• 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!

Hope Valley Capacity Scheme updates

Jozhua

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2019
Messages
1,856
Sorry, I'm a bit confused, what exactly will they do to allow for 3 fast trains per hour?

Also, I've noticed the section around Hazel Grove, before stockport to be awfully slow. The EMT (now EMR) service seems to stop on it the majority of times, heading in the Liverpool direction. I don't see how 3 trains per hour will improve this situation, unless some passing places/better signalling and higher line speeds are brought in!

Perhaps a semi-fast Northern connect service running through New Mills Central could be useful, skipping some stops like Ardwick and Bamford? I imagine some 2 carriage 195s could work well on the route.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Tomnick

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2005
Messages
5,840
Sorry, I'm a bit confused, what exactly will they do to allow for 3 fast trains per hour?

Also, I've noticed the section around Hazel Grove, before stockport to be awfully slow. The EMT (now EMR) service seems to stop on it the majority of times, heading in the Liverpool direction. I don't see how 3 trains per hour will improve this situation, unless some passing places/better signalling and higher line speeds are brought in!

Perhaps a semi-fast Northern connect service running through New Mills Central could be useful, skipping some stops like Ardwick and Bamford? I imagine some 2 carriage 195s could work well on the route.
The Liverpools are generously timed approaching Stockport, so they’ll often turn up at Hazel Grove a minute or two early and closely follow the stopper. It’s a slow bit of railway, but not a problem as such.
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,097
The Liverpools are generously timed approaching Stockport, so they’ll often turn up at Hazel Grove a minute or two early and closely follow the stopper. It’s a slow bit of railway, but not a problem as such.
I can imagine Sir Humphrey (in his comfortable office in Whitehall) saying "Well, it may be an inter-city service, but it's only in the north, so who cares?"
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,190
So it's prevarication! However, my understanding is that until tenders are all in and the confirmed price tickets added up the finance can't finally be signed off by DfT, contractors then authorised to go, work phasing finalised and blockades confirmed.

DfT can sign off whatever they want, but as you can imagine they may well want to be sure about the price first before confirming the full finance.

However this is different to the booking of possessions. I don’t know the detail of this scheme, but I would be astonished if there wasn’t already a programme of works scheduled (developed by construction specialists as part of the design process), and possessions booked on the back of that.

That’s certainly how most other projects work.
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,882
Location
Sheffield
However this is different to the booking of possessions. I don’t know the detail of this scheme, but I would be astonished if there wasn’t already a programme of works scheduled (developed by construction specialists as part of the design process), and possessions booked on the back of that.

That’s certainly how most other projects work.

To the best of my knowledge there currently isn't. In draft and as desired, probably, but the freight is a very major issue. A lot of lorry loads of limestone if that's not got right. Add up all those wagons in and out and try sending them all westward by rail.

Of course it will be phased. As an example Dore Station Junction laying of a new track and station work could be done without blocking access for freight via the Dore curve. Heavy excavating won't be started in winter. The Dore loop/chord earthwork will need a blockade. Bamford loop the same. They could be done at the same time. Resignalling will be another blockade. Some of these will be at weekends and at night.
 

Jozhua

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2019
Messages
1,856
Is there any location on the network that a Class 195 two coach service would work well on?

Well in addition to another 2-car stopping service, 6-car TPE and the 4-car EMR I think 2-cars would be sufficient for a semi-fast train.
 

Class 170101

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
7,937
To the best of my knowledge there currently isn't. In draft and as desired, probably, but the freight is a very major issue. A lot of lorry loads of limestone if that's not got right. Add up all those wagons in and out and try sending them all westward by rail.

Of course it will be phased. As an example Dore Station Junction laying of a new track and station work could be done without blocking access for freight via the Dore curve. Heavy excavating won't be started in winter. The Dore loop/chord earthwork will need a blockade. Bamford loop the same. They could be done at the same time. Resignalling will be another blockade. Some of these will be at weekends and at night.

Even though its a freight project to some extent will they accept blockades or only Saturday afternoon and all day Sunday closures?
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,905
Location
Nottingham
DfT can sign off whatever they want, but as you can imagine they may well want to be sure about the price first before confirming the full finance.

However this is different to the booking of possessions. I don’t know the detail of this scheme, but I would be astonished if there wasn’t already a programme of works scheduled (developed by construction specialists as part of the design process), and possessions booked on the back of that.

That’s certainly how most other projects work.
If disruptive possessions are booked, doesn't that commit NR to pay the associated disruption compensation costs? If there is no funding they can't do that.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,190
If disruptive possessions are booked, doesn't that commit NR to pay the associated disruption compensation costs? If there is no funding they can't do that.

