Manchester-Bury: Unique Electrification System

[MadMac]

For the uninitiated, as Kent Walton was wont to say, this line had a unique (to BR) 1200 volt DC third rail system where the pickup shoes contacted the side of the rail. So, how did it end up with this “oddity”?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

For the uninitiated, as Kent Walton was wont to say, this line had a unique (to BR) 1200 volt DC third rail system where the pickup shoes contacted the side of the rail. So, how did it end up with this “oddity”?

Apparently 1200v DC was the highest voltage permitted (by the Board of Trade?) for a ground level conductor rail system. Side contact current collection avoided the icing problems of top contact conductor rails used elsewhere. It also allowed the shielding of the live rail against snow and dirt by a fire resistant Jarrah wood casing, which also gave some protection to railway staff working on the line.

Source: https://www.lrta.info/archive/Manchester/history.html

Believe that the electric services commenced on the Manchester-Bury line on Monday 17th April 1916. And that the Bury-Holcombe Brook branch line also operated at 1200v, from March 1918.

 

[contrex]

being a third-rail fan, I liked the Manchester-Bury 1200v system, and also the very similar 84 mile 1500v scheme in France, from Culoz to Modane, opened in 1925 and converted to OHL in 1986. Like the English scheme, the third rail side-contact and covered by wooden shielding.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

An opening date of April 1916 for the electrified Manchester->Bury line, i.e. during the midst of the Great War, seems worthy of note.

The-powers-that-be had already considered, over a year previously, that the electrification of the Manchester->Bury line had already progressed so far that it was no longer considered desirable to stop it. However, whilst progressing favourably, it was said that electrification would not be completed quite so early, as would have been the case, if the nation hadn't been at war.

 

[Snow1964]

An opening date of April 1916 for the electrified Manchester->Bury line, i.e. during the midst of the Great War, seems worthy of note.

The-powers-that-be had already considered, over a year previously, that the electrification of the Manchester->Bury line had already progressed so far that it was no longer considered desirable to stop it. However, whilst progressing favourably, it was said that electrification would not be completed quite so early, as would have been the case, if the nation hadn't been at war.

Seen very similar reasons regarding the London and South Western Railway electrification. Was progressed to a point which allowed fewer staff, so that more people could be called up for war.

The dates are similar too.
25 Oct 1915 Waterloo-East Putney (and onwards via already electrified tracks used by District railway trains)
30 Jan 1916 Waterloo, Kingston loop and Shepperton
12 Mar 1916 Hounslow loop
18 Jun 1916 New Malden - Hampton Court
20 Nov 1916 Surbiton-Claygate added to save staff heavy steam working.

No further electrification until after war (when number of schemes went live in 1925)

 

[Taunton]

Did anywhere in the UK use bottom contact, extensively used in the USA where they have worse winter ice conditions, before the DLR came along in 1987?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Fairly obviously, the electrification of the Manchester->Bury line in the mid 1910s was one of the earlier such schemes, and then operated tolerably well for the best part of another 75 years after its installation. What I don't quite understand is why this 1200v, side contact, third rail, system, wasn't more widely adopted over the rest of the GB network. Were the various other competing systems cheaper to build or, indeed, cheaper to operate, or were there other factors at play? So, what were the major advantages/disadvantages of a 1200v system?

 

[30907]

Fairly obviously, the electrification of the Manchester->Bury line in the mid 1910s was one of the earlier such schemes, and then operated tolerably well for the best part of another 75 years after its installation. What I don't quite understand is why this 1200v, side contact, third rail, system, wasn't more widely adopted over the rest of the GB network.

I suspect because it was a few years later than conventional top-contact, as well as costing more.

Were the various other competing systems cheaper to build or, indeed, cheaper to operate, or were there other factors at play? So, what were the major advantages/disadvantages of a 1200v system?

Plus: coping with wintry conditions - more obviously an issue Oop North - and staff safety (was that much of a factor?).
Minus: cost of installation and maintenance, presumably.

 

[Taunton]

Fairly obviously, the electrification of the Manchester->Bury line in the mid 1910s was one of the earlier such schemes, and then operated tolerably well for the best part of another 75 years after its installation. What I don't quite understand is why this 1200v, side contact, third rail, system, wasn't more widely adopted over the rest of the GB network.

I don't think it was that early, it was one of the later schemes of that era. The L&Y had electrified the Liverpool lines on 3rd rail 10 years previously. They then did the Bury to Holcombe Brook line at high voltage DC overhead, and finally the Manchester to Bury line as side contact. Possibly the Liverpool lines had some icing issues. However 3rd rail was standard across the country by this time, and there was a choice of suppliers of it, so the side contact became a one-off.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

I don't think it was that early, it was one of the later schemes of that era.

