My idea for TPU/NPR

[modernrail]

I think TfN risk being completely taken for a ride here. They must realise TRU and NPR need aligning to become the same thing.

If I were them I would regroup and then try for the following,

Manchester Picc HS2 station above ground becomes a super modest addition to an already grand station. A couple of extra terminating platforms, possibly even an island. To be honest I think most high speed stations globally are pretty naff anyway, reaching for the past, looking to the future and not getting either right. We don’t need to beat the Victorians and so just put something good but modest and complementary there.

2. Lobby hard for the TP line to go into a tunnel and underground station, with line popping back out around Miles Platting.

3. From Miles Platting to Diggle use current alignment. It is fairly straight. Maybe knock a corner off here or there if possible.

4. 4 track Miles Platting to Stalybridge. Did it not used to be 4 track anyway? Dynamic passing loop before the tunnel.

5. Either a new tunnel or re-engineered tunnel, but with Tunnel End sorted out to lose the crawl through Marsden.

6. Digital signalling throughout, possibly 4 track but definitely a dynamic passing loop between Marsden and Huddersfield. Ensure sufficient capacity for at least 8 trains (6 express, 2 all station stoppers) plus 2 freight paths per hour between Huddersfield and Stalybridge

Then run something like,

2 per hour Leeds to Liverpool
1 per hour Leeds to Birmingham
1 per hour Leeds to London
1 per hour Leeds to Glasgow via Manchester Victoria, Bolton and Preston

all vía Huddersfield and Man Airport except the Glasgow which would miss the airport
This would give loads of advantages:

- gets rid of the reversal at Picc for TP
- reduces scale of above ground HS2 station, 1 London train per hour goes underground
- really good connectivity for lots of places across the north
- Halifax and Bradford gain a great link to the airport vía Miles Platting

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If I were them I would regroup and then try for the following......

4. 4 track Miles Platting to Stalybridge. Did it not used to be 4 track anyway? Dynamic passing loop before the tunnel.

Are you not confusing this referred-to 4-track section with that of the Ashburys to Guide Bridge line? I know the Miles Platting to Stalybridge section quite well and offer up the following observations:-

1) ... The operational level crossing at Clayton Bridge, near to where Clayton Bridge station once was has only ever had two tracks across it.

2) ... Droylsden station was a 4-line junction station. Two lines only were on the line in question to Stalybridge and a further two lines branching off commencing at this railway station on the LNWR line down to the Denton area then onwards to Stockport.

3) ... Ashton-under-Lyne railway station is an island platform with only two lines, one either side.

4) ... Look at the original overbridge works that were built between Ashton-under-Lyne to Stalybridge and see that they were all constructed for just two lines.

 

[modernrail]

Are you not confusing this referred-to 4-track section with that of the Ashburys to Guide Bridge line? I know the Miles Platting to Stalybridge section quite well and offer up the following observations:-

1) ... The operational level crossing at Clayton Bridge, near to where Clayton Bridge station once was has only ever had two tracks across it.

2) ... Droylsden station was a 4-line junction station. Two lines only were on the line in question to Stalybridge and a further two lines branching off commencing at this railway station on the LNWR line down to the Denton area then onwards to Stockport.

3) ... Ashton-under-Lyne railway station is an island platform with only two lines, one either side.

4) ... Look at the original overbridge works that were built between Ashton-under-Lyne to Stalybridge and see that they were all constructed for just two lines.

I definitely don’t know the section súper well, but took a look at Google maps and it looked to me like there were sections where there had been 4 tracks before. I certainly bow to your superior knowledge about that section though, probably the bit I know least well.

I wonder how easy it would be to 4 track as opposed to the NPR proposal to build a new alignment. There does seem to be space in at least some places?