It does, but the commitment only comes on formal notification, which for 2020/1 has passed, but for 2021/2 has yet to happen. Even then, (strictly speaking) Schedule 4 costs are not capitalised (it’s quite complicated), so what is bein* committed to is costs from the route operating budget.
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,882
Location
Sheffield
It does, but the commitment only comes on formal notification, which for 2020/1 has passed, but for 2021/2 has yet to happen. Even then, (strictly speaking) Schedule 4 costs are not capitalised (it’s quite complicated), so what is bein* committed to is costs from the route operating budget.

Are you aware of cut off dates for 2021/22? That could help to interpret what is and isn't possible. The lead times on everything in this project just get longer and longer.
 

DimTim

Member
Joined
11 Aug 2013
Messages
183
Just been featured as lead item Look North Leeds

Scheme delayed 2 years - to be reviewed to ensure meets future requirements before going out to contract/tender
Construction to start 2022 finished 2023
Sheffield mayor - not happy!!
 

Jozhua

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2019
Messages
1,856
Just been featured as lead item Look North Leeds

Scheme delayed 2 years - to be reviewed to ensure meets future requirements before going out to contract/tender
Construction to start 2022 finished 2023
Sheffield mayor - not happy!!

Neither am I!

Read some reports, honestly feel like what should be a relatively simple, small project in comparison to many others is caught up in so much red tape. NR literally just needs to lay some track and make a new platform/footbridge in Dore and add a new freight loop near Bamford which will add so much value to an existing line for little work. I feel like the work could have probably been carried out fully for the amount of cash spent on unnecessary paperwork. Might just hire a digger, buy some track and do it myself!
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,524
Is this due to not knowing what HS2 want to do in the area?
How are they going to get stone trains out and down to Chesterfield with HS2 whizzing up and down?
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,882
Location
Sheffield
Just been featured as lead item Look North Leeds

Scheme delayed 2 years - to be reviewed to ensure meets future requirements before going out to contract/tender
Construction to start 2022 finished 2023
Sheffield mayor - not happy!!

Actually it may be worse. 2023 is the latest projection but a further concern is that although the work should start in 2022 it is quite likely completion will not be sufficiently certain to allow trains to be timetabled to use it before May 2024. That is a very realistic possibility so feet need keeping to the fire. Dan Jarvis is very much aware of this having visited Dore & Totley recently (older family members either used it daily or train spotted decades ago).

There is more than a possibility that work marked as optional in the plans produced at the public inquiry will be left out. In particular adding two crossovers to permit bi-directional working through Dore & Totley station seem likely not to happen to reduce costs. That removes extra flexibility and resilience.

Why should that matter? As an example, the TPE westbound service is often held up coming into Sheffield from Doncaster and misses its xx.11 departure time. The Northern xx.14 will either be held in the platform, or released only as far as the Heeley loop to allow the TPE to pass.The Northern service can then be held again at Dore Station Junction for a clear path to cross the mainline for the Hope Valley. As northbound services come from as far as Penzance, London or Norwich they're liable to have picked up significant delays and may need to have preference. If the station platforms are signalled bi-directional the Northern service could work up to the station and wait for the TPE service to pass there. That shouldn't delay the TPE service any more and might save the Northern service several minutes and prevent it contributing to knock on delays into the Manchester area.

The potential savings on eastbound movements may not be so great. If the Northern service is running late the following TPE will be 4 minutes behind due to the long block through Totley Tunnel. An eastbound freight service running through Sheffield will soon have room to pull in at Bamford and in the enlarged Heeley loop (bi-directional and maybe the start of 3 tracking down the Sheaf Valley from Dore into Sheffield). Using a bi-directional platform at Dore it could also be held there before taking the mainline north. However a bigger benefit might be an option to permit some TPE services to be timed to pass the Northern service at Dore, thereby helping the faster service to cut a minute off full Manchester - Sheffield journey times. (No help for the TPEs that stop at Dore, of course.)

(If and when Sheffield station is remodelled there is likely to a temporary shortage of platforms. The option to run a unit up to Dore where it could be passed might be helpful - although a short terminal spur or bay platform in that area would be better!)

This is all speculation, but given track and signalling availability many things may be possible to help with operational needs.

The elephant in the room on the Hope valley line is that the signalling is basically the same as provided when the line opened in 1893. The tunnels are big barriers with long blocks - and their wet nature means icicles can delay trains in winter, even when snow ploughs have cleared the open track. But the tunnels need their own thread. Resignalling was supposed to have happened by now. A limited amount of revision will be needed for this scheme and control zones will move so York will take over operations up to and including Earle's Sidings. The rest has been delayed until some uncertain date in the future.
 

