Manchester - Liverpool Electrification

[WatcherZero]

From what I understand the Lancashire electrification will be traditional BR type while the Great Western will be the newly developed standard NR1 (with high speed and European common standard compatibility).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

From what I understand the Lancashire electrification will be traditional BR type while the Great Western will be the newly developed standard NR1 (with high speed and European common standard compatibility).

What would be the main reason for not having a single "high-quality specification" uniform standard for the whole of the British network ?

 

[WatcherZero]

Mainly its not ready yet, secondly its geared more towards a mainline with the capability to support trains running up to 160mph with two pantographs up.

 

[boing_uk]

What would be the main reason for not having a single "high-quality specification" uniform standard for the whole of the British network ?

From a cost-benefit standpoint it is not really appropriate. You dont need main line specification equipment on a secondary line where speeds are never going to get above 70/80/90mph.

Over-engineering for over-engineering's sake is a waste of money. Fine, add in for likely and some less-likely future upgrade work - as one of my old bosses used to say "It will never be as cheap to do as it is right now" - but to simply engineer EVERY structure for every possible and unlikely scenario isn't getting best value for money from a project.

If you look at some of the gantries on the WCML, alot of them are simply made out of rebar and angle iron, spanning four tracks - a strong structure doesn't necessarily have to be a heavyweight structure. Aesthetics aside, those gantries in Manchester look disproportionate to the loads (static and live) I imagine they will need to take, even in extraordinary circumstances for a line with such a relatively low traffic speed.

 

[Nym]

Remember though that these posts will start and stop a lot of overhead lines, so a lot of these will be housing feeders and tensioners...

 

[Schnellzug]

What would be the main reason for not having a single "high-quality specification" uniform standard for the whole of the British network ?

Hopefully NR are taking a "Horses for courses" approach and choosing what's most appropriate for the location, rather than using either something robust, but a bit of, to be tactful, a blot on the landscape, or something less intrusive but liable to come down whenever a bird perches on it?

 

[WatcherZero]

I was speculating to myself that perhaps the torsional twisting forces might be higher as their attached horizontally to the viaduct rather than vertically into the ground.

 

[Nym]

The torsional forces will act upon the securing bolts as a sheer force, but that in a way is a good thing since the sheer strain that can be taken on a bolt in a lateral direction, is usually much higher than the restraining force excerted by the thread and carrier in stopping the bolt 'fall out'. (Ie. it's harder to snap a bolt than pull it out a loose hole).

And I beleive a lot of the ground around that area is either unstable or a national trust site for the Castlefeild thingey whatever it is...

And if NR can do it without needing to attach anything to something they don't own, it's good as it means buying less land / stuff...

 

[ole man]

You will not have new wire runs starting over a viaduct, the majority of new wire runs will start from single masts with a BWA arrangement, maintenance also plays a part in where switches, feeds and boosters etc go

 

[Nym]

I know you usually wouldn't, but there may be no choice thanks to there being even less space at Deansgate where two conductor lines will need to start, unless you feed them all the way back to Ordstall Lane junction and tension them there, but then where do you start / end the lines for the Ordsall Cord?

Run Ordsall - Deal St as a short spur and the cord as the long section that is tensioned at Deal St? (Actually that could work, runs going...
Deansgate / Castleford Junction - Ordstall Lane (Tensioning end)
Ordsall Cord (Castleford End) - Deal St Junction (Tensioning end)
Half way to Deal St Jcn - Ordstall Lane (Tensioning end)

But then if you throw in grade speration at Ordsall Lane it all goes haywire

 

[ole man]

I will have the draft Electrical Diagrams showing switches, feeds and feeder stations on here soon

 

[WatcherZero]

It is interesting some viaducts they bury the supports vertically whereas others they attach to the brickwork on the sides and it isnt always a question of surface space. Some of the supports on the viaduct through Wigan have been beefed up recently similar to the design used here though their vertically attached.

 

[HSTEd]

This looks like pointless Gold plating that risks damaging the prospects of future electrification work by providing the anti electrification accountants with "evidence" that the cost of electrification has shot up. Thus damaging future more marginal projects.

As for viaduct gantries, I much prefer (visually anyway) the type that is on the Royal Border bridge and appears to be a pair of single track cantilevers with a bar connecting the ends together.

 

[1978NWUK]

They look like standard portals used nowadays, as for the OLE to be fixed on them, I'm led too believe its to be the F&F/OLEMI (NR Series) for line speeds upto 100mph.
As for the feeder, it's going to be fed from N-L-W's TSC via new feeds from parkside.
Up to press there are going to be a few switches etc etc around castlefields jnc to separate the existing OLE from the new.

 

[Eagle]

As for viaduct gantries, I much prefer (visually anyway) the type that is on the Royal Border bridge and appears to be a pair of single track cantilevers with a bar connecting the ends together.