You may be right. What had been done earlier, pre WW1?

N.B. In making my previous comment, I was thinking, primarily of the timeline for the third rail electrification of much of the Southern Railway, which did take place over a decade or so later, didn't it?

They then did the Bury to Holcombe Brook line at high voltage DC overhead, and finally the Manchester to Bury line as side contact.

...so the side contact became a one-off.

Think I'm right in saying that the Bury to Holcombe Brook line was subsequently converted to 1200v DC also but, despite that, no through electric services ever operated to/from Manchester Victoria. A historic curiosity?

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

The route out of Victoria to Oldham, Royton and Shaw was also to be electrified on the side contact system, but it got scuppered by the Great War and then the Grouping. Holcombe Brook was first electrified on the overhead system at Dick, Kerr's expense to act as a demonstration for a proposed scheme in Brazil, but was converted to third rail side contact in 1917.

 

[Taunton]

The Holcombe Brook extension was indeed converted to side contact after just a few years, which lasted to the early 1950s when an electrical failure wasn't worth repairing, so back to a steam shuttle for a final year or two before closure. It used short formations of the stock on the mainstream Manchester-Bury line, for the several short platform stations along the way, plus general lack of traffic, hence not running through to Manchester.

 

[Merle Haggard]

There's a record that Aintree yard was electrified on the overhead system although the extent is not mentioned. There was an L&Y electric loco, built on frames the same design as a 2-4-2T, that had both overhead and side contact current collection. It seems to have worked mainly at Aintree but made test runs on the Southport line, according to Eric Mason.

The Holcombe Brook line seemed a bizarre choice for electrification, and on a different system to the line it diverged from. Was it more of a trial?- the Midland LMH similarly seems to have been more an experiment than a line with a frequency suggesting electrification.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

The Holcombe Brook line seemed a bizarre choice for electrification, and on a different system to the line it diverged from. Was it more of a trial?

Yes, believe the 3500v DC overhead system on the Holcombe Brook branch, which was operational in 1913, was essentially a trial, requested, and paid for, by the Dick, Kerr company based in Preston (and so preceded the Manchester-Bury 1200v DC third rail electrification by a few years) but, as discussed above, didn't last all that long as it was subsequently converted to 1200v DC third rail (side contact) in 1917 and was operational in 1918.

 

[Helvellyn]

It's interesting to speculate whether if Manchester-Bury had been done using standard top contact third rail whether post-Grouping the LMS might have progressed it further. Also wonder if BR considered changing or de-electeifying the line before purchasing the unique Class 504 units.

 

[contrex]

Yes, believe the 3500v DC overhead system on the Holcombe Brook branch, which was operational in 1913, was essentially a trial, requested, and paid for, by the Dick, Kerr company based in Preston (and so preceded the Manchester-Bury 1200v DC third rail electrification by a few years) but, as discussed above, didn't last all that long as it was subsequently converted to 1200v DC third rail (side contact) in 1917 and was operational in 1918.

I think I read somewhere that Dick, Kerr wanted a test track for the equipment they were to supply for a contract in Brazil. Not sure if it actually came about.

 

[Merle Haggard]

Yes, believe the 3500v DC overhead system on the Holcombe Brook branch, which was operational in 1913, was essentially a trial, requested, and paid for, by the Dick, Kerr company based in Preston (and so preceded the Manchester-Bury 1200v DC third rail electrification by a few years) but, as discussed above, didn't last all that long as it was subsequently converted to 1200v DC third rail (side contact) in 1917 and was operational in 1918.

That's interesting, and makes sense. I found out about the line when reading an old, borrowed copy of Model Railway News which had a tiny photo, soot and whitewash of the time, captioned 'electric train on the Holcombe Brook branch' with, frustratingly, no further details. Just shattered my impression that a line that was electrified would never be closed, and I developed a fascination for those that were - still seems bizarre to me that you could once catch a '2-BIL' at then very rural Horsted Keynes...

It's interesting to speculate whether if Manchester-Bury had been done using standard top contact third rail whether post-Grouping the LMS might have progressed it further. Also wonder if BR considered changing or de-electeifying the line before purchasing the unique Class 504 units.

