Electrification North-West

[tbtc]

I think it would be a good idea. Don't forget, the Hope Valley is already pretty busy, and that route is quite roundabout.

Only Matlock - Buxton would give all the benefits of:

An additional Inter-City Route between London and Manchester, better inter-regional links between the East Midlands and the North West and better local connectivity between Derby, Bakewell and Buxton

The route from Matlock to Stockport wouldn't actually serve Buxton though (without a lot of expense, and a bit of doubling back).

And since there are no Inter-City services (just) between London and Derby then would your London - Manchester planned service be an additional service from London to Derby, or involve reducing one of Sheffield's services to the capital?

 

[yorksrob]

The route from Matlock to Stockport wouldn't actually serve Buxton though (without a lot of expense, and a bit of doubling back).

And since there are no Inter-City services (just) between London and Derby then would your London - Manchester planned service be an additional service from London to Derby, or involve reducing one of Sheffield's services to the capital?

Since the Dove Holes Tunnel route currently runs into Buxton anyway, wouldn't it just be a case of adding two curves to the project ?

As for the Inter-City/Inter-Regional connections, yes, you would eventually need some sort of major capacity upgrade on the MML (which they may well need at some stage anyway). However, since the two Sheffield trains are quite short anyway, I wonder, could they not have a train of two five car units split at Derby with one going each way for the time being ?

 

[lancastrian]

Logically, electrification should be an on-going process: when one project is completed, another is undertaken. The truth is somewhat different, but we don't live in an ideal World !

The North-West electrification is a huge improvement, but there are some heavily used commuter lines that would bebefit hugely, if they could be included. One that immediately springs to mind is Wigan Wallgate- Manchester Victoria, via Atherton, or an even shorter section via Bolton. At the risk of being called a dreamer, you could even add Southport Chapel Street- Wigan for good measure !

Seriously, has the Wigan Wallgate-Manchester Victoria line ever been considered for electrification ? Another option would be conversion to Metro.
Would passenger figures justify this ?

If there is to be a second tranch of North West Electrification, then I believe that the Manchester/Bolton to Southport via both Atherton & Westhoughton should be at the top of the list. Along with reinstating the north Burscough Curve allowing the Preston to Burscough Bridge line also being electrified. This would reopen a Preston to Southport service that was destroyed by the Beeching closure of the old West Lancashire Route.

The remainder of the Preston to Ormskirk line should be redoubled through Burscough Junction via the reinstated south Burscough curve to a new platform just before the bridge before Burscough Bridge station and electrified by third rail as an extension of the Merseyrail network.

The line from Kirkby to Wigan Wallgate also should be electrified on the third rail. This could terminate in the bay platform at Wallgate.

Other lines that really need to be electrified are the Kirkham to Blackpool South line, with a dynamic loop from before Lytham station through Ansdel and St Annes.

Then the Morecambe branch, Oxenholme to Windermere, with a second platform at Windermere & run-round loop for excursion trains. Carnforth to Barrow should also be done.

But the one line that really should be done is the Preston to Colne & Skipton. This will require the redoubling of the Rose Grove to Colne and the reinstating of a double track line from Colne to Skipton.

Just remembered the other line that really needs to be done is the old Cheshire Lines Route from Knott Mill via Warrington to Liverpool.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

But the one line that really should be done is the Preston to Colne & Skipton. This will require the redoubling of the Rose Grove to Colne and the reinstating of a double track line from Colne to Skipton.

What about the Blackpool South - Preston to Colne Skipton part of that route?

 

[HSTEd]

Hope Valley really needs doing alongside the upper Midland Main Line before we get into reopening routes, it would enable electric transpennine freight service to be restored.

 

[Whistler40145]

lancastrian, I would install a passing loop @ Kendal on the Windermere branch. I am not quite sure if sufficient land is available at Windermere for a run round loop. I think it's madness not to electrify the line as it's the only way you will get a direct service to Manchester Airport.

I know that the South Fylde Line has lower passenger numbers than the North Fylde Line. First of all, I would consider cutting back the current Blackpool South to Colne service to start @ Preston. I would install a passing loop @ either St Anne's or Lytham & electrify the line, introduce an EMU shuttle service to Preston, with some services being attached to a Blackpool North to Manchester Airport service.


