John Bakeer on Wednesday, July 26, 2006 2:57 AM
Simon,
I think your point about access from WCML to Guide Bridge may be incorrect
Stock stored and/or seviced at Longsight has access to all running tracks into and out of Piccadilly, also the main track maintenance depot is at Guide Bridge, without actually going to Piccadilly and looking at the track layout I cannot be absolutely certain.
A zap around on Google Earth shows that enough formation is around to make almost any scheme feasible, some of which is now owned by Central Railways. Yes, they are very much alive and purchasing land and right of way as it becomes available.
John B.

John Baker

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: United Kingdom
  • 732 posts
Posted by John Bakeer on Wednesday, July 26, 2006 1:35 AM
Murphy,
My pooter dosn't need the bits of stuff-http//www,- required on the old system with which you pre-fix to the link. The alternative is to download <http//www.googlearth> this is a link to freeware to a satelight that covers most of the world, you need to subscribe in order to print a view.
Simon.
You are correct, but there is a disused viaduct with track in situ near Ardwick, I don't know where it goes to, but it may have possibilities.
I'm going to have a rummage around the Manchester City Hall web site to see if my theory works.
John B.

John Baker

  • Member since
    March 2005
  • From: Sulzerland, UK
  • 337 posts
Posted by Simon Reed on Tuesday, July 25, 2006 11:29 AM

John, WCML goes to Picc adilly but there's no physical connection from the Northbound side onto the Guide Bridge route.

A chord would be needed, which would'nt be an easy engineering project given that both routes are on viaducts at Ardwick Junction.

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, July 24, 2006 5:48 PM
     John:  I'm having problems adjusting to the new system as well.Sad [:(]  Where is the link to the site you mention?   Thanks

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: United Kingdom
  • 732 posts
Posted by John Bakeer on Monday, July 24, 2006 3:06 AM
Murphy,
This new system is still giving me problems (as you can see this is going to be a long learning curve for this TOG), I have somehow deleted your post.
Please accept my sincere apologies.
John B.

John Baker

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: United Kingdom
  • 732 posts
Posted by John Bakeer on Monday, July 24, 2006 2:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE><table class="quoteOuterTable"><tr><td class="txt4"><img src="/trccs/Themes/default/images/icon-quote.gif">&nbsp;<strong>Murphy Siding wrote:</strong></td></tr><tr><td class="quoteTable"><table width="100%"><tr><td width="100%" valign="top" class="txt4">     I recently found an interesting book.  (I'm a book *nut*).  It's about walking around historical sites in Great Britain.  One walking tour is about an abandonded rail line.  ( I haven't had time to read it yet).  Is there a common use for abandonded rail line in Britain, like "rails to trails", as is popular in the U.S.  Or, do the abandonded lines do like they do in my area, and just melt back into the countryside?</td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
Here's an interesting site,
I found it browsing Google Earth <subbrit.org.uk/sb-sites/stations> it gives an insite to all/ most of the closed stations/tunnels along the Woodhead route.
In the words of Rowen and Matins German "very interesting, but ???"
John B.

John Baker

  • Member since
    December 2003
  • 400 posts
Posted by martin.knoepfel on Sunday, July 23, 2006 8:13 AM
It would be a great idea to have a freight-line with larger clearances from the Midlands through the Chunnel to France. Double-stack containers-trains und TOFC. However, there is no  connection on the Continent.  The project makes sense only if exsiting freight-lines in France would be rebuilt to larger clearances, at least from Lille to the heavily industrialized Ruhr or Main-Ruhr-area in Germany. Technically, this would be feasable.
  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: United Kingdom
  • 732 posts
Posted by John Bakeer on Saturday, July 22, 2006 2:25 AM
Simon,
The WCML goes through Picadilly and in pre-nationalisation days Ardwick was the largest(?) goods yard in the country.
East of Standedge was almost all quadruple track through to Leeds/Wakefield and most of the formation is still present. To the West there were two seperate alignments from Diggle, one to Stalybridge (the closed section) and the present twin track line to Ashton/Stalybridge and on to Victoria/Picadilly, as you say this line is crying out for expansion (have you driven from Manchester to Leeds or v-v at 8.00am?) and is a comparatively easy job (NIMBY's excluded).
Once spent 72 sleepless hrs commissioning a casting facility (RB211) in Yeadon for a site less than 35 quid. Oh! to be young again.
John B.

John Baker

  • Member since
    March 2005
  • From: Sulzerland, UK
  • 337 posts
Posted by Simon Reed on Friday, July 21, 2006 4:55 PM

Had'nt heard about Trafford Park.

A lot of investment went into Trafford Park in 1987/8 when Longsight FLT closed. In terms of relocation the area around Ashburys and Gorton, as John suggests, would be good for road links but would be on the wrong side of the city for most industry and would, in railway terms, be logistically difficult to access from the South unless you took a convoluted route around the OA&GB.

