Hope Valley Capacity Scheme updates

Ianno87 said:

Depends how easy coming back an adding a second platform later is. Might not be straightforward.

Click to expand...

It won't be easy in the long run but if funding is the issue and it can save a considerable amount by not having the second platform (given the station would then likely need a bridge and because of DDA, lifts), surely it's a potential option?

markymark2000 said:

Given how little needs to be done for this project, it has a stupidly long deadline and costs are just out of this world. No wonder small but effective improvements aren't done but the huge, overpriced schemes are planned and approved so quickly.

Click to expand...

Agreed ^

This is a world away from the likes of even electrification. It's a couple bits of track and a platform... I do have to wonder though whether another aspect is the lack of motivation to do it. These east-west connections always seem to be forgotten about, apart from the south where they serve London. It's kind of ridiculous that getting to the midlands from Manchester takes longer than London...

edwin_m said:

Wouldn't the crossovers be permitted development? If so I think they could be added to the scheme without affecting the TWAO.

Click to expand...

I'd have thought so, but the issue now is cost/benefit.And changing anything is likely to add more delays!

markymark2000 said:

In the short term to keep costs low, couldn't you just keep Dore and Totley as 1 platform with the stopping trains crossing over to stop? It will mean that the full potential of the dual tracking won't be felt but for the short term, surely it has to be better than the current bottleneck.

Given how little needs to be done for this project, it has a stupidly long deadline and costs are just out of this world. No wonder small but effective improvements aren't done but the huge, overpriced schemes are planned and approved so quickly.

It's no wonder the railways can be in such a mess with the TWAO!

Click to expand...

The double track and new platform will be done together or not at all, of that I'm certain. That was the original part of the scheme going back to before 2005.

Originally the full scheme put to consultation in 2014 envisaged 4 fast trains an hour, a slow, and freight paths. That got reduced to 3 fast paths, not least because there isn't capacity from Hazel Grove and Stockport (or Marple) into Piccadilly and it's getting tight from Dore into Sheffield. However threading them reliably through the Hope Valley was also hard to do.

Some think even 3 fast trains an hour will be hard to achieve. Certainly getting them to run reliably at 20 minute intervals seems impossible with freight and stopping service to squeeze in.

Which brings us to details, and it's the details which make schemes work, or not.

At present the Hope Valley stations, Edale, Hope, Bamford, Hathersage and Grindleford are all in the bottom 50 in the table of British stations - judged on worst punctuality of trains! (4 Northern hourly return services have been cancelled today, which is another story.)

Users of the line hear fast train operators blaming stopping trains, stopping services blaming the fasts and both blaming freight services. The last few days illustrate one part of the problem, and one that won't be fixed by redoubling at Dore.

TPE are running a shuttle service between Manchester and Sheffield because lines are flooded between Doncaster and Scunthorpe. That's tight because the fast follows the slow into Sheffield and needs to go out again before the stopper. Inevitability the stopper must be late.

It's not unusual for the TPE service to be late into Sheffield from Doncaster, thus ensuring its path at xx11 is missed quite often. The xx14 stopper may be held in the platform or released to the Heeley loop. Either way it has missed its path to cross the northbound mainline tracks at Dore Station Junction. 6 hourly mainline services by XC, East Midlands and Northern pass that way and it should be able to cross fairly easily, if they are on time, but many are not. That may delay at least one of them further, or the stopper. It's not uncommon for the stopper to be ready to depart on time but be held for the TPE and to cross the mainline, arriving at Dore 10-20 minutes late.

The optional crossovers would permit bi-directional tracks between remodelled Dore Station Junction and remodelled Dore West Junction. That would allow the stopping service to clear the Sheffield platforms on time and pass Dore Station Junction as pathed to reach Dore Station on time and be ready to leave. The TPE service could then overtake and the stopper follow roughly 3 minutes behind out of Dore. At present it will follow across the station junction at best 3 minutes behind before slowing down to stop at Dore and accelerate away again now at least 5 minutes late.

Does that matter? A little because it will be late all the way down the valley and probably into Piccadilly where it may obstruct other services. If further delayed in the Hope Valley it can delay the following East Midlands fast service.

Add an extra fast service and the impact of any delays would multiply.

At present the loop at Earles Sidings is not used for passenger services and there seems no intention for that to change. Steam specials often pull in there so it can be done. Maybe it will need to be considered in the future.

