https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crg66p74e62o

Article is not dated 1 April.

I wonder where the station would be for the Monsal Trail - would they
rebuild a spur from the Great Rocks line over the river for an end-on
link with the Monsal Trail footpath/cycle track? And likewise, is there
provision for a station near Hindlow for connection to the Tissington
Trail, without encroaching on quarrying activities?

On 04/04/2024 11:26, NY wrote:
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crg66p74e62o
>
> Article is not dated 1 April.
>
> I wonder where the station would be for the Monsal Trail - would they
> rebuild a spur from the Great Rocks line over the river for an end-on
> link with the Monsal Trail footpath/cycle track? And likewise, is there
> provision for a station near Hindlow for connection to the Tissington
> Trail, without encroaching on quarrying activities?

For Monsal, there would be about 100 m between the new junction and the
river footbridge at the end of the trail. If the train is a single
coach as in the artist's impression, most of that could be footpath.
Even three coaches should fit without running track across the river.
Alternatively, there is a footbridge over the line slightly north which
could have a platform on the existing line, but it would be sharply
curved and might interfere with passing freight. It's also a 200 m
indirect walk from the trail.

For Tissington, there's about 50 m between the current end of the line
and the end of the trail (at a perpendicular track to the A515). Again,
a very short new piece of track could accommodate a single coach without
using existing track, though there may well be freight parked at the end
of the line which would obstruct such a plan.

I doubt that they've decided exactly what is needed, and someone
cleverer than me may soon be getting £100,000 to assess it better.

On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 11:26:43 +0100, NY wrote:

> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crg66p74e62o
>
> Article is not dated 1 April.
>
> I wonder where the station would be for the Monsal Trail - would they
> rebuild a spur from the Great Rocks line over the river for an end-on
> link with the Monsal Trail footpath/cycle track? And likewise, is there
> provision for a station near Hindlow for connection to the Tissington
> Trail, without encroaching on quarrying activities?

The obvious answer for Monsal is to extend the trail over the existing
bridge over the Wye and build a platform at the junction site - it adds
about 400m of footpath, and doesn't require any alteration to the track.

The railway doesn't get anywhere near the Tissington Trail itself, but
that merges into the High Peak Trail (and Pennine Bridleway). This gets
you to within 50m of the track - the only catch being that the quarry has
sidings on the "main line" trackbed. But assuming you can get their
agreement to keep one track clear, there should be no issue putting up a
platform at the end of the line - and again, no track changes needed.

Mike

Mike Humphrey <mail@michaelhumphrey.me.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 11:26:43 +0100, NY wrote:
>
> > https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crg66p74e62o
> >
> > Article is not dated 1 April.
> >
> > I wonder where the station would be for the Monsal Trail - would they
> > rebuild a spur from the Great Rocks line over the river for an end-on
> > link with the Monsal Trail footpath/cycle track? And likewise, is there
> > provision for a station near Hindlow for connection to the Tissington
> > Trail, without encroaching on quarrying activities?
>
> The obvious answer for Monsal is to extend the trail over the existing
> bridge over the Wye and build a platform at the junction site - it adds
> about 400m of footpath, and doesn't require any alteration to the track.
>
> The railway doesn't get anywhere near the Tissington Trail itself, but
> that merges into the High Peak Trail (and Pennine Bridleway). This gets
> you to within 50m of the track - the only catch being that the quarry has
> sidings on the "main line" trackbed. But assuming you can get their
> agreement to keep one track clear, there should be no issue putting up a
> platform at the end of the line - and again, no track changes needed.

You would presumably need to reverse in the sidings at Buxton, since there's
no longer tracks on the south side of the Buxton triangle to allow access to
the station? It looks like Monsal doesn't have a route to the main line,
only to the sidings, so you also couldn't run a train there from the north
unless you ran it around the loop from Chinley.

Theo

On 06 Apr 2024 13:36:29 +0100 (BST), Theo wrote:
> You would presumably need to reverse in the sidings at Buxton, since
> there's no longer tracks on the south side of the Buxton triangle to
> allow access to the station? It looks like Monsal doesn't have a route
> to the main line, only to the sidings, so you also couldn't run a train
> there from the north unless you ran it around the loop from Chinley.

I didn't look at the Buxton end. You're right, neither line connects
directly into the current Buxton station. The Monsal line went into the
now-demolished Midland station, while the line towards Hindlow doubled
back via a very sharp curve into the (current) LNWR station (though the
bay platform has been demolished). It would be possible to connect them
up, assuming the proposed vehicle could cope with a fairly tight curve,
but there's a new block of flats that gets in the way.

And you're right about the track layout as far as I can see - a train from
Monsal needs a double-reverse to get onto the line towards Manchester.
This seems rather odd as I thought the whole reason this line was there
was for freight trains to run onto the main line. I also can't see any way
for a train to enter platform 1, other than by shunting from platform 2,
which seems a bit limiting. Despite this there's loads of track which
seems to serve no purpose - overdue for an overhaul?

The best solution I can come up with is to move the station north,
building a new 4-platform station just south of the Lightwood Road
bridges. This would also have the advantage of allowing a proper run-round
facility using the current platform line. Not so convenient for people
going into town on foot though.

Mike

Mike Humphrey <mail@michaelhumphrey.me.uk> wrote:
> On 06 Apr 2024 13:36:29 +0100 (BST), Theo wrote:
> > You would presumably need to reverse in the sidings at Buxton, since
> > there's no longer tracks on the south side of the Buxton triangle to
> > allow access to the station? It looks like Monsal doesn't have a route
> > to the main line, only to the sidings, so you also couldn't run a train
> > there from the north unless you ran it around the loop from Chinley.
>
> I didn't look at the Buxton end. You're right, neither line connects
> directly into the current Buxton station. The Monsal line went into the
> now-demolished Midland station, while the line towards Hindlow doubled
> back via a very sharp curve into the (current) LNWR station (though the
> bay platform has been demolished). It would be possible to connect them
> up, assuming the proposed vehicle could cope with a fairly tight curve,
> but there's a new block of flats that gets in the way.
>
> And you're right about the track layout as far as I can see - a train from
> Monsal needs a double-reverse to get onto the line towards Manchester.
> This seems rather odd as I thought the whole reason this line was there
> was for freight trains to run onto the main line. I also can't see any way
> for a train to enter platform 1, other than by shunting from platform 2,
> which seems a bit limiting. Despite this there's loads of track which
> seems to serve no purpose - overdue for an overhaul?
>
> The best solution I can come up with is to move the station north,
> building a new 4-platform station just south of the Lightwood Road
> bridges. This would also have the advantage of allowing a proper run-round
> facility using the current platform line. Not so convenient for people
> going into town on foot though.

There's a suggestion elsewhere that they want to run into the remaining
former Midland platforms behind Aldi, using the bridge over Bridge St that
was put in by Peak Rail before it vacated the site. That would need a
junction to be put in with the Monsal line to access the platforms (I gather
this was an original objective of Peak Rail but BR wasn't helpful).

For the Hindlow line I suppose you'd still have to use the current station and
reverse (or run direct from the Chapel en le Frith direction).

Theo