paul1609
Established Member
Wasn't it reported that electrifying the Severn Tunnel wasn't a problem? But reality is now beginning to be revealed?
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates
- Thread starter GRALISTAIR
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Class 170101
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 7,932
Definitely an infill and worth having. I guess the question might also be an environmental one though. As I recall the government lost a case in court concerning emmissions (at source) in urban areas and were instructed that they had to publish a strategy that was either being kept under wraps or create one? Surely electrification will help this in respect of Greater Manchester?
furnessvale
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 4,574
AIUI the actual electrification wasn't too difficult. Problems are now occuring with SALT water ingress into a sub sea level tunnell affecting the equipment. Hopefully a problem not to be found at ca. 600ft ABOVE sea level!
If I'd have an educated guess I'd say they are going for a strategy by Christmas 2020
Suggested case study locations gratefully received by PM
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
Again, an environmental case for wiring Stalybridge to Guide Bridge can only be made from the point of view of shifting folk out of their cars and onto a new Electric service. An infill which only sees use for empty stock movements (and the occasional diverted bi-mode being able to stay on electric power) simply won't cut the mustard.
MetroCar4058
Member
- Joined
- 18 Jun 2014
- Messages
- 580
Clearly they need to do the whole thing from Guide bridge to Huddersfield.
Very very positive
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
Absolutely. Doing so would actually allow services to run on electric. Spending however many £m per mile wiring something that won't actually reduce DMU use will just make Central government less likely to fund electrification in the future.
Resilience and diversion can't be the main motivating factor behind wiring. If it was, BR would have wired Preston-Hellifield-Carlisle at the same time as the Northern WCML.
I'm not opposed to electrification at all, I'd rather see all cross-Pennine routes wired than none... but Stalybridge to Guide Bridge is turning into the "Bradford Crossrail" of electrification: people want it because it'll look neat on a map, not because it will actually improve anything.
Wire the whole route as far as at least York, then doing this short infill does make sense, but without it you'd just be giving more credence to those who think the railway can't be trusted with investment.
td97
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 1,298
Could shift inner city stops (Ashburys, Guide Bridge etc.) from the Rose Hill service (DMU) onto the proposed EMU Stalybridge stopper. Which would be a better use of capacity etc.
paul1609
Established Member
Are the Stalybridge tunnels dry? Most of the tunnels here in the South have water pouring in to them. Sevenoaks is so bad Im surprised Southeastern haven't installed brushes for a free wash as you pass through.
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
Though TfGM still want to look at tram-trains for Rose Hill don't they? A better choice than Glossop and Hadfield at least.
furnessvale
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 4,574
Precisely why I highlighted "SALT water" and the height above sea level.
Fresh water can be channelled away in good cess drainage and being on top of a hill gives the water somewhere to go without expensive pumping like the Severn tunnel.
gimmea50anyday
Established Member
So all that money and (wo)man hours it cost to lay that extension cable has effectively been wasted now the wires are going up. For the cost of that cable they might as well have done the job anyway...
Ploughman
Established Member
If I recall right from working in there.
Standedge tunnel was slightly damp at the ends and dry in the middle.
Which created the problem of ballast dust rising in the air when digging. Big fans usually sorted that though.
Standedge tunnel was slightly damp at the ends and dry in the middle.
Which created the problem of ballast dust rising in the air when digging. Big fans usually sorted that though.
NorthernSpirit
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 2,184
I'll stand corrected on the fact that Tampers can cross.
What's the chance that Huddersfield Viaduct is also a listed structure? The rate its looking for this Transpennine Route Upgrade there seems to be more work required than just rebuilding stations, sewing the knitting up and dealing with tunnels taking in consideration of what was mentioned earlier about the viaduct.
gimmea50anyday
Established Member
Standedge tunnel is certainly a bit wet at the Marsden end as you have the aqueduct feeding the canal ajacent to the tunnel portal, apart from that it has always seemed pretty dry whenever I have hammered through it at 85mph!
You are only likely to get wet if you miss your footing in the cross passages and fall in to the canal underneath!
You are only likely to get wet if you miss your footing in the cross passages and fall in to the canal underneath!
Elecman
Established Member
No it is now an Independent Feeder so it can remain energised when the rest of the OLE is isolated, just as the Western Region version will as well
plarailfan
Member
When I started working on Huddersfield station back in 1979, I remember around the time, that some work was done on the viaduct because an in depth inspection, revealed some of the stone uprights and arches consisted of hollow areas, that were found to have been filled with mud during the original construction !