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?xbqzps

 

[PR1Berske]

If there is to be a second tranch of North West Electrification, then I believe that the Manchester/Bolton to Southport via both Atherton & Westhoughton should be at the top of the list. Along with reinstating the north Burscough Curve allowing the Preston to Burscough Bridge line also being electrified. This would reopen a Preston to Southport service that was destroyed by the Beeching closure of the old West Lancashire Route.

The remainder of the Preston to Ormskirk line should be redoubled through Burscough Junction via the reinstated south Burscough curve to a new platform just before the bridge before Burscough Bridge station and electrified by third rail as an extension of the Merseyrail network.

The line from Kirkby to Wigan Wallgate also should be electrified on the third rail. This could terminate in the bay platform at Wallgate.

Other lines that really need to be electrified are the Kirkham to Blackpool South line, with a dynamic loop from before Lytham station through Ansdel and St Annes.

Then the Morecambe branch, Oxenholme to Windermere, with a second platform at Windermere & run-round loop for excursion trains. Carnforth to Barrow should also be done.

But the one line that really should be done is the Preston to Colne & Skipton. This will require the redoubling of the Rose Grove to Colne and the reinstating of a double track line from Colne to Skipton.

Just remembered the other line that really needs to be done is the old Cheshire Lines Route from Knott Mill via Warrington to Liverpool.

Something of the 'wish list' about this lot but it speaks to my 'ideal world' thinking that's been doing the rounds in my mind for as long as I can remember!

There is a great opportunity to expand the Ormskirk branch into being more than the shuttle-bus it is today, though as I've mentioned somewhere else on the Forum, there is no will within Lancs CC at the moment to commit to the Burscough Curves. The business case, as they see it, has yet to be fully made.

The 2 and X2 bus routes to Southport are packed - and it's not just people doing shopping going back to Longton or Hesketh Bank, people are taking the whole route to Southport by bus. Doing so by train would introduce some competition, give an economic boost to the local area and generate much needed investment in an area so often ignored.

I know - well, we all know - that the government sees "Railway Investment in the North" and only thinks "MANCHESTER". Maybe one day, before we're all dead in the ground, there'll be some change to this mindset.

 

[Pyreneenguy]

You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. I hope some day you'll join us.........................

Good to see so many other dreamers on UK Rail

The Burscough curves reinstatement is a 'classic example' of what is wrong with foreward transport planning. Lancashire CC claim there is no business case for the improvements, howerever, if Southport was still in Lancashire (where it should be and not shackled to a post-industrial desert like Bootle ), things would probably be already up and running.

Without a direct-link from Southport to Preston, I think the future for the Ormskirk-Preston line is pretty grim. When the Lime St to Wigan NW electrification is completed, there will be little point in duplicating , what will be a very fast, frequent and reliable service. Burscough is a very fast growing community and perhaps extending Merseyrail through Burscough Jnc to Burscough Bridge would be the way forward, connecting at the latter with a direct Southport-Preston service.

Funnily enough, the Southport to Wigan and Manchester line is enjoying the best service it has ever had, with a train every 30 minutes ! Other lines with a similar frequency have been electrified, so it's something that cannot be ruled out ! I'm looking forward to the morning Pendolino to Euston departing from platform 6 at Chapel St !

 

[tbtc]

Southport to Manchester would make sense as an electrification project - the daytime PVR is fourteen diagrams (excluding peak extras/ doubled up units etc) so that cuts a decent chunk into Pacer replacement (see also Hunts Cross - Warrington Central - Old Trafford etc)

Colne - Skipton, on the other hand, is pure fantasy.

 

[Lampshade]

The Burscough curves reinstatement is a 'classic example' of what is wrong with foreward transport planning. Lancashire CC claim there is no business case for the improvements, howerever, if Southport was still in Lancashire (where it should be and not shackled to a post-industrial desert like Bootle ), things would probably be already up and running.

Sadly, you are right

Without a direct-link from Southport to Preston, I think the future for the Ormskirk-Preston line is pretty grim. When the Lime St to Wigan NW electrification is completed, there will be little point in duplicating , what will be a very fast, frequent and reliable service. Burscough is a very fast growing community and perhaps extending Merseyrail through Burscough Jnc to Burscough Bridge would be the way forward, connecting at the latter with a direct Southport-Preston service.

Usage figures are up at Croston and Rufford; Burscough Junction has fallen though. For the level of service these stations get, they get a heck of a lot of passengers when compared to some stations on the East Lancs that have a much more frequent service (pfft, it says something when you're saying an hourly service is much more frequent ).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Something of the 'wish list' about this lot but it speaks to my 'ideal world' thinking.......The 2 and X2 bus routes to Southport are packed - and it's not just people doing shopping going back to Longton or Hesketh Bank, people are taking the whole route to Southport by bus. Doing so by train would introduce some competition, give an economic boost to the local area and generate much needed investment in an area so often ignored.

I know - well, we all know - that the government sees "Railway Investment in the North" and only thinks "MANCHESTER". Maybe one day, before we're all dead in the ground, there'll be some change to this mindset.

I think that your comment regarding the 2 (and the 2A) buses being "packed" shows that they are performing their function of a "many stops" service which is convenient to the passengers who use these services, which give direct access to Preston bus station from both Ormskirk and Southport.

How many railway stations does your competing railway service require to give these existing passengers the same ease of access as they enjoy at the present time?

Look what the existing bus services provide as regard to the matter of ease of access for passenger at the goodly numbers of bus stops in each of these settlements that are served:-

Service 2....Southport, Churchtown, Crossens, Banks, Hesketh Bank, Tarleton, Much Hoole, Walmer Bridge, Longton, Hutton, Penwortham, Preston.

It is a very long time indeed since the West Lancashire Railway ran its services over the total length of this line and it is also still over 48 years since the third rail electric service ran from Southport to Crossens.

Service 2A...Ormskirk, Burscough, Burscough Bridge, Rufford, Tarleton, Much Hoole, Walmer Bridge, Longton, Hutton, Penwortham, Preston.

Whilst not exactly guaranteed to set pulses racing by the frequency of the railway service that serves Ormskirk, Burscough Junction, Rufford, Croston and Preston, this service still provides a supplementary addition to the facilities afforded by the existing bus service.

 

[sprinterguy]

Hope Valley really needs doing alongside the upper Midland Main Line before we get into reopening routes, it would enable electric transpennine freight service to be restored.

The only freight services that electrification of the Hope Valley line would benefit are likely to be the intermodal and container trains that run through to, presumably, Trafford Park. The frequent stone and cement workings to and from the Hindlow and Tunstead quarries in the Buxton area and Hope cement works would remain diesel hauled due to their various unelectrified origin points and unless the freight lines around Buxton were electrified too. I would think that electrification of Transpennine North stands to benefit more transpennine freight workings.

If only the Hope Valley line was electrified, alongside MML electrification, then the only passenger service that could go over to electric traction would be the fairly infrequent local service unless the Liverpool to Norwich service was split at Nottingham.

 

[PR1Berske]

I think that your comment regarding the 2 (and the 2A) buses being "packed" shows that they are performing their function of a "many stops" service which is convenient to the passengers who use these services, which give direct access to Preston bus station from both Ormskirk and Southport.

How many railway stations does your competing railway service require to give these existing passengers the same ease of access as they enjoy at the present time?

Look what the existing bus services provide as regard to the matter of ease of access for passenger at the goodly numbers of bus stops in each of these settlements that are served:-

Service 2....Southport, Churchtown, Crossens, Banks, Hesketh Bank, Tarleton, Much Hoole, Walmer Bridge, Longton, Hutton, Penwortham, Preston.

It is a very long time indeed since the West Lancashire Railway ran its services over the total length of this line and it is also still over 48 years since the third rail electric service ran from Southport to Crossens.

Service 2A...Ormskirk, Burscough, Burscough Bridge, Rufford, Tarleton, Much Hoole, Walmer Bridge, Longton, Hutton, Penwortham, Preston.

Whilst not exactly guaranteed to set pulses racing by the frequency of the railway service that serves Ormskirk, Burscough Junction, Rufford, Croston and Preston, this service still provides a supplementary addition to the facilities afforded by the existing bus service.

Very fair points well made.

 

[HSTEd]

The only freight services that electrification of the Hope Valley line would benefit are likely to be the intermodal and container trains that run through to, presumably, Trafford Park. The frequent stone and cement workings to and from the Hindlow and Tunstead quarries in the Buxton area and Hope cement works would remain diesel hauled due to their various unelectrified origin points and unless the freight lines around Buxton were electrified too. I would think that electrification of Transpennine North stands to benefit more transpennine freight workings.

