The Public Transport Thread

[GJMarshy]

For those that want a railway, you're looking at best £1000 per metre. A quick look on Google Maps has it around 6.3km from Froghall to Alton Towers station, so £6.3 million without sorting the various tunnels, bridges, crossings to connect to a line with no mainline links, so you can't even run direct services.

Capacity wise, a heritage MK1 TSO coach can take 64 fully loaded, probably get 70 if you had some standing or 100 on WedgEx Gala loading which would not be popular. If they aren't running up the hill to Ipstones, a decent size heritage diesel could take load 8 or 9 coaches, if the line can support that many in loops/stations for running multiple trains. Probably looking at £25k at least per coach for restorations, so another £200k.

Motive power maintenance, a Western for example has semi-recently been priced at £100,000 for a restoration by the DEPG who own it. If they needed another loco and had to restore one, plus sorting out a fleet of coaches including one with wheelchair access, plus sorting the line you could easily end up with not much left from £10 million. It isn't happening.

I think you're right, a railway at this stage wouldn't be the right solution. The main use case would be to serve AT, the rest of the (abandoned) line doesn't connect towns which would drive ridership high enough for a railway to make sense.

I *do* think. though that AT could and should be served by frequent buses from key P&R locations. This way you'd be able to drive to say M6 Keele services and take buses right to the park entrance, de-clogging the roads through Farley/Alton. Do the same on the M1 side and at Stoke station, and you've got a decent amount of congestion removed, all without any "anti-car" rhetoric.

Give people decent options and they tend to use them. Especially if it makes things easier. I can't count the number of times I'd gone to AT as a kid with friends/family and we got lost. It's just easier to say "Drive to Juction X of M6/M1 – a bus will take you straight from there to the park entrance"

Anecdotally frees up the car park too for park expansion, and suddenly mothballing the decrepit monorail isn't as much of a loss, since now the Johnston family are getting dropped off directly at the park entrance with hundreds of others.

 

[Poisson]

The trick is carrot and stick with that. Free P&R service, paid parking on site.

 

[MaxPower]

I did the bus from Stoke train station in 2005 a couple of times and it was pretty good. Quite busy aswell if I remember correctly so there was obviously demand back then for it.

Don't know if a park and ride or bus service would work today though, I certainly wouldn't want to have to wait for a bus at the end of the day if I could just get in my car and go.

 

[flyingguitar]

For those that want a railway, you're looking at best £1000 per metre. A quick look on Google Maps has it around 6.3km from Froghall to Alton Towers station, so £6.3 million without sorting the various tunnels, bridges, crossings to connect to a line with no mainline links, so you can't even run direct services.

Capacity wise, a heritage MK1 TSO coach can take 64 fully loaded, probably get 70 if you had some standing or 100 on WedgEx Gala loading which would not be popular. If they aren't running up the hill to Ipstones, a decent size heritage diesel could take load 8 or 9 coaches, if the line can support that many in loops/stations for running multiple trains. Probably looking at £25k at least per coach for restorations, so another £200k.

Motive power maintenance, a Western for example has semi-recently been priced at £100,000 for a restoration by the DEPG who own it. If they needed another loco and had to restore one, plus sorting out a fleet of coaches including one with wheelchair access, plus sorting the line you could easily end up with not much left from £10 million. It isn't happening.

I have said earlier that a rail line is not the way to go, as the rail line has the same problems as AT (it has no rail connections itself) and it would probably take way too long to get to At from any station such as Birmingham.
a bus from Uttoxeter, or stoke is a much better idea

however your costs are extortionary, what are your plans, starting a new line from scratch?

