Local council wants to use East Lancs as a commuter line

[Phil Parker]

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

Sorry, there is NO WAY the current proposal can be considered beneficial in any way whatsoever to the ELR as a Heritage railway whose prime role (as with ALL Hereitage railways) is a tourist attraction!

 

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

While I admire your sentiment you need to wake up to facts - whats done is done.

 

So railways now just exist to be quaint tourist attractions?

 

It would be perfectly possible to decide that point A now needs a railway line from Point B - and if there is a heritage railway already running along it then a decision has to be made whether the local area needs good transport links, or a heritage attraction. However, since many heritage railways already work with the "big railway" in other ways, it shouldn't be beyond someone to come up with a way they can share infrastucture. If the will is there anyway.

 

You are looing (IMHO) at a considerable change to the way the line is run, with a new company presumably running service trains and maintining things, and the heritage people sharing the tracks, but there are lots of new ideas out there such as ultra-light rail, so I suspect it would be possible.

[e30ftw]

A 142 would have been more fitting for north west england though😀

[Wheatley]

Not PRM compliant so can't operate on the national network. Only one of the many regulatory issues already mentioned which don't (always) apply to heritage operations.  

[e30ftw]

1 minute ago, Wheatley said:

Not PRM compliant so can't operate on the national network. Only one of the many regulatory issues already mentioned which don't (always) apply to heritage operations.  

Yes but we are going to run a hybrid system, its now a heritage unit, so dosnt have to comply with national regs We could paint it in original GMPT orange. Dont let facts get in the way of a good idea,. 😉

[Ben B]

I got a surprise on holiday to Brittany about 10 years back; I can't remember where it was now, but a standard gauge (very overgrown, derelict-looking line) had both a modern public transport railcar, and regular steam-hauled tourist service. I'd guess regulations would be different, maybd more relaxed, in France?

 

It'd be interesting to know how much a preserved line would lose, fares-wise, over the casual visitor who chooses to ride the public transport DMU for 5-10 quid, versus the 30-quid heritage train that runs an hour or two later?

 

 

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, eldomtom2 said:

My impression from what I've heard is that this is not the case - heritage railways may be required to have the same attitude to safety as the main line, but when it comes to specific regulations there are all sorts of exemptions.

I don't know who you heard that from but I hope they won't be getting a visit from an HMRI soon,  Apart from what Phil has posted I'd draw attention to the following which are required under ROGs as it applies to heritage/leisure railways -

Compliance with the H&S Act, Working at Height Regulations, RIDDOR, COSHH, Electrical Safety Regulations, Risk assessment processes to be in place and fully documented, training procedures to be in place and fully documented for all duties involving the safe i operation of teh railway and various tools plus for those responsible for teh safety of the public, full records to be kept, and regularly reviewed in respect od staff eyesight (wherea standard is required)  and prescription drugs being taken by anybody involved in safety critical work.  proper, fully documneted safety plan to be in place and with a record of briefings to all staff (including volunteers).  A suitable book of Rules & Regulations appropriate to contemporary conditions and railway operation - i.e. you can't just use a BR 1950 Rule Book.  And so on ...  and taht's before we get to workshops

 

If you were to see a list of railways which have been caught out on any or many of the items on that list your eyes might  open very wide.  And if you knew of those which have been told they will not only get an Improvement Order but might well get a Prohibition Notice if they don't put procedures in place by a stated date you would no doubt gasp.  The West Somerset is a fairly widely know example but it is far from being the only one.

[Stuart A]

3 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

.... including through the stations, of course. Might be possible at Bury but Rammy would be problematic.

 

Now an even greener option - at minimal cost to the council - would be to turn the second trackbed over to Sustrans ....... then the commuters could cycle themselves to work ( and the appearance of a heritage RAILWAY would be wrecked - as elsewhere ). 👎

Or how about this we did in Belgium

[Enterprisingwestern]

7 minutes ago, Stuart A said:

Or how about this we did in Belgium

 

That's OK until there's a spell of torrential Manchester sunshine!