I might live to eat my words but in view of the relative modernity of Trafford Park and the lack of a viable alternative (ironically the former Longsight site would be ideal) I'd anticipate Frightener hanging onto it.

On Trans-Pennine capacity it would be relatively easy to re-quadruple the Standege route between Heaton Lodge and Marsden, but I'd agree that the biggest missing link is the old Glazebrook bridge. The impressive embankments on either side are still intact.

There is - of course - a PCC in the UK. Ex New York 3rd Avenue 674 lives at Crich although it is a non-runner and looks likely to remain that way.

Oh, the joys of Friday Nightshift. £35 an hour until 06.00 with nothing to do but accept two trailers at about 02.30. It's nights like this that I wish I'd gone onto the Railways....    

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Southern Region now, UK
  • 820 posts
Posted by Hugh Jampton on Friday, July 21, 2006 7:27 AM
 daveklepper wrote:
You can still ride PCC's in regular service in the USA:    Boston's Mattapan-Ashmont line after the Ashmont station is rebuilt in about 10 months, Kenosha, San Frfancisco's F Line, and Phily;s Gerrad Avenue, Rt. 15.   More to come!


Toronto had a load of them at one time. I don't suspect there's any left though..
Generally a lurker by nature

Be Alert
The world needs more lerts.

It's the 3rd rail that makes the difference.
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Friday, July 21, 2006 5:06 AM
You can still ride PCC's in regular service in the USA:    Boston's Mattapan-Ashmont line after the Ashmont station is rebuilt in about 10 months, Kenosha, San Frfancisco's F Line, and Phily;s Gerrad Avenue, Rt. 15.   More to come!
  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: United Kingdom
  • 732 posts
Posted by John Bakeer on Friday, July 21, 2006 3:46 AM
PS.
There is alot of under used land between Piccadilly and Gorton.
John B.

John Baker

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: United Kingdom
  • 732 posts
Posted by John Bakeer on Friday, July 21, 2006 3:43 AM
Not forgetting that the two original bores remain in situ, one carries high voltage power lines, there is also a narrow gauge railway running through this, meaning that Woodhead has never been bereft of rail traffic, Should capacity become an issue? The remaining one could be put to use for passenger and small gauge traffic (I heard an oink outside my bedroom window last night!).
Regarding the extra height added to Torre Side reservoir, this is to contain excess run off in the event of a tropical rain storm on the adjacent moors a once in thirty years happening which should it happen? It would flood the Woodhead road but would be several metres below the alighment.
Going to the KLR tomorrow, weather permitting?
John B.

John Baker

  • Member since
    July 2005
  • From: Bath, England, UK
  • 712 posts
Posted by Tulyar15 on Friday, July 21, 2006 1:54 AM

On the other hand, one of the arguments in favour of rebuilding the Woodhead is that not only was the infrastructure newer (brand new tunnel built in the 1950's!) but it was also built to a more generous loading gauge. Immediately after WW1 the Great Central considered importing some ex US Army 2-10-2's that had been used in France to work the line - these would have been out of the gauge for most lines in Britain. Also in the 1948 loco exchanges it was one of the few "foreign" lines that GWR locos were able to run on, again due to gauging considerations.

As I understand it the current proposals are based around being able to run lorries (trucks in US parlance ) piggy back style and double stack container trains. This is not possible on most lines here but again it would be possible on the Woodhead line, though they'd have to have the tunnel single track. (I seem to remember reading somewhere the running tunnels of the Chunnel were each built to the same size as the new Woodhead tunnel!).

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, July 20, 2006 2:27 PM

The line which they are missing is the southern Manchester CLC ring really. This closed in '85 due to the bridge over the MSC at Glazebrook being cream crackered.

However there are plenty of Transpennine routes available; the Hope requires resignalling and that will be cheaper than rebuilding 35miles over double track at roughly £3m a mile plus extras.

What is interesting is where (or of) they shift Trafford Park Freight Terminal. Apparently some are eyeing that up for housing; also glad to see that the govt have finally given a half hearted and grudging go-ahead for the Metrolink tram system extension. Probabley one eye on a few marginals in the Greater Manchester Area I should think.

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: United Kingdom
  • 732 posts
Posted by John Bakeer on Thursday, July 20, 2006 11:54 AM
Woodhead was electrified to haul coal from South Yorkshire to the new power stations at Ince (among others). The then government in the 60's (guess who?) allowed the CEGB to import coal from Australia making the line and most of the South Yorkshire coalfield redudant. A job they completed in the early 80's.
The Central Railway is intended to move goods (containers) from the north and midlands directly to continental europe, thus removing tens of thousands of trucks from overcrowded roads. A further benefit is that goods can be transfered from the atlantic seaboard to europe freeing up space in the overstretched ports on the continental mainland.
A direct route for passenger trains between Manchester, Sheffield and the midlands would be much faster than the meandering Hope Valley line which is close to capacity anyway.
John B.