Yeah, but the electrification on that bit of line (in fact the ECML as a whole, I'm tempted to say) is flimsy as hell, as evidenced by the number of times the wires come down!

I don't give a damn about aesthetics as long as it's going to work for a long time.

 

[HSTEd]

Yeah, but the electrification on that bit of line (in fact the ECML as a whole, I'm tempted to say) is flimsy as hell, as evidenced by the number of times the wires come down!

I don't give a damn about aesthetics as long as it's going to work for a long time.

I have never been delayed by wires coming down on the ECML in the fifteen years I can remember travelling on it

Ironically I have been seriously delayed by overhead wiring failure on the WCML before now though.....

Either way, having "gold plated" equipment such as this damages the BCRs for more marginal projects and hands more ammunition to the people who would claim that the projects would all be too expensive.

 

[tbtc]

I have never been delayed by wires coming down on the ECML in the fifteen years I can remember travelling on it

Ironically I have been seriously delayed by overhead wiring failure on the WCML before now though.....

Either way, having "gold plated" equipment such as this damages the BCRs for more marginal projects and hands more ammunition to the people who would claim that the projects would all be too expensive.

I've had plenty of ECML delays - I'd rather that the new Lancashire lines were electrified properly - doing it on the cheap is a false economy as passengers on the ECML must now realise.

Do it properly or don't bother - saving a few quid in the short term by using tinfoil and sellotape is only going to cost more in the long run

 

[HSTEd]

I've had plenty of ECML delays - I'd rather that the new Lancashire lines were electrified properly - doing it on the cheap is a false economy as passengers on the ECML must now realise.

Do it properly or don't bother - saving a few quid in the short term by using tinfoil and sellotape is only going to cost more in the long run

I don't realise it.
Electrification in the 80s has allowed the ECML to acquire rather nicer trains than would have been possible if it was still diesel today. (Increasingly decrepit HSTs and almost certainly too small Cl222s being the alternative in all likelyhood).

Despite certain senior figures at XC complaining, a study showed that the railway was considerably better off with the ECML electrified in its current form than not, even above Newcastle.

The relability issues are rather overblown.

 

[tbtc]

The relability issues are rather overblown

You mean "the infrastructure is rather easily blown"

 

[DJH1971]

With regard to the electricification of the line between Manchester Victoria (and Piccadilly) to Liverpool Lime Street.

As I regularly use this line, I've noticed for many years that the line is already part-electrified between Earlestown (East junction) to Parkside Junction, and the line branching east from Warrington (via Winwick Junction) is also the case.

I know the line will also be electrified at Parkside Junction going towards Golborne Junction (for services between Manchester and Scotland).

However, there is also a single line at Earlestown (West junction) branching west from Warrington (via Winwick Junction) going towards Liverpool which is not electrified.

Is this section of track also going to be electrified?

This would also make logical sense and also create a diversion route for Liverpool-bound WCML services.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

However, there is also a single line at Earlestown (West junction) branching west from Warrington (via Winwick Junction) going towards Liverpool which is not electrified.

Is this section of track also going to be electrified?

Yes, for Dec 2014

 

[DJH1971]

Yes, for Dec 2014

Thanks.

I heard conflicting reports of where this was or was not the case.

 

[Waverley125]

opening up the possibility of Euston-Warrington BQ-St Helens Junc.-Liverpool LS workings up the WCML.

 

[DJH1971]

opening up the possibility of Euston-Warrington BQ-St Helens Junc.-Liverpool LS workings up the WCML.

Sounds good to me, but they would really need to make the Earlestown West chord heading to and from Liverpool to Warrington Bank Quay a double track route.

And build another platform too.

 

[Eagle]

I heard conflicting reports of where this was or was not the case.

It would be a bit ridiculous if it wasn't, meaning that Liverpool to Warrington BQ services would need to stay diesel-run for the want of 200 metres of catenary.

Also there's an unwritten rule that when there will be a junction between electrified routes, you electrify all of its chords (hence why the Foxhall curve at Didcot is getting the wires despite there being no use for an electric service over it).

 

[tbtc]

It would be a bit ridiculous if it wasn't, meaning that Liverpool to Warrington BQ services would need to stay diesel-run for the want of 200 metres of catenary

IIRC these services are being withdrawn at electrification (replaced by additional Liverpool - Manchester services via Chat Moss)

 

[Eagle]

IIRC these services are being withdrawn at electrification (replaced by additional Liverpool - Manchester services via Chat Moss)

Fair enough. That just makes my second point more pertinent.

 

[cal12]

do you think they will still have northern run the route or give it to merseyrail?

 

[Eagle]

do you think they will still have northern run the route or give it to merseyrail?

It'll certainly stay with Northern (with Merseytravel subsidising the bits on their patch), just as today.

 

[DJH1971]

it will be good when its done that line has needed electrifying for years, the wigan branch is getting done aswell i believe but is the southern route to manchester not getting done aswell?

It isn't, and that just doesn't make any sense at all. ad: