Alton Towers by Train?

[s_g_k]

I was recently thinking about the East Midlands Railway Regional route that goes between Nottingham and Crewe, serving both Blythe Bridge and Uttoxeter along the way (the closest stations to Towers). I think it could be of a big benefit to Alton Towers and has been majorly overlooked in discussions regarding public transport to the park on this forum. Universal has lobbied the government for a new rail line, and another upgraded service, so I can’t see why Towers can’t push for an upgraded rail service as well.

These stations (Blythe Bridge & Uttoxeter) are massively underserved and currently only run an hourly 2-carriage, which means the trains are constantly rammed. The station platforms are clearly able to serve 4-carriage trains with plenty of capacity on the lines for additional services. Both stations are only 15-20 minutes from the theme park, compared to Stafford and Stoke-On-Trent, where the current park buses run from, which are about 35-45 minutes away.

Shorter and more convenient journeys would promote modal shift away from cars. The Crewe-Nottingham line also serves at least 5 universities, so could also have the added benefit of increasing access for a key demographic to the theme park. Making it one of the better connected non-London visitor attractions in the country.

No need for any new ground-up infrastructure like has been proposed in this thread, and Towers could probably also spin it to improve relations with the locals particularly around reduced car congestion. With the added benefit of making Towers just as accessible as most major European theme parks from public transport with an upgraded bus service!

Agreed - the answer is more regular trains and buses, not reopening the Alton line. My brother lives in Sheffield and gets the train to Uttoxeter to see my parents every other week and when I questioned why he had to dropped off to Derby at 11am on a Sunday, he said it’s because trains don’t stop at Uttoxeter until 14:57 on Sundays.

It’s shite and not fit for purpose considering Uttoxeter is now a very large town, and is also the closest station to the country’s largest theme park.

 

[flyingguitar]

This is what I have thought, as even if the valley railway reopened to Alton (which would require a ton of work, such as bats living in a tunnel (apparently), working out how to share a road bridge with a local business and more) the line would mostly be limited to 25mph and probably as low as 5mph at parts (pretty typical heritage railway speeds) it would have to leave from stoke, then work its way to leek, then turn around and head to Alton probably taking a very long time, it would probably be really nice and very good looking with a steam engine near the towers, but it would probably take too long and be far too impractical for most people to take, and that is assuming the stoke line reopens.

I think it is more of a chicken and egg scenario, as if you don't have enough trains you can't justify adding more busses, but if there isn't enough demand from the lack of busses you can't add trains

 

[Bert2theSpark]

I think it is more of a chicken and egg scenario, as if you don't have enough trains you can't justify adding more busses, but if there isn't enough demand from the lack of busses you can't add trains

The Crewe-Nottingham line is frequently full as a service, there is demand to expand the service anyways, the stations have enough space to double the train length, and enough capacity on the track to increase the frequency. The demand generated by Alton Towers would be supplementary, not dependent upon.

The bus service from Uttoxeter could at least come from scrapping the infrequent services from Stoke/Stafford, they could probably have a more frequent bus service from Blythe Bridge/Uttoxeter for the same budget, if the demand was there, because the journey length is much shorter. They might be able to cross-subsidise a shuttle service with the local council if they amended a couple of local routes (32/32X immediately pops into mind).

The hard infrastructure for better transport service is there, just nowhere near enough service provision for it to be practical to most AT visitors.

 

[John]

I think lack of capacity at Stoke could be major obstacle to increased train frequency on the Uttox line. It only has 2 through platforms which isn't enough for a station serving so many different routes

 

[QTXAdsy]

All about electrification to handle not only larger trains but with better capacity which could allow for the spacing needing for more services.

Admittedly my knowledge of the rail system there isn't all perfect but the current mainline isn't electrified yet and I'm not sure when the wires will be up but when this happens, more than likely many of the stations will see their lengths increased to cope with longer trains so that is all something to work for.