John Baker

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Cambridge, UK
  • 419 posts
Posted by owlsroost on Thursday, July 20, 2006 9:01 AM
It's interesting to muse on what might have happened if the NER had electrified the York-Newcastle line in the 1920's as it planned. We might have had a fleet of these - http://www.lner.info/locos/Electric/ee1.shtml - and a lot more EM1's and EM2's running around, and no A3's and A4's (or Deltics - ah, maybe not such a good idea then...Smile [:)])

I'm with Simon on the Central Railways proposal - nice idea, but I suspect getting parlimentary time is the least of the hurdles it faces - once the NIMBY contingent wakes up it'll probably get buried in parliment or take so long to get planning approval that the potential investors will lose interest.

In 1930's LNER days, electrifying the Woodhead route made some sense given the problems of operating steam through long single-bore tunnels and that government employment-creation money was available to subsidise it (and the other three trans-pennine rail routes were LMS controlled). But once BR came into existance I suspect a hard-headed appraisal of trans-pennine rail capacity/routes/connections might have closed it earlier rather than spent money on it.....

(Although watching class 76's - EM1's - trundling through Guide Bridge hauling a few parcels vans in the late 1970's is a nice nostalgic memory!)

Tony
  • Member since
    July 2005
  • From: Bath, England, UK
  • 712 posts
Posted by Tulyar15 on Thursday, July 20, 2006 1:49 AM
 Simon Reed wrote:

Woodhead will always be an emotive topic, and coincidentally today marks the 25th anniversary of it's complete closure.

       

Basically the problem with the Woodhead line was it was obsolete almost by the  time it was electrified. Back in the 1930's when the project was conceived freight trains were re-marshalled on either side of the Pennines  - Mottram Yard in Manchester and Wath in Yorkshire (later also Tinsley and the Woodhead electfication was extended there in 1960 when Tinsley Yard opened).

But no sooner had Tinsley Yard opened than BR started to concentrate on train load feight, particularly Merry-Go-Round (MGR) coal trains that were designed to run non-stop from pit to power station. In the case of the Woodhead line this meant two loco changes in a relatively short distance.

As traffic declined during the 1970's it got to the stage where half the trains were light engines! Often a crew would arrive with a westbound freight at Mottram and find no east bound train. They could only wait a certain length of time otherwise they would not be able to return home in time without doing excessive hours.

That said, had more electrification happened, especially if the East Coast Main line been electrified a lot sooner, the case for converting the Woodhead to 25kv AC would have been much stronger. Indeed in the 1955 proposal to electrify the ECML it was assumed this would happen and electrification of the Retford - Sheffield line was included in this proposal. (Just as well this did not happen as it would have finished off the Midland Main Line!).

  • Member since
    March 2005
  • From: Sulzerland, UK
  • 337 posts
Posted by Simon Reed on Wednesday, July 19, 2006 6:17 PM

Incidentally - for those interested in L&Y operations in Yorkshire the Kirklees Light Railway is holding it's first ever enthusiast's event on September 16th and 17th.

KLR runs on the roadbed of the Clayton West branch at 15" gauge, including a run through the standard gauge Skelmanthorpe tunnel.

It's a fine little railway and well worth a visit.    

  • Member since
    March 2005
  • From: Sulzerland, UK
  • 337 posts
Posted by Simon Reed on Wednesday, July 19, 2006 6:08 PM

Woodhead will always be an emotive topic, and coincidentally today marks the 25th anniversary of it's complete closure.

Murphy's question on the last page regarding what we do with abandoned roadbeds is very pertinent here.

As I understand it, although the tunnels remain intact the roadbed on the Lancashire side is now submerged under the extended Torside reservoir. On the Yorkshire side at least one bridge before Penistone has been demolished and there's very little left of Worsley Bank or Wath.

At present there is'nt a great demand for East - West freight traffic flows across the North of England. If that situation changed I would imagine that the Hope Valley has capacity without requiring extensive investment.

I fail to see, therefore, what market Central Railways hope to tap. Certainly both WCML and ECML are running at close to capacity at the moment but utilising the Woodhead route for North - South flows would'nt help this problem.

Dave - Vambacs and PCC's have essentially the same two design innovations, ie. Stepless Control and Resilient wheels. I've enjoyed several PCC rides in Newark and Philadelphia. The Newark examples were pretty much at the end of their lives when I rode them but were still quite acceptable compared to European products of the same era.         

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy