Like many other CP5 schemes it was deferred and faces an uncertain future - what gets the go-ahead in CP6 remains to be seen.
Might depend on business case...which 769s might have diminished (until they need to be replaced).
Like many other CP5 schemes it was deferred and faces an uncertain future - what gets the go-ahead in CP6 remains to be seen.
But they could be used elsewhere (Piccadilly to Rose Hill for example)Might depend on business case...which 769s might have diminished (until they need to be replaced).
But they could be used elsewhere (Piccadilly to Rose Hill for example)
Yes but bi-modes can be used to justify no further electrification. We have to continue to make the case for it (and get the costs down).You miss my point. Electrification business cases are often based on journey time, emissions and operating cost savings of using EMUs over DMUs. But if using 769s leads to these savings being made on the 90% of the route that is electrified, then the further 'benefits' of the remaining bit of wiring is much diminished.
Exactly however they are saying they are doing drainage works so again - why wasn't that work done when the whole route was shut?
All the evidence so far is that Wales will not be a “region”. Wales is only a “route” like it already is.
Images from today
319368 at Bolton bound for Blackpool North
First day of Bolton Electrics by Mike McNiven, on Flickr
319365 coming into Bolton bound for the Airport
First day of Bolton Electrics by Mike McNiven, on Flickr
319361 at Salford Cresent bound for Buckshaw Parkway
First day of Bolton Electrics by Mike McNiven, on Flickr
Dea
First day of Bolton Electrics by Mike McNiven, on Flickr
Probably, but NR are not the most public-facing nor transparent body. Expect any report visible to the public to be published like this.will there be an inquiry as to the challenges Network Rail faced with the project
The foundation issues absolutely hindered the job. The fact that so many bespoke designs had to be created mid-way through the project would have added a lot of expense and time.What are people's thoughts on Network Rail's claims of difficulty creating foundations
Carillion absolutely was one of the biggest set backs.issues with collapse of one of their contractors
Would expect similar conditions for all areas with coal mining history - basically all the northern, western and eastern routes out of Manchester, and further afield places like Durham Coast, Bishop Auckland, Hexham lines (as baseless examples). The geology definitely is not unique - being above Pennine Coal Measures (disused coal mines = subsidence-prone ground = geotechnically unstable) and a topping of glacial till (can be a variable rock type meaning you can experience pockets of running sands, unconsolidated material and other instabilities = bad for embedded foundations).Are these issues which may be more isolated to this project, due to its timing and perhaps unique geological circumstances, or could they be encountered in future projects?
It really is a comprehensive route upgrade. Not just an electrification project. I doubt a single sleeper, ballast stone or signalling cable has been left untouched. People are quick to point out how Scotland's so-called 'rolling electrification programme' is the perfect electrification solution, but last time I checked these schemes didn't come with a 33% speed improvement, additional and re-modelled platforms, or super-modern signalling controlled from a state-of-the-art ROC (Rail Operating Centre). The line has done so well to be worthy of these expensive upgrades, and it'll only improve in time when the new trains arrive on the route.more of the rail network is modern and less polluting.
The foundation issues absolutely hindered the job. The fact that so many bespoke designs had to be created mid-way through the project would have added a lot of expense and time.
Would expect similar conditions for all areas with coal mining history - basically all the northern, western and eastern routes out of Manchester, and further afield places like Durham Coast, Bishop Auckland, Hexham lines (as baseless examples). The geology definitely is not unique - being above Pennine Coal Measures (disused coal mines = subsidence-prone ground = geotechnically unstable) and a topping of glacial till (can be a variable rock type meaning you can experience pockets of running sands, unconsolidated material and other instabilities = bad for embedded foundations).
No, because the issue is with installing OLE masts and gantries at an embedded depth, to transfer the forces from the OLE installation to the soil/rock. The mast and its attachments cause an overturning force which must be supported and counteracted by the soil.would this not be a concern for trains already on the route?
On the first week of 319's!Slightly off topic, but has anyone noticed this is page 319 ??!!
What a time to be alive.On the first week of 319's!
Bringing the conversation back to the Manchester-Blackpool, will there be an inquiry as to the challenges Network Rail faced with the project and how lessons can be learnt from this electrification project to hopefully bring more electrification to other lines at lower cost and in a shorter space of time?
What are people's thoughts on Network Rail's claims of difficulty creating foundations and issues with collapse of one of their contractors? Are these issues which may be more isolated to this project, due to its timing and perhaps unique geological circumstances, or could they be encountered in future projects?
Looking forward to hearing back from someone more knowledgeable of the subject than me! Personally I'm glad it's complete, and more of the rail network is modern and less polluting.
No, because the issue is with installing OLE masts and gantries at an embedded depth, to transfer the forces from the OLE installation to the soil/rock. The mast and its attachments cause an overturning force which must be supported and counteracted by the soil.
maybe the lesson to learn is to do proper site surveys before starting work. These projects went wrong because too many surprises, I thinkAnd yet we didn't hear of ground conditions affecting the earlier electrification projects in, say, Lanarkshire, or through Durham/Northumberland, or Warwickshire, all problematic mining areas.
The recent Chase line electrification was also delayed by ground conditions linked to mining.
I remember the new Harecastle Tunnel at Kidsgrove (1966) being an unexpectedly difficult job, but that was about all on the WCML.
There was the salt subsidence issue at Sandbach for decades, of course, with the OHLE needing jacking up periodically and low TSRs imposed.
On the east side the marshy fens seem to have been the most troublesome areas, in the long term.
It will be interesting following the Valleys electrification in South Wales, with its similarly complex geology.
The irritating thing about this is that the geology of the area is, in principle, well known. Coal fields need to be understood so you can mine and we have a good deal of experience of digging in them too, 200 years of mining with a lot of geological mapping published. Even my rudimentary knowledge says expect layer upon layer of different rocks, that is how the coal seams formed as cycles of deposition went on. I doubt knowing more would have speeded the project, difficult is always difficult, but it might have got a better estimation of completion dates and more resource.maybe the lesson to learn is to do proper site surveys before starting work. These projects went wrong because too many surprises, I think
Part of the problems has apparently been that more historic mining (200+ years) often nearer the surface that wasn't properly recorded.The irritating thing about this is that the geology of the area is, in principle, well known. Coal fields need to be understood so you can mine and we have a good deal of experience of digging in them too, 200 years of mining with a lot of geological mapping published. Even my rudimentary knowledge says expect layer upon layer of different rocks, that is how the coal seams formed as cycles of deposition went on. I doubt knowing more would have speeded the project, difficult is always difficult, but it might have got a better estimation of completion dates and more resource.
Is it true that lots of mining records have become lost with the demise of the coal board?Part of the problems has apparently been that more historic mining (200+ years) often nearer the surface that wasn't properly recorded.
Is it true that lots of mining records have become lost with the demise of the coal board?
I think the BGS as pretty good records of the more recent activity (last 150 years) but as Joseph Locke says any older is dubious.Is it true that lots of mining records have become lost with the demise of the coal board?
Any noticeable knock on impact yet on other Northern services of the use of 319s via Bolton? Eg less shortforming of diesel unit services?
Slight overreaction. The Atherton line was closed on some of the weekends when the Bolton line was closed, but far from, "almost the whole duration of the works". I've been commuting from Wigan to Manchester via a combination of the Bolton, Atherton, and Chat Moss routes for the last 3.5 years, and had hardly any issues at all.There needs to be some investigation as to whether there was some way of not having the Atherton line closed for almost the whole duration of the works.
Does the track layout need altering ? Is there an issue with the signalling system that needs to be resolved, could some element of single line working have been introduced at some stage ?
To have a whole route closed for so long without works taking place on it was nothing short of a disgrace.
Slight overreaction. The Atherton line was closed on some of the weekends when the Bolton line was closed, but far from, "almost the whole duration of the works". I've been commuting from Wigan to Manchester via a combination of the Bolton, Atherton, and Chat Moss routes for the last 3.5 years, and had hardly any issues at all.
The Farnsworth Tunnel blockade, and a few weekends (far, far from every weekend), are the only times I've noticed a significant alteration of service via Atherton.
Apparently I have been. Genuinely haven't experienced any major issues since other than when Salford Crescent has been closed for works down there. That said, for four months of last year there was a strike every Saturday anyway so the less said about those days the better.I can assure you that out of the whole rugby season, I had a train service once on a Saturday.
You must have been commuting in a parallel universe if you've been using the Atherton line on weekends last year hand haven't experienced significant disruption.
Any noticeable knock on impact yet on other Northern services of the use of 319s via Bolton? Eg less shortforming of diesel unit services?