£1000 per meter?
that £1000/m is for a brand new line you need to remember many things:
1. the labour will be heavily discounted or voluinteers
2. they use differnt track building tequniques, modern track is built with expensive machines, and is streched then welded together they will use basic machines and will probably use older style of track (with fish plates) significantly reducing the cost
3. they own the line down to oakmoore already.
4. there is very little signalling equipment required, compared to modern lines.
5. this is a very slow line, the track can be much less accurate compared to high speed modern lines
6. the route is already set, much less planning is required

i don't have acctual numbers however i'll be honest, I would be very surprised if froghall to oakmoore cost anywhere near £1mil (especially considering they ripped up the track, so may have a lot of it stored ready to use.)

also why are they buying coaches?
they already own coaches, why would they go out and buy new ones, also you can rent old br mk1 or brmk2 coaches if you need more. (also a reasonable diesel could probably pull more than 9 coaches)

also why are they buying a locomotive (and £100,000!!!! that is extremely expensive) a western is a rare and a locomotive that is desirable also why buy a new diesel, they have 5 opperational diesels (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churnet_Valley_Railway), 2 are shunting so not applicable, but still that is 3 diesels, more than enough
if they needed more then herratige diesels move round a lot, they essentially could rent a engine, it is how galas are done (from my understanding you can get short term or long term)
there is also 1 diesel undergoing overhaul, and another awaiting overhaull.

overall we can't say a price, given that oakmoore had rails on recently I would say it is fair that little ground work may be requires (extending banks, etc) the only problem is work required on the oakmoore - alton section, that could be just as cheap or expensive (if heavy groundwork is required (e.g collapsed bank))

 

[BarryZola]

The trick is carrot and stick with that. Free P&R service, paid parking on site.

...and the trouble with this is, what park management would want to actively give up a load of zero effort car parking profit each year in exchange for them having to go to the effort of providing a park and ride service. Like tax on petrol in the UK, once it's put there, and they're used to the cash take, it's hard to take it away.

 

[Poisson]

...and the trouble with this is, what park management would want to actively give up a load of zero effort car parking profit each year in exchange for them having to go to the effort of providing a park and ride service. Like tax on petrol in the UK, once it's put there, and they're used to the cash take, it's hard to take it away.

They'd only do it for full council funding plus other incentives.

 

[Poisson]

£1000 per meter?
that £1000/m is for a brand new line you need to remember many things:
1. the labour will be heavily discounted or voluinteers
2. they use differnt track building tequniques, modern track is built with expensive machines, and is streched then welded together they will use basic machines and will probably use older style of track (with fish plates) significantly reducing the cost
3. they own the line down to oakmoore already.
4. there is very little signalling equipment required, compared to modern lines.
5. this is a very slow line, the track can be much less accurate compared to high speed modern lines
6. the route is already set, much less planning is required

So you're saying Alton Towers, owned by the large and profitable organisation that is Merlin, should demand the volunteers of the CVR build the line for free/materials only? This isn't being viewed as a heritage line extension, more of a line to connect to a very profitable business. I used a figure that was confirmed accurate a decade ago for plain line installation per metre on a good track bed with drainage etc all sorted. The line will need all the drainage etc sorted, with some of it not seeing trains for 17 years at least whilst other bits not seeing trains for 60 years. There's a large tunnel, that will need fully sorting out at great expense and then there's a road crossing directly afterwards that'd need instating. Even embankment works aren't cheap, ask the SVR who are currently spending over half a mil to fix a bridge wing and embankment slip.

CVR will most likely need more rolling stock and locos to run more services along a longer line. I know they have some locos already (I had a full tour of their Class 47 including engine room last year) but if you're offering an actual transport link rather than a heritage service you need extra on standby to rescue failures etc. The reason for train lengths is unless it is dual tracked, you'll be putting things in loops to pass and loops longer than 8/9 coaches plus a loco and clearance aren't the most common things on heritage railways. Of course the larger locos can do more, but the infrastructure will place limits on them. Loco rental isn't free either, so even if they didn't want to use their own it won't exactly be a cheap endeavour. In the mid 90s it was reported around £750 per day for a Class 37, then you'd need someone with competency to drive it. It will be a hell of a lot more now.