In the early sixties, the electric service was every 20 minutes. But Bury - Bacup was also even interval - half hourly (dmu I think), I wonder why consideration was never given to extension of electrification. I've been told (by someone on the E.L.R.) there's suggestions about extending the tram that way because of, he said, some heavy congestion crossing a motorway somewhere along there. Just odd that one section became a high frequency modern tramway and the other bit closed. The latter did mean that the steam railway had a connection to easy public transport, though - I recall there original plan was Helmshore area.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

I think I read somewhere that Dick, Kerr wanted a test track for the equipment they were to supply for a contract in Brazil. Not sure if it actually came about.

Reckon it was done so that the Dick, Kerr firm would be able to submit a tender. As you say, not sure if they ever got the business. Can't see anything in the press at the time of the announcement (end March 1912) mentioning a Brazil connection, but it does seem entirely plausible.

 

[contrex]

Reckon it was done so that the Dick, Kerr firm would be able to submit a tender. As you say, not sure if they ever got the business. Can't see anything in the press at the time of the announcement (end March 1912) mentioning a Brazil connection, but it does seem entirely plausible.

I found this item in a list of 'new share issues' in a publication called 'The Brazilian Review' (Rio de janiero, April 11th, 1911). I did read somewhere else that no dividends were paid on shares of that railway from 1914 onwards, and it is a cliché of fiction of that time that people lost all their savings in South American railway shares. Must have happened a lot.

The Itabira Iron Ore Company Ltd. has been registered in London with a capital of $2,000,000 to develop the iron ore deposits on the Company's property in the State
of Minas Geraes. Hand in had with this venture go the electrification of the Victoria and Minas Railway and the improvement of the Port of Victoria. We understand that
the electrification of the railway in question will be contracted with Messrs. Dick Kerr and the Port of Victoria with Messrs. C. H. Walker & Co., both guarantees for prompt execution of the different works.

The railway still exists, but the pictures I've seen don't seem to show any electrification equipment or the remnants of it. Called in Portuguese Estrada de Ferro Vitória a Minas or EFVM.

I do imagine that events of 1914 might have interrupted an awful lot of plans world wide.

 

[etr221]

My understanding is that the L&Y did have intention of further electrification out of Manchester - to Oldham, Rochdale, etc. but I don't know details, which would have used same system as Manchester-Bury: whether there was any thought going further, over the Pennines, I don't know.

I think the Holcombe Brook electrification was done on the cheap, with no new sub-station, so limiting the train lengths (number of power cars) that could be run.

There was a project post war - in the 1920s - for electrification of the LNWR line from Crewe to Carlisle, for which some detils have been published - can't recall whether it was LNWR, LNWR+L&Y or LMSR, or quite how far it got (not that is was very far). I think 1500v dc oh - but either that or the contemporary NER York-Newcastle proposal did look at 1500dc third rail (side or bottom contact)

One of the American interurban lines did try 3kV dc third rail (don't recall which contact surface) for its out of town section, but it was not judged a success.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

I think the Holcombe Brook electrification was done on the cheap, with no new sub-station, so limiting the train lengths (number of power cars) that could be run.

Martin Bairstow's "The East Lancashire Railway" (1993 book) mentions that when the Bury-Holcombe Brook branch was re-electrified at 1200v DC, the sub-station at Holcombe Brook was out of action for a period, and so a work-around solution had to be implemented. Can't imagine that the branch line was all that busy anyway.

 

[Taunton]

One of the American interurban lines did try 3kV dc third rail (don't recall which contact surface) for its out of town section, but it was not judged a success.

I had read there was a Michigan interurban that was built 3rd rail at 2,400V DC, but that indeed didn't work out (possibly too much current leakage in snow/wet weather), so it was cut back to 1,200V DC.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

It's interesting to speculate whether if Manchester-Bury had been done using standard top contact third rail whether post-Grouping the LMS might have progressed it further. Also wonder if BR considered changing or de-electeifying the line before purchasing the unique Class 504 units.

The L + Y Board did seriously consider reviving its Oldham Loop scheme in 1920, but the merger with the LNWR and then the Grouping intervened. After that, Oldham was badly affected by the Depression and the severe downturn in the cotton industry. The LMS choose instead to invest in the more promising areas - the Altrincham scheme (jointly with the LNER) at 1500V DC overhead (1931) and the Wirral scheme with standard third rail (1938).

As for BR, a fairly simple modification to a standard EMU was probably the easiest option rather than converting the line to standard third rail or even 25kV AC overhead. If the old units had lasted a few years longer I suspect the line would have been de-electrified like Tyneside. Unbelievably, the Bury line was even listed for closure in the 'Beeching Report'.

 

[norbitonflyer]

As for BR, a fairly simple modification to a standard EMU was probably the easiest option rather than converting the line to standard third rail or even 25kV AC overhead.