If only the Hope Valley line was electrified, alongside MML electrification, then the only passenger service that could go over to electric traction would be the fairly infrequent local service unless the Liverpool to Norwich service was split at Nottingham.

Well apparently the local service is now going to go hourly following the redoubling of Dore (this has been proposed I think but I'm not sure if it was actually commited?).

While the benefit to passenger services in the short term would be small there are other opportunities such as electrification of the Breckland line gaining a slightly stronger case (Grantham-Nottingham is so short that in any reasonable world it would be done at the same time as the MML as there is no need for any grid taps or anything) as it would be the only remaining gap in the Liverpool-Norwich route.

On top of this there is the possibility of extending some Sheffield terminators to Manchester to obtain a London Midland/Chiltern-like "secondary" service to Manchester from the Capital.
You can probably cobble together enough trains to give a decent case, especially as Hazel Grove to Dore (end of Manchester suburban electrification to the MML electrification) is only 47.5km, which is I believe half the length of the North Transpennine project.

This is, incidentally exactly the sort of project the lightly engineered, low cost, BB Mark 3 equipment is so good at, but because of the expense of using heavyweight equipment throughout the BCR will be far weaker than otherwise.

And this is before those TRAXX "Last Mile" electrodiesels arrive... if they ever do.

 

[yorksrob]

How many railway stations does your competing railway service require to give these existing passengers the same ease of access as they enjoy at the present time?
[/I]

Isn't the point of having a railway service that it provides a faster service stopping at fewer points - hence why trains still attract passengers even where they compete with buses.

 

[Stonesourscotty]

Isnt Third rail viewed as Out of date? and soon to be phased out? and i doubt a 507/8 would fit in Walllgate platform3? i know a double one woudn't

I'd much Rather see something like 319's running the Kirkbys with a change to Third rail at Kirkby to Central the only good thing third rail would provide is a few frazzled chavs on the rails as the Pem-Kirkby sections are blighted with drunken tresspassers especially over the summer months

 

[Pyreneenguy]

Isnt Third rail viewed as Out of date? and soon to be phased out? and i doubt a 507/8 would fit in Walllgate platform3? i know a double one woudn't

I'd much Rather see something like 319's running the Kirkbys with a change to Third rail at Kirkby to Central the only good thing third rail would provide is a few frazzled chavs on the rails as the Pem-Kirkby sections are blighted with drunken tresspassers especially over the summer months

I thought that funding had been obtained for an extention to a new terminus at Headbolt Lane ?

 

[yorksrob]

Isnt Third rail viewed as Out of date? and soon to be phased out? and i doubt a 507/8 would fit in Walllgate platform3? i know a double one woudn't

I'd much Rather see something like 319's running the Kirkbys with a change to Third rail at Kirkby to Central the only good thing third rail would provide is a few frazzled chavs on the rails as the Pem-Kirkby sections are blighted with drunken tresspassers especially over the summer months

Doesn't that depend on the likelihood of OLE getting put in the tunnel sections. If they're currently not high enough I can't see them spending loads of money on switching.

Would be strange if Merseyrail ends up the only part of the national network with 3rd rail though !

 

[Gareth]

The tunnels are too low for standard clearance, so any conversion would have to obtain opt outs. Platform Screen Doors would probably help at underground stations in this respect. Needless to say, conversion of Merseyrail to OHLE is not being planned. Also, hybrid operation has been talked about, but any extension of Merseyrail would almost certainly be 3rd rail.

 

[VTPreston_Tez]

How about Merseyrail take over from Northern Ormskirk-Preston? It would provide a second stopper link into Liverpool and free up some Northern stock for lines that would generate more revenue, thus allowing more money for improvement in the future

 

[MidnightFlyer]

How about Merseyrail take over from Northern Ormskirk-Preston? It would provide a second stopper link into Liverpool and free up some Northern stock for lines that would generate more revenue, thus allowing more money for improvement in the future

Some Northern stock being one 153? I'm not sure how an extra 153 on a service would lead to greater revenue either, I doubt you'll get more people using it because it is longer outside of the peaks...

 

[VTPreston_Tez]

Some Northern stock being one 153? I'm not sure how an extra 153 on a service would lead to greater revenue either, I doubt you'll get more people using it because it is longer outside of the peaks...

I realised after I posted it!
Maybe a limited service extended to Preston by Merseyrail and that 153 running a shuttle service somewhere?