 

Mike.

[The Stationmaster]

7 minutes ago, e30ftw said:

Yes but we are going to run a hybrid system, its now a heritage unit, so dosnt have to comply with national regs We could paint it in original GMPT orange. Dont let facts get in the way of a good idea,. 😉

Wouldn't work like that because the 'commuter train' wouldn't be going to the right place, i.e. Manchester (probably).  Branch line re-openings, certainly shorter ones need trains which go somewhere and 'somewhere is nota junction where passengers have to change to another train.  People are used to cars and 'buses which go to the place they want to go to so when a railway reopens for regular passenger use it has to go somewhere.  An excellent example is the Western Valley from Ebbw Vale and a big part of making it successful was the decision to run the initial service to Cardiff, not to Newport.

 

There is no real problem using the same route for both a heritage/leisure operation and a public transport operation.  But the line speed needed for public transport will be much higher than 25mph otherwise it simply won't be commercial for almost every use likely to be made of it.  Hence the infrastructure would have to be improved as I previously explained.  

 

But, albeit at an extra operating cost, you can still have semaphore signals and you can still have a manned level crossing with gates.  The only real difference comes if it is to be electrified or become part of a tramway type operation; it won't need to look much different if the 'regular service' trains are worked by DMUs.  But we don't know from this thread what Systra came up with and it might be something very different from a DMU operation over traditional infrastructure even though in capital cost terms that's the cheapest way to get something started.

 

BTW as far as track is concerned wooden sleepers rot and bullhead rail is expensive if bought new so concrete or steel sleepers will be the likely result if track has to be relaid anyway.  and of course steel sleepers are very heritage and pre-dated on Britain's railways quite a goodly proportion of the preserved loco fleet.

[phil-b259]

18 minutes ago, Phil Parker said:

 

So railways now just exist to be quaint tourist attractions?

 

 

No in the case of a public transport system, but yes in the case of a 'living museum' / tourist attraction.

 

You cannot ignore the fact that a station in the 1950s did not have harsh LED lighting, electronic PIDs, hep points, lots of CCTV, anti trespass fencing,/ tactile paving, white and yellow lines etc. All of these will be REQUIRED (most for disability access / safety reasons if the service is to become a permanent fixture.

 

Infrastructure wise you cannot ignore the fact that in the 1950s you didn't have TPWS etc that will be a must if line speads are to increase to what would be needed for a commuter opperation.

 

You cannot ignore the fact that Heritage railways are (as per the 1950s prototype) very labour intensive yet volunteers are extremely unlikely to get up early / stay late / give up their time to run a modern commuter train / tram 7 days a week.

 

29 minutes ago, Phil Parker said:

 

You are looing (IMHO) at a considerable change to the way the line is run, with a new company presumably running service trains and maintining things, and the heritage people sharing the tracks, but there are lots of new ideas out there such as ultra-light rail, so I suspect it would be possible.

 

And that change means the end of the ELR as we know it.

 

If thats what people want then fair enough - but don't for one minute pretend you can somehow retain things as they are. If a proposal to return the line to the national network comes to pass then it will have to end up becoming something akin to the situation on the Fort William - Mallaig line - i.e. A token steam train in amongst what is a very modern railway environment - not a Turbostar travelling through a 1950s one.

[Phil Parker]

22 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

And that change means the end of the ELR as we know it.

 

If thats what people want then fair enough - but don't for one minute pretend you can somehow retain things as they are. If a proposal to return the line to the national network comes to pass then it will have to end up becoming something akin to the situation on the Fort William - Mallaig line - i.e. A token steam train in amongst what is a very modern railway environment - not a Turbostar travelling through a 1950s one.

 

And that's likely to tbe the cruicial point - many, maybe even most, people in the UK want the entire place picked in aspic on the basis that the past was always better than the future. The argument is likely to be that effective transport comes a distant second to heritage.

 

However, let's not pretend that any heritage line is a perfect recreation of the 1950s either. For a start, most would have very little in the way of toilet facilities, and no provision for disabled people. No gift shops, or cafes either. Lovely for enthusiasts who want to take photos, but preserved railways have had to evolve to capture most people's money.