Special shoe gear, and connecting the c600V motors in series instead of parallel, would do it. The units had similar design to 2EPBs, but with a raked cab front like classes 304, 305 and 308 (but without the 4 track headcode)

 

[Strathclyder]

Special shoe gear, and connecting the c600V motors in series instead of parallel, would do it. The units had similar design to 2EPBs, but with a raked cab front like classes 304, 305 and 308 (but without the 4 track headcode)

Weren't these EMUs (the 304s/305s/308s at least) nicknamed 'Dinosaurs' in their last years? At least that's what I remember reading somewhere a long time ago (more than likely Wikipedia).

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

I’m not an electrical engineer but I know that 3rd rail systems suffer problems with current return which is done via the running rails. Leakage into surrounding structures promotes corrosion and can cause issues with signalling cables etc. (For this reason the London Underground standardised on current return via a dedicated 4th rail, to try and limit the electrolytic corrosion of the tunnel rings.)

Would a 1200V 3rd rail system suffer from this issue more than 750V perhaps?

 

[Taunton]

The Bury line patronage did fall off notably, especially off-peak, just after the 504 units came along; it turned out too many of them had been built and a good number were mothballed. It suffered considerably from bus competition, and a somewhat off-centre terminal in Manchester, along with being quite short. Instead of doing other short lines, to Oldham etc, which had comparable issues, it would probably have been more worthwhile to extend the electrification up the Rossendale Valley to Bacup, which would have given them a speed advantage into Manchester from further out.

By Beeching's time the service outside peaks was every 20 minutes, every 30 minutes on Sundays. Not much competition to the frequent "normally one in sight" bus service on Bury New Road. It is notable that the current replacement trams on the route address these various problems.

 

[edwin_m]

I’m not an electrical engineer but I know that 3rd rail systems suffer problems with current return which is done via the running rails. Leakage into surrounding structures promotes corrosion and can cause issues with signalling cables etc. (For this reason the London Underground standardised on current return via a dedicated 4th rail, to try and limit the electrolytic corrosion of the tunnel rings.)

Would a 1200V 3rd rail system suffer from this issue more than 750V perhaps?

Probably less, because power is voltage multiplied by current so the current would be less at a higher voltage. It would distribute itself via the various possible return paths (rails or various through the earth) in inverse proportion to the impedance of those paths, so the current in each return path would be a fixed proportion of the total.

AC and DC overhead wire systems also have return current through the rails but it's actually the fact it's DC that causes the corrosion issue, due to electrolytic effects.

And before anyone asks, an AC third rail system wouldn't be a good idea because of the "skin effect", whereby AC current only flows through the outer skin of a conductor - about 10mm worth at 50Hz. So most of the cross-section of the third rail wouldn't be carrying any current, and this would increase the impedance and therefore the losses to more than even the relatively high amounts on a low voltage DC system. There's also very little point in feeding AC at those voltages, because the whole reason for AC is to allow a higher voltage to be supplied to a transformer on the train.

The Bury line patronage did fall off notably, especially off-peak, just after the 504 units came along; it turned out too many of them had been built and a good number were mothballed. It suffered considerably from bus competition, and a somewhat off-centre terminal in Manchester, along with being quite short. Instead of doing other short lines, to Oldham etc, which had comparable issues, it would probably have been more worthwhile to extend the electrification up the Rossendale Valley to Bacup, which would have given them a speed advantage into Manchester from further out.

Most of the route to Bury was in the suburbs of Manchester, but north of there were only some small towns surrounded by countryside, so I would expect the passenger numbers to have been much less further north. Also, the railway was electrifying in competition with trams, which could compete on cost and frequency providing the journey was short enough that their slowness didn't matter too much. Further out, if the trams even got that far, they would have been too slow to offer much competition so the railway effectively still had a monopoly and little incentive to improve the service. This obviously changed when buses and later cars became competitive, but by then the railway would have had much more difficulty investing.

The railway also had to serve the non-electrified route via Clifton and Radcliffe, which provided a convenient way of running through trains from north of Bury fast without getting them held up in the commuter area. So that would have probably had to be electrified too if they had gone north of Bury.

 

[vidal]

I wonder if the Holcombe Brook line is one of the few (or maybe unique) in that it had steam, electric (OHLE), electric (3rd rail) and then steam again. Did it ever see diesel traction?

James

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Did it ever see diesel traction?

Possibly not. Although, having said that, at the time when proposals were circulated to close the Holcombe Brook branch line (in July 1951) it was mooted that diesel railcars might be used to save on costs if the third rail couldn't be repaired/replaced. Other than specials, the line closed to passengers less than a year later, however.