 

[s_g_k]

I think lack of capacity at Stoke could be major obstacle to increased train frequency on the Uttox line. It only has 2 through platforms which isn't enough for a station serving so many different routes

This is true, but the Stoke - Derby branch line separates off from the mainline pretty much immediately after leaving Stoke so I think there’s definitely room for more capacity.

Don’t forget that London can handle trains every 3 minutes on lines that handle tube trains and National rail trains.

 

[flyingguitar]

The Crewe-Nottingham line is frequently full as a service, there is demand to expand the service anyways, the stations have enough space to double the train length, and enough capacity on the track to increase the frequency. The demand generated by Alton Towers would be supplementary, not dependent upon.

true, however there are other limitations which means it would be quite expensive to expand (for starters the stoke station is currently small (IMO it could easily become 4 platforms if they installed a middle platform)

operating at full I would argue is basically the perfect usage level (not for passengers) as for the company it means they they aren't wasting additional funds on diesel

but also a lot of operators (Cross country I am looking at you!) have a shortage of trains, so the service may currently be full, but other services may be also full (or close to it) and thus it may come down to if adding a train to a service (e.g to make it 4 car) should it go on x or y service.

 

[rob666]

It doesn't matter what is possible physically, practically, there is no chance of this ever happening.
Economically, Towers operates fine on a simple road motor vehicle only policy.
There is very little demand for trains, it is less convenient for 99% of the punters, few people would travel to the Towers by train unless they are also train thoosies (I know, there are many).
Most people do not want to change vehicle at least three times to visit the Towers, taking usually at least twice as long.
Economically dead, no chance.

 

[Quantum]

It doesn't matter what is possible physically, practically, there is no chance of this ever happening.
Economically, Towers operates fine on a simple road motor vehicle only policy.
There is very little demand for trains, it is less convenient for 99% of the punters, few people would travel to the Towers by train unless they are also train thoosies (I know, there are many).
Most people do not want to change vehicle at least three times to visit the Towers, taking usually at least twice as long.
Economically dead, no chance.

There is no demand for trains as there is no train line service to Towers. Given the station is there and it's not a massive stretch to reinstate a line that ends a few miles away I don't see why this wouldn't be a positive viable route especially if the full route is restored.

 

[rob666]

The station isn't there, it is a house.
There are dozens of other hurdles to be overcome.
People prefer cars.
It would never, ever be viable economically.
Beeching was completely right, economically, all those years ago.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

If you're a gigantic American conglomerate with plans to build a shiny new theme park, however, the UK government will build you a dedicated train station, dedicated service roads and brand new motorway junctions. All at the expense of the British taxpayer!

 

[BarryZola]

If you're a gigantic American conglomerate with plans to build a shiny new theme park, however, the UK government will build you a dedicated train station, dedicated service roads and brand new motorway junctions. All at the expense of the British taxpayer!

Yeah, Towers don't hold a great hand there. Towers have already built the theme park and created the jobs so there's no need for the government to bribe them with goodies. Until Universal is built they always have the fact that they can build in a different country if they don't get the funding that they want from the government. Towers would have to be going out of business for anyone in government to even think about organising any funding for them, and even then they'd most probably let them die because it's only leisure and not something cool like steel or cars.

 

[flyingguitar]

People prefer cars.

actually people prefer public transits when it is in place, the problem is our transit is horrific and from the Victorian era without much investment in new lines since

public transit is far better for the environment, peoples health, anyone with disabilities (I don't know why people think cars are so good for people with disabilities, cars are really restrictive, blind people, etc can't drive so need someone else, where as a bus anyone can ride, and it can be made accessible really easily)

with a good network it can also take less time (as there are fewer traffic jams) and be more free the problem is outside of london we have quite bad to very bad networks.

