Part of Post 60
I'm a Teessider and that's why this thread feels like a "Greater West Riding" to me - regardless of whether it was or wasn't in practice.
I've been thinking about this a lot since last time you mentioned it. I think Yorkshire will end up similar to other devolved areas; Aberdeen complains about Central Belt domination of London, the outer suburbs get annoyed at the London Assembly (see: ULEZ), North Wales gets frustrated by South Wales domination of Welsh Assembly. And here, inevitably, the West Riding (in OTL, what is West & South Yorkshire) will dominate provincial politics.
However, they will have to take heed of politics in other areas; because of the proportional voting to avoid single-party domination (same as Wales and Scotland), non-Labour parties will pick up seats even in the West Riding, so they'll have to at least pay lip service to North Yorkshire and Teeside.
That said, Teeside is also going to have some frustrations given that the former Cleveland county has been sliced down the middle - the Teeside urban area has been sliced down the middle with the provincial Yorkshire on one side, and County Durham with no province on the other side.
To my knowledge, there were several proposals to electrify both routes from Middlesbrough to Saltburn (i.e. via Guisborough as well as Redcar) between the 1910s and the 1950s. The first serious one was what became the OTL Shildon-Newport electrification, that was originally part of a larger scheme that included Bishop Auckland-Darlington-Middlesbrough-Redcar-Saltburn & Middlesbrough-Guisborough-Saltburn. The last one that I know about was Darlington to Saltburn via Redcar which was part of the 33-Year Plan of 1957.
And if Middlesbrough-Redcar-Saltburn was electrified it would be logical to do Bishop Auckland-Darlington-Middlesbrough at the same time as most of the passenger trains that run from Middlesbrough to Saltburn actually run from Bishop Auckland to Saltburn. Perhaps it could be done as a joint scheme between the Province of Yorkshire and the North Eastern Province. This scheme would hopefully include the electrification of Middlesbrough to Nunthorpe and the reopening of Nunthorpe to Guisborough.
Just FYI; there is no North Eastern Province (at least by 2020), due to the failed referendum in mid 2000s. As Middlesbrough is in Yorkshire, I envisaged the referendum getting bogged down in "centralisation of power in Tyneside" (whereever the seat of the province is, it'll be dominated by Tyneside). So rail politics ends up largely governed by Westminster; I think the Tyne & Wear Metro will still comfortably happen here, but the schemes you mentioned along the banks of the Tees will probably be overlooked.
I'm 100% in favour of this. Unfortunately, the Ripon bypass (which was built in the late 1980s) used part of the railway's route, so it may not be feasible.
Agreed, that why it's not happened so far; the issue of how to route it through Ripon will be local politics+++. I think a scheme passing to the east of Ripon with a station on Boroughbridge Road is the most likely, but it'll be argued over. For bonus points, I often used to walk on this route in the 1980s-2000s from Bilton to the River Nidd, pleased to see it's now a cycleway at that end in OTL
Please will you clarify.
When you wrote ...
... Does "and via Cross Gates" mean Leeds to York via Cross Gates, Micklefield Junction, Church Fenton (for Yorkshire International Airport) and Colton Junction
If it does, it would have allowed all-electric working from Leeds to Newcastle and (when Northallerton to Middeslbrough is electrified) Leeds to Middlesbrough. That would strengthen the argument for the early electrification of Leeds-Manchester-Liverpool because more than half of the route from Newcastle to Liverpool would have been electrified. Which in turn strengthen the argument for electrifying Micklefield Junction to Hull because more than half of the Liverpool to Hull route would have been electrified and electrifying Micklefield Junciton to Hull would have allowed the Newcastle to Hull trains to be electrically hauled too.
My thoughts were that it would have been literally from Hambleton Junction (where the ECML crosses the Leeds-Selby line) through Garforth and Cross Gates to Leeds. This allows electric expresses to run straight in to Leeds, as well as connecting line Garforth-Church Fenton-Colton Junction. This is because of what you say below; it's a small amount of electrification which allows significant electric traction between Leeds and Newcastle.
Is one of the reasons why you chose Church Fenton as the site for Yorkshire International airport that it's on the line from York to Sheffield? If so, would Church Fenton to Sheffield be one of the piecemeal electrification schemes of the 1990s? If it was, it would have been possible for electric trains to run from Sheffield to Leeds via Moorthorpe and Swinton to Doncaster might have been done at the same time.