I suspect TfN need to offer up a cost saving of avoiding a new line if they are to get an underground station in Manchester. Personally I think that is a big priority and probably bigger than a new route from Manchester to Diggle. From the thousands of TP trains I have been on in my life, my feeling is you lose way more time going through the mess that is Manchester (and Stalybridge to Guide Bridge) than you could gain from a slightly faster route from Stalybridge to Marsden. However I can’t see how you do that without more tracks between Miles Platting and Stalybridge.

Perhaps if the stoppers go via Guide Bridge a dynamic loop would be enough but it doesn’t feel like it to me.

EDIT: just watched this cab ride from Victoria to Stalybridge and looks like you could mostly 4 track using previous 4 track alignment, using existing railway lands or extending existing railway land but without knocking anything or much more than a car park down. There do seem to be a couple of proper pinch points though so maybe it would have to be mostly 4 track.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I definitely don’t know the section súper well, but took a look at Google maps and it looked to me like there were sections where there had been 4 tracks before. I certainly bow to your superior knowledge about that section though, probably the bit I know least well.

I wonder how easy it would be to 4 track as opposed to the NPR proposal to build a new alignment. There does seem to be space in at least some places?

I suspect TfN need to offer up a cost saving of avoiding a new line if they are to get an underground station in Manchester. Personally I think that is a big priority and probably bigger than a new route from Manchester to Diggle. From the thousands of TP trains I have been on in my life, my feeling is you lose way more time going through the mess that is Manchester (and Stalybridge to Guide Bridge) than you could gain from a slightly faster route from Stalybridge to Marsden. However I can’t see how you do that without more tracks between Miles Platting and Stalybridge.

Perhaps if the stoppers go via Guide Bridge a dynamic loop would be enough but it doesn’t feel like it to me.

The line section between Ashton-under-Lyne and Stalybridge is in deep cuttings in some sections with properties on both sides at the top of the cuttings. How you would overcome that would cause quite some planning headaches.

You can tell how old that cab ride is as the platforms were in situ at Miles Platting station. Also bear in mind that much track rationalisation has taken place between the former Miles Platting and Park railway stations, especially with the west-facing and east-facing Phillips Park No 1 and No 2 junctions and assorted storage siding and running lines through those two junctions.

Did you see the number of overbridges between Ashton-under-Lyne and Stalybridge in that cab ride. All of these were built just to allow two tracks.

 

[modernrail]

The line section between Ashton-under-Lyne and Stalybridge is in deep cuttings in some sections with properties on both sides at the top of the cuttings. How you would overcome that would cause quite some planning headaches.

Agreed, think you would have to drop down to 2 between Ashton and the junction just before Stalybridge, then back to 4 for the short stretch into Stalybridge.

 

[Nottingham59]

There's lots of discussion about possible routes for a new line from Manchester to Marsden in the Speculative Discussion forum. This thread is about TRU progress in the shorter term. See here:

Previous discussion in this thread under Speculative:

Potential options for the proposed high speed line from Manchester towards Leeds

Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/publication-of-integrated-rail-plan-for-the-north-and-midlands.224967/ e[.] I don't believe they have found a surface route all the way to Marsden. Isn't the IPR basically saying "this is the kind of connectivity we need, go and...

www.railforums.co.uk

There's also this one on capacity Marsden-Huddersfield:

How to solve capacity issues between Marsden and Huddersfield?

The capacity issue between Marsden and Huddersfield is similar to that between Ravensthorpe and Leeds after completion of the four-tracking from Huddersfield. The 8TPH of fasts doesn't have to be regular, it can include a couple of longer gaps for a stopper in between. Assuming electrification...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[modernrail]

There's lots of discussion about possible routes for a new line from Manchester to Marsden in the Speculative Discussion forum. This thread is about TRU progress in the shorter term. See here:

Thanks Nottingham59, I will take a look with interest.

I think what I am saying is that I don’t believe there ever will be a new route, and so TfN needs to start thinking whether it is better in the short term to plan TRU to be able to become NPR on this stretch. I realise that probably puts my posts between threads rather than in one or the other.

