theboybilly
Well-known member
....and I could be drinking in the Partridge in 20 minutes 
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Richard Beeching and the effects of his report.
- Thread starter Leekbrookgull
- Start date
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 30,585
Thrre is absolutely no chance of a railway being reinstated in Steyning, for a whole variety of reasons.
Hampster Gull
New member
- Dec 22, 2010
- 13,462
Really poor analysis behind the decision. Really poor. I suspect many would still have closed but the data gathering was a one week spot and was inconsistent in its deployment.
West Hoathly Seagull
Honorary Ruffian
It is also known as Abermaw. The Welsh name is always on top on road signs. The odd thing is that the local line from Machynlleth to Pwllheli survived, including the well known Barmouth Bridge, but the main line from Ruabon, which now has the preserved Bala Lake and Llangollen Railways on part of it, and used to bring in holidaymakers from Liverpool and Manchester, did not. I worked at one time for a Christian mission organisation which had a holiday home at Arthog near Fairbourne. We stayed there and the old railway was a path along the Mawddach Estuary. The local station, Morfa Mawddach, was once a very important junction, but it is now an unstaffed halt without any buildings. That was the strange thing - lines serving small villages survived, sizeable towns in Devon such as Tavistock lost their railways, as did some quite large towns in our area. I don't know if there were local campaigns to save those railways that survived.
Regarding your point about the East Grinstead to Three Bridges line, it cannot be reinstated. The line has been built across at Crawley Down and the road network realigned along the old track. The only thing that could be done would be to extend the Crawley Fastway guided bus system, but taking over Worth Way, which is a popular walking and cycling route, would be very unpopular. It's a right pain, as the only practical way to get to Crawley is to drive. The buses are just too slow. Closing the Tunbridge Wells line was barmy too, and I regret not being able to get to Haywards Heath and on to the coast by train. Again, driving is the only option, other than parking in Haywards Heath.
Last edited:
MattBackHome
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 11,729
Magnificent post. It's stuff like this that makes NSC truly great.
GT49er
Well-known member
East Grinstead to London was never closed. Haven't you ever wondered why?
- Apr 5, 2014
- 23,582
As an informed and interesting forum, yes. It's one of the reasons why I think we should have sub-divisions on various topics of interest. I knew [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] was speaking of widening the remit without losing its original purpose.
- Apr 5, 2014
- 23,582
Well, no. Surprisingly, his biase was against East Grinstead. See earlier post.
Seagull
Yes I eat anything
Uckfield to Lewes would have been handy for some fans now, though it would require serious reworking of the A22! My Dad used to take that line to school after cycling 3 miles & slinging his bike, unlocked in a shack at the station, so he's fond of recounting.
Cian
Well-known member
Costs were inflated on some lines marked for closure by holding over irregular maintenance work for a few years then rushing it through in the year they were going to use as the base for the "costs" of the line. Allegedly
Good old NSC.
For those of us without a clue what is being written about:-
For those of us without a clue what is being written about:-
What I do find surprising about the Beeching cuts is that, even in the 60s, there were a lot of commuters on the south coast. I don't understand why he didn't consider that there might be the need for an alternative route to B&H, Lewes, Worthing, Eastbourne. Did he really not consider what would happen if the Brighton mainline were damaged in some way?
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,312
he probably considered it, but it wasn't in his remit to ensure a rail network with redundant routes. he was tasked with saving money and its pretty costly to keep lines open just so that they can be used a half dozen times a year when there's a problem on another line.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
While that might be true, certainly in looking at the statistics he used and methods of data collection and analysis were significantly flawed. There is little doubt that many lines were shut that were and would go on to be profitable.
Man of Harveys
Well-known member
It is very arguably the worst mistake - outside of dodgy wars and stuff like that - ever made by a UK government, certainly in the field of transport.
Add in a Tory government with members actually involved the motorway building industry in the form of Ernest Marples and the whole thing stinks all the more. Laughably short-sighted at very best and a lesson to any government not to get carried away, putting it very mildly.
For the sake of comparison, it's worth checking out how many smaller rural villages and towns can still be accessed by regular rail services in France or Germany, where a Beeching axe never took place. Tragic really.
Add in a Tory government with members actually involved the motorway building industry in the form of Ernest Marples and the whole thing stinks all the more. Laughably short-sighted at very best and a lesson to any government not to get carried away, putting it very mildly.
For the sake of comparison, it's worth checking out how many smaller rural villages and towns can still be accessed by regular rail services in France or Germany, where a Beeching axe never took place. Tragic really.
GT49er
Well-known member
There were some. The Settle-Carlisle line was saved, although most of the stations were shut. Many of these have since re-opened, and are relatively well used. It's also a diversion route when the main West Coast line is having engineering works. Together with quite a lot of freight, it's now busier than it ever was in the past. The Barrow-Whitehaven route was also saved. This is a funny little line, it's single track, and often has only one carriage trains on it - and none on a Sunday. However, it is one of the main ways staff get to Sellafield Nuclear spot - so the morning and evening trains are packed. There's now plans to build the new nuclear plant at Sellafield, and part of these plans involve doubling the line - as much of the freight and equipment for building the plant will be coming in by rail.
Which goes to show how short-sighted Beeching was really. It's one thing saying 'only 50 passengers a day, must be closed', but there seems to have been no thought about the future potential of the lines.
I am at the moment on holiday near Witney - which lost it's line to Oxford thanks to Beeching. Since then, Witney has grown quite considerably - there is now such demand for public transport between the two that there is a bus every 10 minutes. And they're full.
The point about not retaining the land is very valid. I think they do this in the States, and in France. Some of the lines that have shut could have definitely been reopened, and probably would have done by now if it had been easy to do so. It strikes me that the hurried sell off was partly idealogical, in that Marples was part of the determined to change society from one of public benefit and service to individualism and car use. That is - if there was no option to re-open the lines, they couldn't be - and people would have to buy cars and use his roads.
Oddly, although much of the land and so on has been sold off - the railways (BRB Residuary) still have to look after most of the bridges over or under the line even though it's shut. BRB is/was part of the DoT, so what we're not told is how much the lines that were closed are still costing the public - even though there's no trains on them.
However, it is undeniable that some lines were worthy of closure. The line to Coniston in the Lakes was carrying a grand total of 11 passengers a day. The bus that replaced it carried 4 passengers a day and didn't last either.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,312
when the network that remains is not profitable and still requires heavy subsidy, i think there's a great deal of doubt to that. I'm sure that many of the lines were more utilised than statistics recorded, but not profitably. if we consider Lewes-Uckfield, it wouldn't be profitable as most passengers would take the faster line to London, or at least the passengers would be shared, so cost effectiveness greatly reduced on both lines. (i would support that line reopening btw, who's going pay the extra for it?)
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
What I mean by profitable, is that certain lines not being a burden on the overall network than any other, perhaps not profitable, but not causing anymore loss. Beeching was tasked with a vision for the future of the railways, but actually he only considered the present and there was no real vision for the future at all.