To be honest, I chose Church Fenton on largely non-rail set of metrics, although it was a nice bonus. It's still very close to Leeds to be considered the primary airport for Leeds (whilst justifying the closure of the OTL Leeds-Bradford Airport). It's very close to the A1 motorway, close to M62 and ATL M18 motorway, so it's easy to access from Hull, M'boro, and even what is OTL South Yorkshire. It's a working airport with 2 x 1.8km runways, which seem to have space for lengthening, and open space around so few people to complain about airport/aircraft noise. One of the runways is on the SW/NE alignment to fit in with general wind patterns for the UK. Then, as you say, it's almost adjacent to Church Fenton station, which sits on the main Leeds-York route, and is also accessible by new train services from Sheffield and Hull if was so desired later (so far in this ATL, not!).
And when you wrote ...
Does Harrogate/York, include Harrogate-Knaresborough-Poppleton-York?
Yes. The awkward parts of the termini electrification are already taken care of at Leeds and York, the Leeds-Harrogate is solid double track, with one long tunnel and two viaducts - not
too difficult, especially if they can manage the viaduct in Berwick-on-Tweed. Harrogate-York is largely single track, which reduces price a little.
If Manchester-Sheffield-Wath isn't closed in the 1980s and instead is converted from 1,500v DC to 25kv AC there will be an excellent argument for electrifying Sheffield to Retford when the ECML is electrified later in the 1980s and there will be a good argument for electiffing the line from Wath to Mexborough when the Sheffield to Church Fenton & Swinton to Doncaster lines are electrified.
Although it was outside the Province of Yorkshire's purview it would be possible to run electric trains all the way to Liverpool when Manchester to Liverpool Central or Liverpool Lime Street (and preferably both) are electrified.
Sheffield-Retford is one of those common sense casualties, and is part of the reason Sheffield-Doncaster was done later; this allows freight to trundle from the ECML across the Pennines via Doncaster, Wath, Peniston and over to Manchester. The connecting line isn't grade separated in Retford, so would play havoc on expresses having freight try to switch across on the flat crossing.
IOTL the rump of the Manchester-Sheffield-Wath line (i.e. the section from Manchester to Hadfield & Glossop) was converted from DC to AC in the early 1980s and when I first read the above I thought you meant the whole MSW line was converted in the early 1980s. However, now it looks like it was done in the middle 1970s.
My feeling here is that BR is trying to close
a cross-Pennine route in the 1970-1980s given there are two between Sheffield and Manchester. One is a bit winding, and the other is faster and electrified. The electric systems are shot, but if Yorkshire offers some funding to help update to 25kV, it's a no-brainer for BR, and it retains rail travel along the Don Valley for Yorkshire. There will be losers in the OTL rail route area, but they are in Derbyshire, so what does Yorkshire care? It keeps express Sheffield (and beyond) -Manchester services, all on cheaper electric traction. The only negative point for Sheffield is the continued existence of two stations on separate routes with little mix, but there are a ton of other towns and cities in the UK in the same positions.
Unfortunately, one of its second acts can't be the to stop the closure of the Harrogate to Northallerton line because it was closed to passengers in 1967 (but the track wasn't lifted until 1970) and the first elections for the County of Yorkshire weren't until 1973. However, if it was more "rail minded" than the OTL local government bodies & the Department of Transport it may have done more to preserve the routes of closed lines to make reopening easier and one of it's last acts might have been to approve the reopening of the line instead of the OTL Ripon bypass which as I wrote before used part of the Harrogate to Northallerton line's route.
Agree; most of the OTL rail closures are already closed. Woodhead hung on due to one-off funding (instead of annual subsidies) for electrification, and it only finally closed in the 1980s anyway. Others are long gone.
I thought the province would be a little rail-minded, as like London/TfL it's one of the major public policy areas it can actually control to justify it's existence, but also West Yorkshire was rail-focussed and as we mentioned earlier, that area will be a bastion of power in provincial Yorkshire - but will likewise have to justify it's existence across all of Yorkshire.
The County of Yorkshire was also created too late to save the Guisborough branch. However, as the town's population grew considerably between its closure in 1964 & the middle 1970s and the County of Yorkshire seems to be more "rail minded" than the Ministry of Transport, Teesside County Borough Council & Cleveland County Council were IOTL it would have reopened the 4 miles 18 chains from Nunthorpe Junction to Guisborough Station before the health centre was built on the site of the latter. The intermediate stations at Pitchinthorpe and Hutton Gate were probably reopened too.
I've toyed with thoughts over Guisborough and the Whitby line more generally. I've tried to stay away from reopening rail until the province starts up (and likewise, I didn't want to to be all trains trains trains!
), just because history tends to suggest, once the track is closed, it's not reopening very easily.