 

[flyingguitar]

So you're saying Alton Towers, owned by the large and profitable organisation that is Merlin, should demand the volunteers of the CVR build the line for free/materials only? This isn't being viewed as a heritage line extension, more of a line to connect to a very profitable business. I used a figure that was confirmed accurate a decade ago for plain line installation per metre on a good track bed with drainage etc all sorted. The line will need all the drainage etc sorted, with some of it not seeing trains for 17 years at least whilst other bits not seeing trains for 60 years. There's a large tunnel, that will need fully sorting out at great expense and then there's a road crossing directly afterwards that'd need instating. Even embankment works aren't cheap, ask the SVR who are currently spending over half a mil to fix a bridge wing and embankment slip.

why is AT paying for the railway, CVR would probably end up owning it even if they did pay for it, as CVR would own it, they likely would get volunteers to help out

£1000/m is very expensive and the cost a government will be paying, so is inflated this line is probably going to be limited to 30mph, and use old construction techniques (which are far cheaper, as no expensive machines are required and track doesn't have to be stretched), it also won't need to be as smooth as new lines either. they also may have stored the rail and ties (or got some for discounted prices)

I am not saying it isn't expensive, however £6m is extremely expensive for a heritage railway, I would honestly say sub £1m is probably quite reasonable for returning to oakmoore, the big question is returning to AT as that is trackbed that hasn't been touched for 60 years (could be very cheap and easy, or difficult with lost of delays (such as their leek line extension, they had to spend an additional £500,000 on extending a bank)).

CVR will most likely need more rolling stock and locos to run more services along a longer line. I know they have some locos already (I had a full tour of their Class 47 including engine room last year) but if you're offering an actual transport link rather than a heritage service you need extra on standby to rescue failures etc. The reason for train lengths is unless it is dual tracked, you'll be putting things in loops to pass and loops longer than 8/9 coaches plus a loco and clearance aren't the most common things on heritage railways. Of course the larger locos can do more, but the infrastructure will place limits on them. Loco rental isn't free either, so even if they didn't want to use their own it won't exactly be a cheap endeavour. In the mid 90s it was reported around £750 per day for a Class 37, then you'd need someone with competency to drive it. It will be a hell of a lot more now.

the passing loops will depend on where they are, however it isn't difficult to extend the loops (this used to be a double tracked line) besides as a starting point having 2 train service (with a third diesel (and shunters) as back up) would probably be fine if you needed more you can quite easily rent them similar to how a gala would be set up, or from places like this: https://pioneer-diesels.co.uk/heritage-diesel-locomotive-hire/

If they wanted to own one, £100,000 is on the high, high end of locomotives (besides it is common for a heritage locomotive to be privately owned and not owned by the railway)

as for cost of running, that is the point of tickets, (or at least AT would pay them) and the drivers are also volunteers. TBH £750 really dosn't sound that bad, compared to the amount of busses you would need to hire / contract for a similar amount of time

 

[owenstreet7]

I did the bus from Stoke train station in 2005 a couple of times and it was pretty good. Quite busy aswell if I remember correctly so there was obviously demand back then for it.

Don't know if a park and ride or bus service would work today though, I certainly wouldn't want to have to wait for a bus at the end of the day if I could just get in my car and go.

Personally, I think Park and Ride is the golden solution and could work very well with a station en route

I wonder if the parking prices is because Merlin/Towers know car or taxi is the best way to go to the park and take advantage of it.

 

[flyingguitar]

Personally, I think Park and Ride is the golden solution and could work very well with a station en route

I wonder if the parking prices is because Merlin/Towers know car or taxi is the best way to go to the park and take advantage of it.

It could be good for coaches as well, it is easy to get to Uttoxeter via coach but getting to AT there are a lot of narrow country roads.

 

[Blackrock]

The park really dose need to try and look at getting some, I can't imagine the number of people (students, teenagers, city people (Birmingham has pretty good public transport)) who can't drive / don't have a car and I really think if there were accessible, relatively cheap methods it could really help. it also is much more accessible as public transport is much more disable friendly compared to driving


I did just come up with another serious problem is accessibility of Alton station
if you dive past Alton station, it is at the bottom of the valley a good mile or two walk to the entrance (on roads with no paths), Alton would either have to add an entrance at the bottom of the valley and figure out how to get people up the valley or add a like 2 mile path to the entrance (on a 60 road as well), or add a bus service

Like I said ignore Alton Station.