 

Final thought - many preserved lines are struggling for volunteers and money. If they don't make it, what's the better option: Return to full railway use, a cyclepath, or housing.

[melmerby]

33 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

BTW as far as track is concerned wooden sleepers rot and bullhead rail is expensive if bought new so concrete or steel sleepers will be the likely result if track has to be relaid anyway.  and of course steel sleepers are very heritage and pre-dated on Britain's railways quite a goodly proportion of the preserved loco fleet.

Aren't there still some wooden sleepers/bullhead track in Birmingham New Street?

Edited October 12, 2022 by melmerby

[Gordon Connell]

16 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Finally, you should also take note what happened to said Heritage operation when the line was restored to the national network - IT CLOSED!

 

I believe the heritage operation closed before the line was restored to the national network. Dartmoor Railway goes into Administration

 

Gordon

[phil-b259]

48 minutes ago, Phil Parker said:

 

Final thought - many preserved lines are struggling for volunteers and money. If they don't make it, what's the better option: Return to full railway use, a cyclepath, or housing.

 

Agreed - but as far as I know the ELR is not yet in that category.

 

In fact being surrounded by large populations and not having significant competition locally its in a better position than some....

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, Phil Parker said:

 

However, let's not pretend that any heritage line is a perfect recreation of the 1950s either. For a start, most would have very little in the way of toilet facilities, and no provision for disabled people. No gift shops, or cafes either. Lovely for enthusiasts who want to take photos, but preserved railways have had to evolve to capture most people's money.

 

 

This is true - but its quite possible to make such buildings / facilities blend in.

 

Its a lot harder to make a stonking great 'help point' or scrolling electronic display look anything other than modern.

 

Take a look at the restored Birmingham Moor street - yes the paint schemes etc may well be Heritage (and very nice too) but its also stuffed full of modern railway trappings and cannot be said to be 'recreating the past' in any significant sense. On the other hand Bewdley on the SVR has exactly the same heritage paint schemes - yet the distinct lack of 'modern' items defiantly creates the impression of stepping into the past.

Edited October 12, 2022 by phil-b259

[eldomtom2]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

I don't know who you heard that from but I hope they won't be getting a visit from an HMRI soon,  Apart from what Phil has posted I'd draw attention to the following which are required under ROGs as it applies to heritage/leisure railways -

Compliance with the H&S Act, Working at Height Regulations, RIDDOR, COSHH, Electrical Safety Regulations, Risk assessment processes to be in place and fully documented, training procedures to be in place and fully documented for all duties involving the safe i operation of teh railway and various tools plus for those responsible for teh safety of the public, full records to be kept, and regularly reviewed in respect od staff eyesight (wherea standard is required)  and prescription drugs being taken by anybody involved in safety critical work.  proper, fully documneted safety plan to be in place and with a record of briefings to all staff (including volunteers).  A suitable book of Rules & Regulations appropriate to contemporary conditions and railway operation - i.e. you can't just use a BR 1950 Rule Book.  And so on ...  and taht's before we get to workshops

 

If you were to see a list of railways which have been caught out on any or many of the items on that list your eyes might  open very wide.  And if you knew of those which have been told they will not only get an Improvement Order but might well get a Prohibition Notice if they don't put procedures in place by a stated date you would no doubt gasp.  The West Somerset is a fairly widely know example but it is far from being the only one.

You have completely misinterpreted my point. None of what you have said is a denial to the fact that running an effective commuter service would place the ELR under a great many exemptions it is currently exempt from. That heritage railways are required to follow many general safety regulations does not mean they are not exempted from many specific regulations.

[eldomtom2]

58 minutes ago, Phil Parker said:

Final thought - many preserved lines are struggling for volunteers and money. If they don't make it, what's the better option: Return to full railway use, a cyclepath, or housing.

I imagine the preserved railways that are the best candidates for a return to the national network are those that are not struggling...