Returning to the potential benefits from the optional crossovers it should be noted that the original scheme called for the Bamford loop to be at Grindleford to allow freight services to pull in as near as possible to the mainline. Going South after Bamford they can do that again, on a tight rising curve, in the new loop at Dore. Going north it's pull in at Bamford or obstruct traffic almost into Sheffield. With bi-directional at Dore a freight could be overtaken.

In the eastbound direction the Bamford loop will be engineered and signalled for passenger use so the stopping service may be less of an issue with overtaking possible there.

At present the eastbound stopping services are unreliable for several reasons that the capacity scheme can't prevent, but it may help reduce further delays. Westbound trains can be late arriving from Sheffield. Delayed other trains can mean wrong platforms need to be used with wrong platform order resulting in another train coming in behind like the TPE for Middlesbrough preventing timely departure. Stoppers can be delayed 15 minutes or more at Chinley to let an East Midlands fast through, itself delayed at Castlefield.

Freight for Earles coming in from the west has to cross onto the opposite track and reverse in. That can take 15-20 minutes blocking both tracks. Trying to cram too many people into Pacers adds to extended dwell times. Longer trains could solve that one.

The scheme will be done. It should be available by the May 2024 timetable (my forecast), although December 2023 is still the aim of Network rail. Our political masters want it sooner. The detailed planning isn't sufficiently advanced to achieve that.

But we need to see it completed in such a way as to give the maximum benefit not only for current services, but that extra fast train, a full hourly stopping all station service and extra stops at Hope and Dore. Dore used to have a much better service in and out of Sheffield in 1938, today it only has one train an hour for most of the day, with gaps up to 2 hours 33 minutes in the evenings out of Sheffield!

How it was. Current Dore users would love to get this back. I's currently much easier to get to and from Manchester!

A scheme such as this would have been well within the capability of BR, planning, works, P/Way etc. after all it was they who singled it in the first place.

Now, Network Rail doesn't have that capability, the whole lot has to be put out to contract and the total bill will include hefty profits for all those concerned, it won't be just one company either!

Mugby said:

A scheme such as this would have been well within the capability of BR, planning, works, P/Way etc. after all it was they who singled it in the first place.

Now, Network Rail doesn't have that capability, the whole lot has to be put out to contract and the total bill will include hefty profits for all those concerned, it won't be just one company either!

Click to expand...

As I understand it it will be put out for a design and build type of contract. Hence indeed the further delay. And sub contractors with their own sub contractors. But isn't that rather like the contracts to build the Dore and Chinley Railway in the first place?

Incidentally we sometimes curse those who singled the line in 1985. It wasn't so daft back then with only 3 passenger trains an hour and occasional freight over 2 tracks through the station. Today there are 6 trains an hour and more freights over a single track through station.

It's been a bit quiet on this of late but things are happening.

Network Rail issued an invitation to tender in October for a Design and Build contract over 30 months up to £65m and responses were in for 18th November.

Here on the ground we're seeing increased activity as the contractors who are expected to bid carry out more detailed on site surveys of what is involved. Network Rail are engaged on advanced signalling design works. That includes the Heeley loop where the track itself will not be lengthened but will be made capable of holding longer freight trains thanks to the signalling changes.

Current reasoning suggests a start date of spring/summer 2022 and completion autumn 2023. Many ask why not spring 2021 and autumn 2022? Planning blockades to allow maximum availability for the freight traffic and ensuring as much as possible of the heavy earth moving is done in the drier summer months. Christmas 2022 and Easter 2023 look likely to be blocked plus quite a few weekends and nights - fingers crossed for fine weather. (Don't mention how quickly the Chinese would have done this project - up and running by 2007 most like.)

My own assessment is that we should have track available to relieve existing services in late 2023 but will be lucky if any new services can safely be timetabled before May 2024. I hope I'm proved to have been unduly pessimistic, but locally we've heard so many over optimistic statements in the past that it's hard not to be cautious.

A few years back, they doubled the single track turn out at Methley junction, easing flow and increasing capacity. I'm not sure how long that was in the planning, and obviously Dore involves a new platform, however this does seem to be taking a very long time, for something probably more essential.

All gone very quiet on this scheme. Network Rail have put the design and build contract out to tender. Due to the current crisis it's likely extra time may have to be granted for submission and consideration. It all seems to remain on track otherwise. It seems very unlikely work could now be started before 2022, so autumn 2023 completion is the earliest date for completion, any new timetabled trains possibly not before May 2024?!

By which time passenger numbers may be getting back towards what they were in early March 2020.

Killingworth said:

All gone very quiet on this scheme. Network Rail have put the design and build contract out to tender. Due to the current crisis it's likely extra time may have to be granted for submission and consideration. It all seems to remain on track otherwise. It seems very unlikely work could now be started before 2022, so autumn 2023 completion is the earliest date for completion, any new timetabled trains possibly not before May 2024?!

By which time passenger numbers may be getting back towards what they were in early March 2020.

Click to expand...

If the tender is out now, why can't work start in mid 2021 or earlier? It's no wonder projects take so long, too much sitting around and not enough trackside work.

markymark2000 said:

If the tender is out now, why can't work start in mid 2021 or earlier? It's no wonder projects take so long, too much sitting around and not enough trackside work.

Click to expand...

Time to develop and submit bids, Fairly evaluating the tenders, selecting a preferred bidder, final negotiations on the detail, Agreeing and signing Contracts, Due Diligence, Authorising use of funds....

None of which happens overnight and is certainly not "sitting around" (a very insulting term to the office folk who make this all happen)

Ianno87 said:

Time to develop and submit bids, Fairly evaluating the tenders, selecting a preferred bidder, final negotiations on the detail, Agreeing and signing Contracts, Due Diligence, Authorising use of funds....

None of which happens overnight and is certainly not "sitting around" (a very insulting term to the office folk who make this all happen)

Click to expand...

Tenders normally go out for a month then 3 months to evaluate and award the tender. Tenders are put out regularly around the UK and none take 3 years from tender to starting work.

For something like HS2, I would understand but this isnt a huge project. Probably is locally but in the grand scheme of things, it's not.

I know it doesn't happen over night but 3 years is a joke. No wonder so much of our railways are stuck in the olden days.

It's possible the tender prices that have come back are more than was in the budget, so they are looking to de-scope or find some more money.

It's also possible it was always intended to go on this long. Most of the work needs to be within possessions and they may need disruptive ones to do anything significant. These have to be planned out months or years ahead.

markymark2000 said:

If the tender is out now, why can't work start in mid 2021 or earlier? It's no wonder projects take so long, too much sitting around and not enough trackside work.

Click to expand...

No chance if it requires any real disruptive access, most of 2021 is pretty nailed down.

The Planner said:

No chance if it requires any real disruptive access, most of 2021 is pretty nailed down.

Click to expand...

Some of the Hope Valley scheme could probably be done without possessions. 2nd platform, track laying (except where the excavation works are needed). You would need possessions probably for the excavation work at Twentywell Lane bridge. and you would need something to put the points in either end of the scheme. 2 points can be done overnight though. Overnight possession for putting a bridge up at Dore to the 2nd platform and then another weekend possession for signalling. Other parts of the world can build railways quicker than we can do a small but essential capacity upgrade project. I know the staff who do the jobs work very hard but if more jobs were done at the same time (with more staff of course), it would be done a lot quicker and the next project can be moved onto.

Not sure about the Grindleford segment of the works.

Accepting that the rate of progress isn't the fault of the people actually working on it, it does seem awfully slow. Like everything devised by civil servants it is ponderous in the extreme designed solely for the purpose of avoiding blame settling on said civil servants. For many years I was involved in a simple and easy and quick process to appoint anaesthetic trainees in the NHS. Before I stopped this had been replaced by an over managed and ponderous system designed to be complaint proof with no added value beyond this.

markymark2000 said:

Some of the Hope Valley scheme could probably be done without possessions. 2nd platform, track laying (except where the excavation works are needed). You would need possessions probably for the excavation work at Twentywell Lane bridge. and you would need something to put the points in either end of the scheme. 2 points can be done overnight though. Overnight possession for putting a bridge up at Dore to the 2nd platform and then another weekend possession for signalling. Other parts of the world can build railways quicker than we can do a small but essential capacity upgrade project. I know the staff who do the jobs work very hard but if more jobs were done at the same time (with more staff of course), it would be done a lot quicker and the next project can be moved onto.

Not sure about the Grindleford segment of the works.

Click to expand...

It's all been done in draft, but there's, a lot of detail needed yet.

Heavy earthworks are needed to create the lops at both Dore and Bamford, not Grindleford. That is usually started in drier spring and summer.

It's necesary to keep the route open as much as possible. Longer possessions are likely at Xmas/New Year 2022/23 and Easter 2023. There'll be a lot of work done at weekends and at night. Long notice needs to be given for longer term timetabling for both freight and passenger traffic. (As an aside, stone output and resulting freight trains are nothing like as reduced in the Peak District at present as passenger services. They pay for a lot of the line's upkeep.)

Those tendering in the current situation must be very wary about costings. The crisis is bound to have impact on almost everything.

Keeping workers apart on site is only part of the present situation. Using minibuses and site facilties need rethinking too.

Much as we'd all want to see more progress, and those living by this project have been waiting about 20 years, we have to accept we're in uncharted waters at present. Hopefully it will all settle down and that 2023 date will be achieved. As an example of rail projects it doesn't inspire confidence in completion of more complex schemes. But after the electrification delays of recent decades it comes as no surprise

Killingworth said:

It's necesary to keep the route open as much as possible. Longer possessions are likely at Xmas/New Year 2022/23 and Easter 2023. There'll be a lot of work done at weekends and at night. Long notice needs to be given for longer term timetabling for both freight and passenger traffic. (As an aside, stone output and resulting freight trains are nothing like as reduced in the Peak District as passenger services. They pay for a lot of the line's upkeep.)

Much as we'd all want to see more progress, and those living by this project have been waiting about 20 years, we have to accept we're in uncharted waters at present. Hopefully it will all settle down and that 2023 date will be achieved. As an example of rail projects it doesn't inspire confidence in completion of more complex schemes. But after the electrification delays of recent decades it comes as no surprise

Click to expand...

I agree the route needs to stay open as much as possible. It shouldn't need longer possessions. At the Dore end, it's 2 sets of points, a platform, excavation to accommodate the track, lay the track and then signals. A fair chunk I would say can be done while the line is running, overnight or on a Saturday night - Monday morning possession.
Not sure on work at the Bamford end but I would say that is less important than the Dore scheme. While they are both needed for the overall capacity enhancement, the Dore end causes more delays than the lack of Bamford passing loop.

I'm not expecting work to be being done right now but in 2021 when all this should have blown over, it should be fine. 2023 is stupidly long away for the work which needs doing. This project could probably be done in 6 months from the first space going into the ground.

markymark2000 said:

This project could probably be done in 6 months from the first space going into the ground.

Click to expand...

I'm struggling to make sense of your postings. You say this project "shouldn't need longer possessions", but then you write the above sentence in the very same post.

Why would Network Rail want the project to take longer than necessary? Killingworth has explained below in far greater detail...

markymark2000 said:

I agree the route needs to stay open as much as possible. It shouldn't need longer possessions. At the Dore end, it's 2 sets of points, a platform, excavation to accommodate the track, lay the track and then signals. A fair chunk I would say can be done while the line is running, overnight or on a Saturday night - Monday morning possession.
Not sure on work at the Bamford end but I would say that is less important than the Dore scheme. While they are both needed for the overall capacity enhancement, the Dore end causes more delays than the lack of Bamford passing loop.

I'm not expecting work to be being done right now but in 2021 when all this should have blown over, it should be fine. 2023 is stupidly long away for the work which needs doing. This project could probably be done in 6 months from the first space going into the ground.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid many parties have been pressing on this for years. The planning processes are incredibly slow, but there is more to it than might appear on the surface.

You can't safely build a new platform between two active running tracks with trains passing every 10 minutes, certainly not quickly. That requires possession of almost half the station car park for access and storage of materials and equipment, potentially for several months. Until last month the 129 spaces were full every weekday with 100-150 on nearby roads. Those are some of the details the successful bidder will need to resolve.

Rrsignalling is another issue, although it's not going to be as comprehensive as originally hoped for the entire route.

It's a very tight site to build the Dore loop excavating into the hillside with access only along the railway. There are blocks of flats right beside the nearest access point and the excavations will be right up to the edge of their car park with appropriate piling to protect their foundations. That won't be quiet or popular.

The Bamford loop is not straightforward either, requiring both embankment and cutting and an underbridge widening.

The installation of a pedestrian overbridge at Hathersage West is another irritating detail that requires site access, all at an estimated cost of £750k.

Believe me, those of us who attended 3 rounds of public consultation and the subsequent public inquiry are rather fed up that the December 2018 completion date was missed. The fact that Sheffield Council Planning first saw intimation of the project in 2005 doesn't make us feel better either.

It will happen. Those looking at other projects nationwide take note. Whatever you want, prepare for it taking a long time.

I wonder if perhaps a couple of blockades of the line might not be quicker, perhaps one at the Dore end and one at the other end of the line on a subsequent date might not be quicker and keep the stone traffic moving albeit via different routes.

Class 170101 said:

I wonder if perhaps a couple of blockades of the line might not be quicker, perhaps one at the Dore end and one at the other end of the line on a subsequent date might not be quicker and keep the stone traffic moving albeit via different routes.

Click to expand...

I rather think those planning the project considered that over two years ago. As I explained earlier, it's not that simple. There are several parts to the total job. Disrupting the flow of stone would have a very big impact on lorry movements through the Peak Park, and it won't go down well even for Bank Holiday weeks. The modern rail wagons carry a lot of stone, there may be 30 wagons in a train, and a dozen trains on a busy day, many at night. And production is (was?) growing.

Killingworth said:

I rather think those planning the project considered that over two years ago. As I explained earlier, it's not that simple. There are several parts to the total job. Disrupting the flow of stone would have a very big impact on lorry movements through the Peak Park, and it won't go down well even for Bank Holiday weeks. The modern rail wagons carry a lot of stone, there may be 30 wagons in a train, and a dozen trains on a busy day, many at night. And production is (was?) growing.

Click to expand...

Not suggesting a total blockade of the line as I pointed I was suggesting taking one end out at a time so as to keep the stone on the railway vice the roads. Was this not the case with the recent floods near Chinley - that the stone came out via Dore end of the route rather than the Manchester end?

Class 170101 said:

Not suggesting a total blockade of the line as I pointed I was suggesting taking one end out at a time so as to keep the stone on the railway vice the roads. Was this not the case with the recent floods near Chinley - that the stone came out via Dore end of the route rather than the Manchester end?

Click to expand...

Most comes out the Dore end anyway.

Any line closures for HVCs will have serious consequences for travelers between Sheffield and Stockport/New Mills Central/Manchester.
There is not a suitable alternative rail route.
There is no suitable bus route.
During the Whalley Bridge closures a 50 minute journeys were extend by 2 hours.

unlevel42 said:

Any line closures for HVCs will have serious consequences for travelers between Sheffield and Stockport/New Mills Central/Manchester.
There is not a suitable alternative rail route.
There is no suitable bus route.
During the Whalley Bridge closures a 50 minute journeys were extend by 2 hours.

Click to expand...

Exactly, which is why weekend work will be extensive, and almost certainly blockades of several weeks over Christmas and Easter Bank Holidays. The days of men with cloth caps dancing between live trains are long gone.

What is the plan for the signalling. Does Totley and Grindleford box survive, given the loop will be at Bamford (the middle of an Absolute Block section)? Or will it transfer to York ROC Sheffield Workstation?

Living 250 metres from the planned Dore chord/loop I'm acutely aware that the building of local tunnels at Bradway and Totley took less time than this project. If there were a war on, or just a bridge washed out as at Workington a few years ago, it would indeed get fixed in 6-12 months.

It's no good asking why the track through the station was singled in 1985. Only 3 tph across the single track then, compared with at least 6 until recently.

WestRiding said:

What is the plan for the signalling. Does Totley and Grindleford box survive, given the loop will be at Bamford (the middle of an Absolute Block section)? Or will it transfer to York ROC Sheffield Workstation?

Click to expand...

As I understand it signalling control east of Earles transfers to York to include the new Bamford loop.

Killingworth said:

Living 250 metres from the planned Dore chord/loop I'm acutely aware that the building of local tunnels at Bradway and Totley took less time than this project. If there were a war on, or just a bridge washed out as at Workington a few years ago, it would indeed get fixed in 6-12 months.

Click to expand...

The slight difference being that none of those projects were on a live railway. If you're willing to shut the railway I'm sure the Dore loop could be built much quicker.

quantinghome said:

The slight difference being that none of those projects were on a live railway. If you're willing to shut the railway I'm sure the Dore loop could be built much quicker.

Click to expand...

Indeed, longer closures were ruled out very early in the planning, and that's the nub of the issue - as it is with all schemes to enhance existing tracks. Although HS2 will be disruptive for a lot of people it will have modest effect on the existing rail network compared with major mainline electrification schemes. (My fanciful Trans Peak tunnel would mostly avoid that.)