 

[HSTEd]

The tunnels are too low for standard clearance, so any conversion would have to obtain opt outs. Platform Screen Doors would probably help at underground stations in this respect. Needless to say, conversion of Merseyrail to OHLE is not being planned. Also, hybrid operation has been talked about, any extension of Merseyrail would almost certainly be 3rd rail.

With the current hatred of third rail because it ices up two weeks a year or so isn't that effectively the same as saying there will be no more extensions of Merseyrail?

 

[Whistler40145]

With NT receiving 319s, would it not make more sense for the line at Ormskirk be reinstated as a through line and electrify the section to Preston with 25Kv & include a lap over with 3rd rail, thus making full use of a dual-voltage EMU?

I am sure Northern could operate the through service on behalf of MerseyRail?


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?bphq4d

 

[DarloRich]

now it has gone so i cant

 

[Gareth]

With the current hatred of third rail because it ices up two weeks a year or so isn't that effectively the same as saying there will be no more extensions of Merseyrail?

I'm not sure if there is a hatred of 3rd rail. Yeah, iced up power rails can be annoying but so can snagged or pulled down overhead wires. It's not that big of an issue. Yes, third rail DC is considered inferior to AC overhead which is more efficient and is the standard for any new electrification but new 3rd rail can be put down on extensions to existing systems. I don't think Merseyrail will ever be converted to OHLE, in the same way the London Underground won't. It will just never be deemed worth the cost, logistical headaches or the disruption. Any extensions are most likely to also be 3rd rail. Certainly, they won't be putting up a mere mile or so of OHLE just for the Headbolt Lane extension, if they ever get round to actually doing it, that is.

 

[John55]

With the current hatred of third rail because it ices up two weeks a year or so isn't that effectively the same as saying there will be no more extensions of Merseyrail?

There is no current hatred of 3rd rail electrification it has been present since at least the 1920s. The LMS for example did not want to electrify from Birkenhead to New Brighton/West Kirby using 3rd rail and were keen that 1500V dc overhead should be used. One of the key reasons was the safety of the railwaymen who were much more likely to be out and about on the track then than now. There were many other technical, economic and reputational reasons.

Currently it is calculated that 27% of the electricity bought by the railway in 750V 3rd rail supplied areas off the former Southern Region is dissipated in waste heat compared to 7% for 25kV OHLE areas. The other key issue with the 3rd rail network is the current demands of modern rolling stock and the long, frequent and fast services run on almost all lines out of London in the peaks. Delivering this sort of electrical demand is not easy and we are probably approaching the limits of practical engineering now. An old friend once told me how concerned he was about the issue of discriminating between a short circuit fault and normal operation 30 years ago. I doubt if things have got anything but worse since.

 

[pemma]

With NT receiving 319s, would it not make more sense for the line at Ormskirk be reinstated as a through line and electrify the section to Preston with 25Kv & include a lap over with 3rd rail, thus making full use of a dual-voltage EMU?

I am sure Northern could operate the through service on behalf of MerseyRail?

The 319s are having the third rail equipment removed. Apparently, it's a lot less reliable than the OHE equipment.

I'm not sure if another operator can run on behalf of Merseyrail due to the terms of the Merseyrail franchise. Also there is no guarantee that when the 319s arrive that Serco/Abeillo will hold the Northern franchise.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Some Northern stock being one 153? I'm not sure how an extra 153 on a service would lead to greater revenue either, I doubt you'll get more people using it because it is longer outside of the peaks...

I thought the 153 was supposed to have been 'upgraded' to a 142 as of last December.

 

[Aictos]

The 319s are having the third rail equipment removed. Apparently, it's a lot less reliable than the OHE equipment.

Don't mind me asking but where the evidence backing up this claim that the 319s will lose their 3rd rail equipment?

 

[tbtc]

With NT receiving 319s, would it not make more sense for the line at Ormskirk be reinstated as a through line and electrify the section to Preston with 25Kv & include a lap over with 3rd rail, thus making full use of a dual-voltage EMU?

I am sure Northern could operate the through service on behalf of MerseyRail?

I like the idea, but one issue with the 319s is that they are four coach units, whereas the Merseyrail EMUs (507/508s) are three coach (and therefore able to run in six coach formation, to get the most out of the Merseyside platforms).

A single 319 would be too short for rush hour services through Liverpool, but an eight coach 319 would be too long for the platforms.