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, Phil Parker said:

 

And that's likely to tbe the cruicial point - many, maybe even most, people in the UK want the entire place picked in aspic on the basis that the past was always better than the future. The argument is likely to be that effective transport comes a distant second to heritage.

 

 

But for most people 'effective transport' is going to mean modern stations, light airy open plan vehicles with decent air con fully accessible by those with disabilities running at frequent intervals and with fast journey times.

 

Is that really what is proposed for the ELR? Not as far as I can see.

 

Instead, we have got some councillors dreaming of simply chucking an unspecified bit of rolling stock on a slow, inefficient / expensive (in staff terms) railway and thinking its going to solve all their road traffic problems!

 

In other word a bodge job that wrecks something that currently works quite well for the sake of half baked idea not backed up by anything like the funding needed to achieve the desired end result.

 

I repeat if you really want the ELR to be transformed into a viable public transport service its going to have to mean the end of the ELR as a Heritage railway as we know it - with significant repercussions for the likes of the likes of the Mid Hants who could also be said to be in prime position to be taken over and turned into part of the national rail network.

 

In itself thats obviously not a bad thing for society and pollution reduction etc - but its important to realise the full consequences which come with it and drop this nonsense that you can somehow keep the ELR as a fully functioning Heritage railway (as we know it) yet also have frequent, fast, modern direct trains into Manchester as part of the national rail network.

 

Edited October 12, 2022 by phil-b259

[phil-b259]

22 minutes ago, eldomtom2 said:

I imagine the preserved railways that are the best candidates for a return to the national network are those that are not struggling...

 

In some ways true.

 

The best candidates for restoration to the national rail network are generally those which hung on till the 1970s before succumbing - and of those the ELR and Mid Hants are to the top of the list given their potential for commuting purposes.

 

The West Somerset and Swanage are potential contenders but in both cases the summer ridership is likely to be far higher than winter and they are much further from large cities (e.g. Manchester or London)

 

The Severn Valley basically goes the wrong way (north -south) where as I imagine most of the commuting type demand in the area will be eastwards to Birmingham / Wolverhampton

 

The 'pull' factor from the only sizable towns served by the NYMR is Pickering southwards and Whitby - Middlesborough so its of no real use.

 

The Bluebell links nowhere to somewhere and although the line north of Horsted has been touted as relief for the BML in the past, the fact that the line north of E Grinstead is only double track with nowhere for faster trains to overtake (in contrast to the existing BML north of Three Bridges) makes it less than ideal

Edited October 12, 2022 by phil-b259

[adb968008]

On 11/10/2022 at 18:49, The Stationmaster said:

 

 

The matter of level crossings is again relatively simple.  The traffic moment for each crossing would have to be reassessed to take into account of additional trains plus any increase in linespeeds would also obviouslyneed to be considered.  

The level crossing at Ramsbottom would fail, it is far too busy any day of the week. I’m surprised gates were allowed even back in 1991, unless grandfather rights applied and maybe still does. Minehead crossing is nothing compared to the traffic at Ramsbottom.

 

Townsend Fold is a sleepy back water, but a crossing none the less, Rawtenstall West is quite busy too.

But the commuters are at neither… they are all around the valley, upto Burnley and beyond, heading to Into a funnel road to Manchester.. not one of 4 ELR stations has enough demand, only a park and ride would solve the motorways problems, as a local “catch all” … unless that was addressed, it simply would not stack up… but “catching all” means major road works, as well as rail as well as the station, the track, signalling and of course rolling stock and maintenance.

As mentioned earlier the track is very old, I dont know when it was last replaced, but BR started running it down in the 1960’s, it wasnt lifted. I’m sure the ELR maintains it for its needs but I doubt its suitable for sustained daily higher speed running without entire replacement.

 

Castleton curve would need reinstating towards Manchester for any rail solution, a Tram solution would probably meet lesser stringent standards. Whats to be considered here is distance to Manchester… the Bury line is a commuter line with lots of stations, via Castleton is a long detour.. BRs fast solution was via Clifton, and whilst the route still exists thats a big money solution… so of the two options available neither are fast, even at faster speeds.