If hypothetically this were to ever happen you would disembark at a new station further along the old railway track as Alton Towers fences and boundary backs directly onto this path (railway track), if they went so far along you have an entrance gate that gives them access into the valley, the air car park is also conveniently just up that hill and there’s been rumours about a second entrance there for years.

But it’s not going to happen, tbh living locally I don’t think I’d want it to happen.

It wouldn’t be as easy as just ‘purchasing the old railway track’ as it’s now a popular walking route taking people to Denstone, Alton and the pubs, the ramblers retreat, dimmingsdale etc,

The land on either side of this track is owned by multiple private individuals and entities such as the forestry commission, on one side it’s heavily wooded, used for walking, bmx biking and the woods have a sharp incline. The other way is mostly flat but is owned privately and the river Churnet meanders through it.

It’d also mean this train would have to go through the old tunnel (which from what I’ve heard needs extensive repairs, is also used by thousands of bats so good luck with that), then it’d have to go past the old station house (another air bnb) which they’d no doubt have to purchase. Then it’d be going past the houses opposite on the island which no doubt don’t want a train going past.

This would also shut access to Oakamoor cricket club by car so another bridge across the river Churnet would need to be built.

Too expensive, too many people involved that they’d have to purchase from, not enough demand, it’d cut off access between the villages of Alton and Oakamoor by foot as well as the business’s.

So yeah, personally I’d vote against it living here. I’d be losing something and personally gaining nothing.

 

[owenstreet7]

It could be good for coaches as well, it is easy to get to Uttoxeter via coach but getting to AT there are a lot of narrow country roads.

Plus it would make residents happier with less cars at Alton Village

Everyone is on about a few buses an hour from Uttoxeter Park and Ride

 

[Blackrock]

Plus it would make residents happier with less cars at Alton Village

Everyone is on about a few buses an hour from Uttoxeter Park and Ride

But there’d still be cars, a lot of cars.

It really wouldn’t have that much of an impact, and whilst the traffic is annoying most people deal with it because it’s seasonal.

 

[GJMarshy]

But there’d still be cars, a lot of cars.

It really wouldn’t have that much of an impact, and whilst the traffic is annoying most people deal with it because it’s seasonal.

It’d have quite a big impact on traffic!

The average car has 1.5 people statistically and takes up 1/3 the length of a bus which carries 40-50 people. (Call it 45 average)

Even if we assume 3 people per car as an average (given Towers is mostly families) and make a reference point of 9 people driving in the same area a bus would take up – there’s a massive reduction. This doesn’t even account for the fact cars don’t neatly bunch together like buses in convoys, they spread out more creating traffic.

So this means that even under those assumptions, 5x as many people are being moved in the same space as cars. Closer to 8x when you take into account cars don’t “convoy”

Now let’s estimate the number of cars that travel to the park daily.

Let’s use an average of 10,000 guests per day. 3 people per car. That’s 3,333 cars.

Now we’ll see how many buses would be required if (hypothetically) everyone got there by bus. So that’s 10,000 divided by 45. That’s 222.
We’ll say 50% arrive by bus/coach, 50% arrive by car.

So 50% of guests (5,000) arrive on 111 buses.

The other 50% arrive in 1,667 cars.

So we’ve gone from 3,333 cars per day to 1,667. Now let’s add the buses we’ll need to that. Gets you 1,778 vehicles per day to the park.

That’s a 46.6% decrease in traffic to the park through the area’s country lanes per day. Effectively half of what there is now.
Just by shifting 50% of guests to buses.

The wonders of space efficiency

 

[owenstreet7]

But there’d still be cars, a lot of cars.

It really wouldn’t have that much of an impact, and whilst the traffic is annoying most people deal with it because it’s seasonal.

Some yes, of course

A park and ride won't take all cars off the road en route to Towers but will take a lot off the road.

It’d have quite a big impact on traffic!