Mugby

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2012
Messages
1,923
Location
Derby
When (if) two tracks are restored to Dore Station, will Dore Station Junction be kept in it's present position or will the double track extend further towards Millhouses? I'm thinking a higher crossover speed should surely be factored into any remodelling scheme.

I suppose what's really needed and what might have to be considered at some future date is a third track all the way from Dore to Sheffield which could be used by the stopper both ways and northbound TPE trains plus anything else which needs to get out of the way of main line services. Many times I've been on an expresses from the south which have had to crawl all the way to Sheffield on single yellows, being stuck behind something slower.
I think there would be enough space for an extra track past Tesco and such a line would only need to go to where the Down Relief line starts at Heeley where it could be linked into the existing layout.
 

Jozhua

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2019
Messages
1,856
Am I missing something because I fail to see why this project needs to take so long, in fact it seems do-able by staff from within Network Rail itself.

An extra track at Dore and Totley and a passing loop doesn't seem like too much of a stretch from just general day to day track maintenance?

Okay, a footbridge and platform at Dore and Totley probably needs some contractors, but that shouldn't take till 2023 right?

If we can't get simple stuff like this done within 6 months to a year in a reasonable budget, what "Hope" is there for the rest of the railway?
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,882
Location
Sheffield
Am I missing something because I fail to see why this project needs to take so long, in fact it seems do-able by staff from within Network Rail itself.

An extra track at Dore and Totley and a passing loop doesn't seem like too much of a stretch from just general day to day track maintenance?

Okay, a footbridge and platform at Dore and Totley probably needs some contractors, but that shouldn't take till 2023 right?

If we can't get simple stuff like this done within 6 months to a year in a reasonable budget, what "Hope" is there for the rest of the railway?

Sorry, you just haven't got how much planning goes into schemes like this. Planned and planned again, it creates masses of work with nothing actually being seen to be done. Planning started in the days of Railtrack and has been updated and revised many, many times. Various budgets have been allocated, withdrawn, revised and kicked back. Construction standards have been changed, future electrification now allowed for, and most recently possibly dovetailing with HS2. It still won't be good enough at about £145M, minimum.

A loop at Chinley was in, then taken out. 4 fast trains an hour were in the original specification, but there's no room for them into Piccadilly (or Sheffield) so that got reduced to 3. To ease the way into Sheffield the Heeley loop is to be lengthened and that should be extended further up to Dore as part of HS2. (With slewing it will just fit between Tesco's and Sainsbury's at Millhouses.) There is to be a new freight loop at Bamford requiring considerable earth moving. The extended Dore chord also requires a lot of earth shifting and that is done in the spring-autumn period to avoid bad weather disruption - it gets quite bleak in the Hope Valley in winter.

The Dore platform gets extended back up to the signal*, where it used to be until 1985 when the three other platforms were removed and the one that survived was shortened. The new platform gets a bridge with lifts.

But you're quite right. If relatively modest schemes like this can take so long it's no wonder that HS2 is going to take so long - and Piccadilly Platforms 15/16 hasn't a prayer!

Bats, newts, badgers, birds, plants archaeology, local community consultation, public inquiries, changes of government, priority, new regulations - you name it there's always something to add a new delay.

2005 is when Network Rail can be seen to have consulted Sheffield City Council about reinstatement of the second platform. In 2013 Network Rail spoke of a 56%* increase in passenger numbers from Sheffield by 2029. Since 2013 Dore & Totley has seen that increase in 6 years with over 10 years still to go!

* TPE are soon to operate 6 coaches and and Dore won't be able to take them without SDO methods until 2023. At the present passenger growth rate 9 would be needed by then, but the third fast train will certainly be needed with 6.
 

ohgoditsjames

Member
Joined
16 Jun 2019
Messages
379
Location
Sheffield & Shipley
The whole thing is a bodge job papering over the cracks. The HVL is inadequate for Sheffield to Manchester services and since HS3 won’t be going nowhere near Sheffield it’s not going to get any better.
 

Jozhua

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2019
Messages
1,856
Sorry, you just haven't got how much planning goes into schemes like this. Planned and planned again, it creates masses of work with nothing actually being seen to be done. Planning started in the days of Railtrack and has been updated and revised many, many times. Various budgets have been allocated, withdrawn, revised and kicked back. Construction standards have been changed, future electrification now allowed for, and most recently possibly dovetailing with HS2. It still won't be good enough at about £145M, minimum.