There is no demand for trains as there is no train line service to Towers. Given the station is there and it's not a massive stretch to reinstate a line that ends a few miles away I don't see why this wouldn't be a positive viable route especially if the full route is restored.

the only options for the line are to go towards Uttoxeter or to go towards leak (which currently has no mainline connections, however network rail has the stoke branch line which could be recommissioned to connect leak to stoke)

neither option is great:

Uttoxeter would require a brand new line as at den stone someone has built their house on the former section of the line and JCB has built over it as well, this would require new bridges (to go over the A50??) and a whole new junction and routing likely costing millions of pounds, IMO this is extremely unlikely to happen as it wouldn't be profitable enough to justify being build (network rail requires a certain level of profitability to build something).

the leak then stoke option is probably the option which is most likely to happen but this requires network rail reopening the stoke-leak branch line, then the expansion of the heritage railway from frog hall to Alton (which requires going through a tunnel with bats, sharing a rail bridge with a cricket club and more disturbance to towns)

if the leak then stoke line is built it isn't perfect, it would mostly be a heritage railway, thus a lot of the line speed will probably be around 25mph, and the stoke (and most the valley) is single tracked severely reducing capacity, and as the stoke line comes onto the valley line heading towards leak the trains would have to turn around adding even more time, (between 1-3 mins if it was top & tailing to 10-20mins if it had to go through a turn around) I wouldn't be too surprised if it would take over an hour to get from stoke to Alton via these train lines, it would probably be a great experience (the steam engine to Alton towers) but apart from VIP type experiences I can't imagine it would be that practical as it would probably be quicker and cheaper to run a bus from stoke.


I do think a bus line should be made between Uttoxeter station and Alton towers as many people can't get to Alton, either because they don't have a car (such as teenagers) or they don't want to drive on the country roads (they aren't bad country roads, but I have been behind some people who probably shouldn't be on them (such as doing 10 mph in a 60 !!!))

 

[rob666]

...actually people prefer public transits when it is in place, ...

Actually, no they don't.
Every statistical report in the UK regarding transport I have read over the years (SABRE sitereader most days) has shown a preference for private over public, even when a public transport service is available.
Reliability, cost, safety and accessibility are the reasons given for why.
Covid tipped the balance further due to infection risk.
What is your source for thinking otherwise?

 

[flyingguitar]

Reliability, cost, safety and accessibility are the reasons given for why.

... yeah which is why in the UK we don't like it as I said:

the problem is our transit is horrific

What is your source for thinking otherwise?

for starters there are plenty of people who would, this is a survey for investing in public transit (so take it with a truck load of salt):

https://bettertransport.org.uk/media/survey-finds-79-per-cent-of-drivers-would-use-public-transport-more-if-it-was-better/

also:

Three in four people prefer better-connected public transport over driving, new global study reveals

More than half of North American respondents would accept increased road taxes to fund better-connected public transport Hitachi Rail publishes...

www.globenewswire.com

when you use a good public transit network you can understand why people prefer them, it is just that our network is quite poor (not American level bad, bust still quite poor) outside of London, I much more prefer to sit on a train reading a book, or on my phone than sat in a traffic jam my commute is about the same time car vs train bus I usually catch the train as it is far more comfortable, less stressful and more enjoyable

 

[rob666]

Still no.
The first report is from a public transport pressure group, so very biased, and says that people would use public transport more if there was a better service...no surprise there then, not that they have a preference for public transport...because they simply don't.
The second refers to people in large global cities, and work commuting...so absolutely no use for an argument about getting to a theme park in a rural area.
People have moved on from communal transport, and private car journeys in the uk increased by six per cent in 2023.
There was no trend to public transport, apart from commuting for work into big cities.

 

[flyingguitar]

Still no.
The first report is from a public transport pressure group, so very biased, and says that people would use public transport more if there was a better service...no surprise there then, not that they have a preference for public transport...because they simply don't.

so what your saying is that if the service was better people would use it over cars, but they don't prefer them over cars????