The average car has 1.5 people statistically and takes up 1/3 the length of a bus which carries 40-50 people. (Call it 45 average)

Even if we assume 3 people per car as an average (given Towers is mostly families) and make a reference point of 9 people driving in the same area a bus would take up – there’s a massive reduction. This doesn’t even account for the fact cars don’t neatly bunch together like buses in convoys, they spread out more creating traffic.

So this means that even under those assumptions, 5x as many people are being moved in the same space as cars. Closer to 8x when you take into account cars don’t “convoy”

Now let’s estimate the number of cars that travel to the park daily.

Let’s use an average of 10,000 guests per day. 3 people per car. That’s 3,333 cars.

Now we’ll see how many buses would be required if (hypothetically) everyone got there by bus. So that’s 10,000 divided by 45. That’s 222.

Now we’ll say 50% arrive by bus/coach, 50% arrive by car.

So 50% of guests (5,000) arrive on 111 buses.

The other 50% arrive in 1,667 cars.

So we’ve gone from 3,333 cars per day to 1,667. Now let’s add the buses we’ll need to that. Gets you 1,778 vehicles per day to the park.

That’s a 46.6% decrease in traffic to the park through the area’s country lanes per day. Effectively half of what there is now.

Just by shifting 50% of guests to buses.

The wonders of space efficiency

That would make the Alton Towers Park and Ride an absolute no brainer to be honest

 

[Matt N]

The thing is, though, that I’m not sure adoption would be nearly as high as people suggest even if better public transport was offered.

Unfortunately, most people will opt for the car over public transport if they have the choice, regardless of public transport options. A lot of people just prefer the flexibility and their own space.

 

[BarryZola]

Let's do some more very loose fag packet maths.

2 million visitors a year.
£12 a car to park.
That's £24,000,000

Let's say 1 person in a car of 4 pays for parking and divide that by 4.
That's now £6,000,000.

Now let's take a generous couple of million off that for higher scale pass holders who get parking for free and those who come by coach and taxi.
That's now £4,000,000.

Lose another couple of million off that by the 'park and riders' not paying the parking fee and Bianca's not going to be a happy bunny when she can't afford staff to run the park anymore.

 

[Matt N]

Let's do some more very loose fag packet maths.

2 million visitors a year.
£12 a car to park.
That's £24,000,000

Let's say 1 person in a car of 4 pays for parking and divide that by 4.
That's now £6,000,000.

Now let's take a generous couple of million off that for higher scale pass holders who get parking for free and those who come by coach and taxi.
That's now £4,000,000.

Lose another couple of million off that by the 'park and riders' not paying the parking fee and Bianca's not going to be a happy bunny when she can't afford staff to run the park anymore.

There would surely be a fee for park and ride, though, wouldn’t there?

There’s no way Towers wouldn’t charge to park at a park and ride car park. There would probably be a bus fee as well.

 

[rob666]

The most realistic solution remains my new skyride system running from the motorway services on both the M6 and M1.

 

[GJMarshy]

The thing is, though, that I’m not sure adoption would be nearly as high as people suggest even if better public transport was offered.

Unfortunately, most people will opt for the car over public transport if they have the choice, regardless of public transport options. A lot of people just prefer the flexibility and their own space.

Let's say you live in the North West of England (a huge chunk of AT's customer base given its very high metropolitan/urban population)

Even if we put to one side that you could get a train from greater manchester to Stoke and assume *everyone* drives to alton towers. Imagine you're a driver. You're not familiar with the country roads of Staffordshire. You just want to get your family to Alton Towers for a day out. What's easier?

Driving straight down the M6 to an adjacent Park & Ride (free parking) with frequent buses direct to there park entrance.

OR

Negotiating many slim and windy country lanes in an area you don't know (probably stuck in traffic through Leek), park in AT's huge car park, pay for parking, then walk 20mins to the park entrance (and back), or get the monorail (if it's still operational by then)

I'd argue one's far more convenient than the other. Hence if you mirrored this the M1 side to the East, alongside a similar facility at Stoke station, you'd likely see 50% of guests mover over to the new P&R system. The other 50% would still drive direct, but traffic reduction(as peer calculations) would be c. 50% anyway, more than justifying public sector investment to make this possible.