 

Another “maybe” is a more practical solution is a park and ride at the M66 Bury junction, where the line crosses the motorway, The existing tram could run paralell to the ELR from Bury Interchange 1 mile upto the M66… doesnt affect the ELR, Solves the Manchester congestion and exactly 1 mile of tram track adjacent to the ELR, 1/2 of which used to be 4 track formation., and sidings. There is already a sizeable car park space at the site with Motorway feed, as part of the site is a business park.

The real solution to this is road widening, but thats even more cost prohibitive hence politicians reach for what they think is an easy cheap win and think they can just turn on the station lights and start selling tickets.

 

Edited October 12, 2022 by adb968008

[John Besley]

An example of a modern steam railway that only tentivly is classed as heritage would be the Torbay line Paignton to Kingswear... colour light signals top rate PW no rows of unrestored locos and makes money.

 

It's not your SDR or SVR etc. It does what it does very well - little known fact when the then PSR started on December 31st 1972 they had to run a commuter service as part of the take over of the line from BR ... so we had steam hauled passenger service 7 days a week until I think it was October when the contract went to Devon General 

 

It has been done before 50 years ago...

[KingEdwardII]

7 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

yet the distinct lack of 'modern' items defiantly creates the impression of stepping into the past.

It's not quite as simple as that, however. Even on the "1904" Broadway station on the GWSR, there are things like CCTV installed (to the annoyance of some purists) but even items designed to match original, such as the big lanterns, inevitably have modern technology inside such as LED lights.

 

So in reality there is already a blending of modern and heritage items - the trick is finding an acceptable balance. Some heritage lines are already capable of accepting trains from connected main line routes.

 

It is here on the ELR where it may be possible to look at acceptable ways of combining regular commuter style services with heritage operation. Tricky, for sure, but not impossible. How much it might all cost and what compromises may be required needs careful investigation.

 

Yours, Mike.

[melmerby]

3 hours ago, John Besley said:

 

It has been done before 50 years ago...

50 years ago was 50 years ago and they were just continuing the status quo.

 

[phil-b259]

3 hours ago, John Besley said:

An example of a modern steam railway that only tentivly is classed as heritage would be the Torbay line Paignton to Kingswear... colour light signals top rate PW no rows of unrestored locos and makes money.

 

It's not your SDR or SVR etc. It does what it does very well - little known fact when the then PSR started on December 31st 1972 they had to run a commuter service as part of the take over of the line from BR ... so we had steam hauled passenger service 7 days a week until I think it was October when the contract went to Devon General 

 

It has been done before 50 years ago...

 

50 years ago things like accessibility standards were considerably lacking... you would find yourself in court very quickly if a local authority tried the same stunt today as its rightly recognised that a public transport service MUST cater for those with visual, hearing and mobility impairments and slam door Mk1s do NOT!

 

In fact there was a big outcry a couple of years ago about the buses used for school runs and rail replacements - the official rules now dictate that there must be 'accessible provision made for those with disabilities (although I do grant that in certain circumstances this need can be met by providing an accessible taxi in place of the bus)

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, KingEdwardII said:

 

So in reality there is already a blending of modern and heritage items - the trick is finding an acceptable balance. Some heritage lines are already capable of accepting trains from connected main line routes.

 

 

This is true but you need to be careful to differentiate between 'charters' and a frequent public transport service provided to try and achieve modal shift away from cars!

 

Charter trains are exempt from an awful lot of the rules which are mandatory for regular public transport providers and in that respect are not a lot different to a Heritage railways own services when they arrive there.

 

Even the trial of a Summer Saturday service by SWR / SWT to Corfe Castle on the Swanage branch had nothing to do with providing a regular public transport service as such (one train a day out and back is hardly useful for such an enterprise) - it was in effect also a charter bringing people in for a trip on the steam railway arriving during a normal running day when the Swange railway was already operating. A very different proposition to trying to operate a 30 minute service on a winter midweek when the railway would ordinarily be shut.