A loop at Chinley was in, then taken out. 4 fast trains an hour were in the original specification, but there's no room for them into Piccadilly (or Sheffield) so that got reduced to 3. To ease the way into Sheffield the Heeley loop is to be lengthened and that should be extended further up to Dore as part of HS2. (With slewing it will just fit between Tesco's and Sainsbury's at Millhouses.) There is to be a new freight loop at Bamford requiring considerable earth moving. The extended Dore chord also requires a lot of earth shifting and that is done in the spring-autumn period to avoid bad weather disruption - it gets quite bleak in the Hope Valley in winter.

The Dore platform gets extended back up to the signal*, where it used to be until 1985 when the three other platforms were removed and the one that survived was shortened. The new platform gets a bridge with lifts.

But you're quite right. If relatively modest schemes like this can take so long it's no wonder that HS2 is going to take so long - and Piccadilly Platforms 15/16 hasn't a prayer!

Bats, newts, badgers, birds, plants archaeology, local community consultation, public inquiries, changes of government, priority, new regulations - you name it there's always something to add a new delay.

2005 is when Network Rail can be seen to have consulted Sheffield City Council about reinstatement of the second platform. In 2013 Network Rail spoke of a 56%* increase in passenger numbers from Sheffield by 2029. Since 2013 Dore & Totley has seen that increase in 6 years with over 10 years still to go!

* TPE are soon to operate 6 coaches and and Dore won't be able to take them without SDO methods until 2023. At the present passenger growth rate 9 would be needed by then, but the third fast train will certainly be needed with 6.

You could quite easily launch a Pacer to space for £145 million!

I get that local communities and wildlife should have some protection, but frankly the biggest risk to them is pollution, noise and danger from ever increasing road traffic. I highly doubt road builders have to go through this rigmorole when doing some minor remodelling.

From what I see (correct me if I'm wrong) this is Network Rail wanting to build some new track on land they already own, which already has a railway on it. It's literally a platform and an extra loop or two.

In my *humble* opinion, Network Rail shouldn't have to consult central government on anything involving construction on land they own or projects which involve small land acquisitions, such as say buying a plot of land next to Piccadilly 13/14. Local councils should have a say, in regards to planning permission, but they will also have the benefits to their residents in mind so will likely not put loads of roadblocks in the way!
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,882
Location
Sheffield
You could quite easily launch a Pacer to space for £145 million!

I get that local communities and wildlife should have some protection, but frankly the biggest risk to them is pollution, noise and danger from ever increasing road traffic. I highly doubt road builders have to go through this rigmorole when doing some minor remodelling.

From what I see (correct me if I'm wrong) this is Network Rail wanting to build some new track on land they already own, which already has a railway on it. It's literally a platform and an extra loop or two.

In my *humble* opinion, Network Rail shouldn't have to consult central government on anything involving construction on land they own or projects which involve small land acquisitions, such as say buying a plot of land next to Piccadilly 13/14. Local councils should have a say, in regards to planning permission, but they will also have the benefits to their residents in mind so will likely not put loads of roadblocks in the way!

The loops at Bamford and Dore required land to be purchased, and the work to get a TWAO for such a scheme lay down a lot of conditions to cover all the items I've previously mentioned. The Bamford loop is in the Peak District National Park which added another factor.

You may find road builders have different onerous conditions to comply with. Local authorities can't put many obstacles in the way when most of the work is on railway owned land. Most of the problems are political will and cash spend priorities. The North has had low priority and what there is tends to go towards Manchester and Leeds. The existing use of rail around and into those cities gives some justification for that. Of course those in other cities are bound to say that investment there would improve matters, and it would, but until it's done it's hard to assess what will be value for money.
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,882
Location
Sheffield
Further to previous comments the conditions of the TWAO seem to make any earlier work in the area of the scheme 'difficult.' Like extending Platform 1 at Dore to 6 coach length as it's already in the scheme and that has to be approved in total before any work starts. To do it outside the scheme, starting a new project process now, would probably take 3 years to get agreed anyway!

It seems adding anything to the scheme would delay it, no matter how beneficial it might be. Like two optional crossovers shown on the plans that have inevitably been opted out of! They'd cost far too much for points and signalling.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,905
Location
Nottingham
Wouldn't the crossovers be permitted development? If so I think they could be added to the scheme without affecting the TWAO.
 

Jozhua

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2019
Messages
1,856
Reckon anything will change regarding the scheme after the GE in December?

Or will the government remain paralysed by other, more 'pressing' matters?

Brexit Vs Hope Valley Capacity Scheme, which will happen first... :lol:
 

markymark2000

On Moderation
Joined
11 May 2015
Messages
3,562
Location
Western Part of the UK
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!
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,097
Doesn't the fact that D & T is just a single platform make it one of the most urgent constraints to address?
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
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!

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

Top