People have moved on from communal transport, and private car journeys in the uk increased by six per cent in 2023.
There was no trend to public transport, apart from commuting for work into big cities.

you seem to be mis interpreting what I am saying, the UK doesn't have that good public transit, so I would not expect it to have swings towards public transit as our network is bad, hint why we should invest in our public transit

What I have been trying to say is essentially when public transit is good (such as in Switzerland, Netherlands, etc) people often prefer to take public transit as it is far more convenient, often quicker, better, etc

NTS 2023: Trends in public transport use and multi-modal public transport trips

www.gov.uk

besides according to this (2023) pre covid rail journeys had been increasing year on year, local bus journeys have been decreasing (although many services near me have been cut because they are run by company's trying to save money) and other journeys (busses in London and the underground) have been essentially flat

I don't understand why you love cars so much, we have had a similar conversation (although about biking) a few months ago, do you own a car manufacture?

there is a fundamental problem in this country where public transit needs to be a company and be profitable, etc where as this isn't the reason we should have public transit, good public transit can improve a lot of peoples lives, reducing cost of living, cleaning up the enviroment, making cities better places to live, being more accessible for disabled guests, and so many more advantages

 

[rob666]

I do not own a car manufacture, no.
I don't love cars, and I still own a fine Super Galaxy road bike...my ankle stops me riding it as often as I would like.
I walked to school a couple of miles every day for a decade.
I use public transport occasionally, where a decent option is available.
I walked cross London during the tube strikes...and like most in the capital...a car is not a real option.
Like trains to the Towers.
I agree public transport is better for the environment...but people still fail to choose it when there is a private alternative.

But...you said people prefer public transport where it is in place...people don't.
As simple as that.
Even where there is a good public transport option...people still prefer their own car.
Unavoidable fact.

Train service to Alton Towers...to bring us back on topic.
Beyond economic reason, and 99% of punters would not use it for the reasons given previously, even if the facility was there.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

What I have been trying to say is essentially when public transit is good (such as in Switzerland, Netherlands, etc) people often prefer to take public transit as it is far more convenient, often quicker, better, etc

Whilst the studies that you've highlighted do state that car drivers say that they would be more likely to use public transport if it were better, they don't question the frequency of which said drivers would use the hypothetical public transport.

Crucially, you've provided no evidence for the statement that people would prefer to use public transport over private vehicles. Just evidence that it is used more in places with good public network access. That's not a preference.

The majority of commuters in London use the Tube not because they prefer it, but because private transport otherwise is more difficult, costly, or impossible. Give them a choice, however, and they would likely opt for travel in a private vehicle.

That being said, since the introduction of ride-sharing apps in London in 2012, TfL data shows that there's been an increase in Private Hire Vehicles of 6.2%. This is in a city which was already incredibly well served by an exisiting hackney carriage and minicab market. There has been a dramatic increase in the amount of private hire vehicle journeys. Whilst this hasn't made a dent in the number of journeys made on foot or by public transport, it does demonstrate that there is a preference in using a private vehicle to get somewhere Vs public transport.

Yes, people will say that they would use public transport if it were better. Give them the option of driving or using public transport, however, and their preference will tend to be driving, especially with long distance journeys. The data we've both been looking at really only takes into account commutes.

---

Might be time to bother our resident statistical expert, @Matt N, and ask him to create a survey of TST users to find out the realities of preference of travel to Alton Towers, in a hypothetical world where there were a viable train station.

I would imagine that journey time, ease of "first mile" and "last mile" connections, connecting journey services and cost will play a major impact. I would also argue that families and groups would skew toward travelling by car vs individuals.

 

[BarryZola]

I think there are 3 main things that would put me off using public transport to get to Towers.

1. Crime and punishment is out of whack in this country and you can't control what nutters you're trapped in a metal tin with for hours. I feel safer in my own car.
2. I like to turn up quite early at Towers most of the time and I don't think I'd manage that on the rail network, for example, especially having to change trains etc. I can also leave Towers exactly when I want in my car and don't have to look at a timetable and be on someone else's time.
3. The cost of rail travel is just stupid in this country and that won't change. In my lifetime it'll probably always be cheaper for me to go by car.

The only good thing about rail travel would be that I wouldn't have to concentrate on driving and could rest or read or whatever. I suppose if I didn't have to drive at either end I could have a few alcoholic beverages too if desired.