I presume some of it must have been removed and replaced with concrete, but to what extent this was done, I have no idea !
I presume some of it must have been removed and replaced with concrete, but to what extent this was done, I have no idea !
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
The viaduct situation may not necessarily so severe as to require complete replacement. As I said my source for that is not linked to NR or any infrastructure contractors. It definitely needs some work to carry wires and four tracks again, the extent and cost of that work is yet to be determined.
My understanding of the tamper thing (which might not be correct) is that it applies to all on track plant. Basically said machine can cross the viaduct under its own power but not perform its actual function, be that tamping, rail-grinding, ballast cleaning or whatever else.
I can confirm it is listed and has been since 1978.
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
Some listings seem to be of dubious merit, this one included. Pretty much every town in the North has a stone railway viaduct somewhere, is there something particularly unique about the Huddersfield one other than it being the location of the first write-off of a Pacer*?
Corners being cut during construction (as alluded to a few posts back) certainly isn't unique, given the number of tales I'd suggest that Victorian building contractors were pretty much expected to commit these acts of fraud!
*=on second thoughts, for that it shouldn't just be listed, it should be canonized!
Some listings seem to be of dubious merit, this one included. Pretty much every town in the North has a stone railway viaduct somewhere, is there something particularly unique about the Huddersfield one other than it being the location of the first write-off of a Pacer*?
Corners being cut during construction (as alluded to a few posts back) certainly isn't unique, given the number of tales I'd suggest that Victorian building contractors were pretty much expected to commit these acts of fraud!
*=on second thoughts, for that it shouldn't just be listed, it should be canonized!
I mean yeah, there is nothing architecturally merit worthy and as you state every town in the north of England has one. Other than York, Bath and London Huddersfield has more listed buildings than any other place in Britain, ranging from beauties as the railway station itself to the red phone boxes on Northumberland Street and the rather ugly Queensgate Market hall so maybe the listing mania must have gripped the listers who listed everything in sight, including the rather none descript viaduct!!!!
Wasn't a pacer written off at Lime Street too? Which was first?
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
142059 written off at Lime Street in 1991.
141104 written off just outside Huddersfield in November 1989.
Greybeard33
Established Member
Which undermines the resilience argument for wiring Guide Bridge to Stalybridge. The Heyrod to Ordsall Independent Feeder (a.k.a. the Great Extension Lead) will enable the Heyrod grid feeder to continue to supply the wider Manchester network, via the Ordsall Lane ATF station, in spite of any problems with the OLE between Victoria and Stalybridge.
Bevan Price
Established Member
- Joined
- 22 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 7,337
The Royal Border Bridge at Berwick is listed -- and electrified..
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
The concern wasn't really over listed building consent to put the wires up, more about the condition of the viaduct and the possible costs of any repairs to the structure.
If (and I stress IF) the viaduct is in very poor condition, replacement could potentially be cheaper than repair (though disruption would be huge) but as a listed structure that would need to be justified.
Fitting OHLE equipment to listed structures is permitted, there are many examples besides Berwick... but it also pushes up costs as the design has to be signed off by Historic England (IIRC).
Last edited:
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
NOTE: the above post was originally in the thread discussing the consultation process for the Huddersfield to Ravensthorpe section of route.
Leeds City Council seem to want to have their cake and eat it too. Today they've been awarded (among many other towns/cities) funding intended to revive "historic high-streets", despite having had millions invested in the city centre over the last decade. Notably Sheffield, which suffers far more due to a nearby mega-mall, is absent from this list.
Which further calls into question the wisdom behind putting a station there: if it isn't going to be that convenient for the WRC, don't call the station White Rose Centre. If it's primarily for commuter use outside of the retail sector, the peak demand will be in the traditional rush-hours- right when overcrowding is already at its worst.
Leeds City Council seem to want to have their cake and eat it too. Today they've been awarded (among many other towns/cities) funding intended to revive "historic high-streets", despite having had millions invested in the city centre over the last decade. Notably Sheffield, which suffers far more due to a nearby mega-mall, is absent from this list.
Last edited:
Don't worry about it. The display boards at the public consultation showed the new station to be sited almost next to the A643. Possibly the worst location commercially. So not only wont it be attractive for shoppers it will be less appealing for office workers. I am guessing the proposed unsatisfactory location meets the ORR's fetish with not building platforms on curves (due to the hundreds of accidents every year at the likes of Newcastle, York and Shipley). I agree it shouldn't be called White Rose-White Elephant would be more appropriate