A random curiosity I just found

[NotATrainspott]

In the Manchester HS2 plans, the north chord from Manchester up to Preston uses wrong-way running with trains to the North on the northeastern track and to Manchester on the southwestern track.

Here's the Manchester end of the chord

Here's the Preston end of the chord

In the first PDF you can see the to-Preston-from-Manchester track crossing the up and down London lines on a viaduct and then ending up to the north-east of the to-Manchester-from-Preston track, which is then swapped over again in the second PDF. It seems utterly bizarre when there's all that free land available and a flyover needs built at both junctions anyway but I presume there is some extremely valid engineering reason for it. Weird.

 

[pablo]

Yes, you are quite right and there appears to be an underpass at the Preston end junction but the draughy has fudged it a bit across the discontinuity between charts.
Could give the drivers the willies at night!

 

[DownSouth]

It's significantly simpler for both construction and maintenance to build a flyover crossing the whole corridor than to have it landing between two tracks. You can keep the curves wider and the speeds higher doing it that way, and allow for better noise mitigation.

Signal sighting won't be an issue (as there won't be any old hat lineside signals) and neither will people looking the wrong way before using a level crossing on foot (there won't be any level crossings. What's not to love?

 

[gordonthemoron]

why is the map upside down?

 

[DownSouth]

why is the map upside down?

Because it's a section, not a map.

 

[pablo]

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probaly is one.
Looks like a map or chart to me and convention (in the northern hemisphere) is north up.
It took me a little while to re-orientate, and I know the area fairly well.

Because the western leg of the Y generally leanes to the north-west, HS2 Ltd has got the 'leans'* and when it came to turning east for Manchester, they ended up standing on their head.

* well known aviation phenomena.

Rostherne Mere; it's that big blue blob to the north of the M56, oh er sorry, I mean the south, is a visual reporting point for Manchester Airport. So I'm used to seeing it the right way up!

 

[DownSouth]

It is a map, but that is the point where you stop being right. What is more important is the type of map - which in this case is a sectioned plan/profile rather than a navigation chart for aviators. The convention for a sectioned plan/profile is to orientate the plan such that it can be read in conjunction with the profile - if you chose some arbitrary orientation for the plan it would be impossible to read the profile!

Happily for the uneducated such as yourself, it is also normal practice to publish a 'key map' for the purpose of making it easy to work out the context of which section relates to which geographical area. You can find the key map for the whole Birmingham-Manchester/Preston route here and the more localised key map for the Manchester-Preston chord here.

There is no general convention with a linear route as to which direction the profile runs (i.e. chainage increasing from left to right, or vice-versa) so long as it is kept consistent across the whole set of section drawings. In the case of Phase 2 they have consistently chosen to go with chainage increasing from L to R, which has most of the Leeds/York arm and Manchester spur "the right way up," at the cost of having the Manchester-Preston chord and much of the Manchester/Preston arm "upside down."

It is not "turning to the east" which is the "problem" here, it is rather the turning to the north away from the Manchester spur onto the chord running towards Preston on the HS2 Mainline, at which point the distance from the London datum starts increasing again, and therefore the eastern end of the chord needs to be on the left to keep things consistent.

I suppose they could have reversed the orientation of all the HS2 Phase 2 drawings to go the other way (chainage increasing from right to left) but that would simply be silly - it would only serve to make the whole of the Leeds/York route "upside down" rather than a fair chunk of the Manchester/Preston route.

Yes, I do understand that you're not an engineer and that therefore it might be hard to get your pilot brain around it and land a plane on the line, but the rail operator probably wouldn't think it a bad thing if confused pilots stay well clear!

 

[pablo]

Engineer, huh? So a lack of sense of humour goes with the job?

It's 50 years since I used a chain. We've moved on.

The meek shall inherit the earth. The rest of us are off to the stars.

 

[asylumxl]

Yes, I do understand that you're not an engineer and that therefore it might be hard to get your pilot brain around it and land a plane on the line, but the rail operator probably wouldn't think it a bad thing if confused pilots stay well clear!

That seems rather personal. While we are talking about the subject, from personal experience a pilot probably functions better in everyday life than an engineer .

 

[edwin_m]

It's significantly simpler for both construction and maintenance to build a flyover crossing the whole corridor than to have it landing between two tracks. You can keep the curves wider and the speeds higher doing it that way, and allow for better noise mitigation.

Signal sighting won't be an issue (as there won't be any old hat lineside signals) and neither will people looking the wrong way before using a level crossing on foot (there won't be any level crossings. What's not to love?

Pretty sure all the tracks will be bi-directional anyway.

 

[DownSouth]

It's 50 years since I used a chain. We've moved on.

I did yesterday, it made a quite decent link between the pedals and the rear wheel.

You ought to know that chainage doesn't actually use chains, it's measured in metres.

 

[edwin_m]

You ought to know that chainage doesn't actually use chains, it's measured in metres.

Except on Network Rail, where the chain is alive and well.

 

[pablo]

Except on Network Rail, where the chain is alive and well.

I hope that a small change of gauge between HS2 and the classic line can be avoided. Do you think converting from metric to rods, poles and perches might be a challenge for some?

 

[Yew]

I hope that a small change of gauge between HS2 and the classic line can be avoided. Do you think converting from metric to rods, poles and perches might be a challenge for some?

May as well go for furlongs per fortnight and beard-seconds if you want to go to silly measurement systems

 

[pablo]

May as well go for furlongs per fortnight and beard-seconds if you want to go to silly measurement systems

No, not silly at all. A rod, pole or perch is a quarter of a chain. 5½ yards.
Very useful measurement if you are buying land. 1 acre = 160 square rods or 10 square chains, usw. Still used in backward places.
But it's 5.0292 metres. 1 chain = 20.1168m. If HS2 is being built in metric, there's plenty of scope for conversion error there, if I know engineers.

 

[dysonsphere]

It is a map, but that is the point where you stop being right. What is more important is the type of map - which in this case is a sectioned plan/profile rather than a navigation chart for aviators. The convention for a sectioned plan/profile is to orientate the plan such that it can be read in conjunction with the profile - if you chose some arbitrary orientation for the plan it would be impossible to read the profile!

Happily for the uneducated such as yourself, it is also normal practice to publish a 'key map' for the purpose of making it easy to work out the context of which section relates to which geographical area. You can find the key map for the whole Birmingham-Manchester/Preston route here and the more localised key map for the Manchester-Preston chord here.

There is no general convention with a linear route as to which direction the profile runs (i.e. chainage increasing from left to right, or vice-versa) so long as it is kept consistent across the whole set of section drawings. In the case of Phase 2 they have consistently chosen to go with chainage increasing from L to R, which has most of the Leeds/York arm and Manchester spur "the right way up," at the cost of having the Manchester-Preston chord and much of the Manchester/Preston arm "upside down."

It is not "turning to the east" which is the "problem" here, it is rather the turning to the north away from the Manchester spur onto the chord running towards Preston on the HS2 Mainline, at which point the distance from the London datum starts increasing again, and therefore the eastern end of the chord needs to be on the left to keep things consistent.

I suppose they could have reversed the orientation of all the HS2 Phase 2 drawings to go the other way (chainage increasing from right to left) but that would simply be silly - it would only serve to make the whole of the Leeds/York route "upside down" rather than a fair chunk of the Manchester/Preston route.

Yes, I do understand that you're not an engineer and that therefore it might be hard to get your pilot brain around it and land a plane on the line, but the rail operator probably wouldn't think it a bad thing if confused pilots stay well clear!

FYI railways both currant and long disused railways are marked on avation maps as they are handy nav marks and very easy to spot from the air. (straight line features)