But there is a serious short term point here. We have already seen money wasted at Stalybridge remodelling and with the Ordsall Chord. Much better I think for TfN to bite the bullet on this now and say, we don’t believe you will ever fund a new line, there is no easy alignment, so we want to beef up TRU now instead over this stretch.

At the moment, our Con of a Government is playing a lovely game and there is a massive risk we end up with TRU only but lacking in the capacity actually needed on key stretches.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I really cannot see it being efficient to re-engineer some very fine but old tunnels only for them to become obsolete a few years later. Why not just get the new tunnels in now/soon?

The old Standedge tunnels will be needed even if a new tunnel is built.
It will have to carry the local services via Stalybridge, and freight.
Any new tunnel will just be for fast passenger traffic from Piccadilly.
But I agree it's still to be determined if a new tunnel is needed.
One of the constraints is the curvature at the eastern end of the existing tunnels and through Marsden, which puts time into every journey.
NPR heading for Marsden directly is one way of avoiding that delay.

 

[Ken H]

The line section between Ashton-under-Lyne and Stalybridge is in deep cuttings in some sections with properties on both sides at the top of the cuttings. How you would overcome that would cause quite some planning headaches.

NLS Maps shows 4 tracks through Ashton station

View map: Ordnance Survey, Lancashire CV.10 (Ashton Under Lyne; Audenshaw; Denton; Dukinfield; Hyde) - Ordnance Survey 25 inch England and Wales, 1841-1952

(Link to image of 1935 25 inches to the mile ordnance survey map of the Ashton area)

 

[LittleAH]

I think TfN risk being completely taken for a ride here. They must realise TRU and NPR need aligning to become the same thing.

TfN are a body that have no authority and are losing funding. The ideas they've put forward aren't realistic to what can be delivered, even if there was a different government. And TRU is now the first stage in NPR, they are the same thing but NPR comes with different goals.

TfN's goals would cost a hell of a lot more money than what is being proposed. To hit the 30 min target of Leeds - Manchester all that's required is a new alignment Huddersfield - Manchester and utilising TRU works. It means Bradford misses out and there is perhaps a good argument about looking at a new section of track from Bradley Junction to Bradford to enable better connectivity for the city, but Bradford's topography is difficult and they'd most definitely need a new through station.

2. Lobby hard for the TP line to go into a tunnel and underground station, with line popping back out around Miles Platting.

At what cost? Unless there's a whole rethink around Manchester and HS2, this simply isn't sustainable. A new government might go for the through station option though, but again - at what cost?

3. From Miles Platting to Diggle use current alignment. It is fairly straight. Maybe knock a corner off here or there if possible.

No it isn't. 30mph junction at Stalybridge. 65mph Stalybridge to Diggle as it snakes through the Pennines. You don't achieve Leeds - Manchester in 30 mins following the current alignment at all.

4. 4 track Miles Platting to Stalybridge. Did it not used to be 4 track anyway? Dynamic passing loop before the tunnel.

No it didn't used to be 4 track.

6. Digital signalling throughout, possibly 4 track but definitely a dynamic passing loop between Marsden and Huddersfield. Ensure sufficient capacity for at least 8 trains (6 express, 2 all station stoppers) plus 2 freight paths per hour between Huddersfield and Stalybridge

ETCS is happening on TRU, work is ongoing. However, you cannot 4 track between Marsden - Huddersfield without losing speed again. Which impacts on any benefits from TRU/NPR. Which is why 3 tracking with a bi-directional track is being proposed.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

NLS Maps shows 4 tracks through Ashton station

View map: Ordnance Survey, Lancashire CV.10 (Ashton Under Lyne; Audenshaw; Denton; Dukinfield; Hyde) - Ordnance Survey 25 inch England and Wales, 1841-1952

(Link to image of 1935 25 inches to the mile ordnance survey map of the Ashton area)

Since that 1935 map period, there has been much in the way of infrastructural change with one major bridge completely renewed. Have a more recent look at the trackwork currently in place in the area of Ashton-under-Lyne railway station. I cannot see matters reverting.