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

[HSTEd]

Don't these layouts stop NPR trains terminating at Manchester Piccadilly and turning back there?

Is that a sensible operational restriction to impose on the system?

 

[Bald Rick]

Don't these layouts stop NPR trains terminating at Manchester Piccadilly and turning back there?

Is that a sensible operational restriction to impose on the system?

You can assume that not all connections are shown!

 

[Greybeard33]

Don't these layouts stop NPR trains terminating at Manchester Piccadilly and turning back there?

Is that a sensible operational restriction to impose on the system?

I think the 6-platform station design assumes that NPR trains do not normally terminate at Piccadilly, in order to keep platform dwell times down to 5 minutes. 4tph Liverpool - Leeds/beyond, 2tph Birmingham - Leeds/beyond.

But I imagine there would be crossovers between the up and down Leeds lines, east of the flying junction.

 

[JKF]

Similarly I doubt anything will terminate at Leeds, there’s always somewhere beyond worth going to, York, Newcastle, Scarborough.
(have any of the modern transpennine services terminated at Leeds? I seem to recall Leeds-Liverpool being a thing in BR times but has there been any terminators say post privatisation?)

 

[HSTEd]

In hindsight I think would have been a good layout for Curzon Street, but would have required two extra tracks in the approach.

Especially with innovations like autoreverse I can see why it might approach the capability of a through station at a fraction the cost.

 

[YorksLad12]

Similarly I doubt anything will terminate at Leeds, there’s always somewhere beyond worth going to, York, Newcastle, Scarborough.
(have any of the modern transpennine services terminated at Leeds? I seem to recall Leeds-Liverpool being a thing in BR times but has there been any terminators say post privatisation?)

Yes. I mean, it depends on what you mean by "modern", but in the days when there were only four trains per hour between Leeds and Piccadilly, the xx40 started from Leeds (around 2004, I'm thinking). This was then extended back to York a few years later, once TPE became a separate franchise.

There also used to be a service from Hull in the evening that terminated on P16B around 18.00, which then had to shift quickly out of the way for the through service coming in to land on 16A. This terminator was then sensibly extended to Huddersfield to provide extra peak-time seats.

 

[MattRat]

Similarly I doubt anything will terminate at Leeds, there’s always somewhere beyond worth going to, York, Newcastle, Scarborough.
(have any of the modern transpennine services terminated at Leeds? I seem to recall Leeds-Liverpool being a thing in BR times but has there been any terminators say post privatisation?)

The only reason it even goes to Leeds is becuase that's the only way in the IRP to get from Birmingham to Leeds. If they actually wanted to upgrade the MML, it would go via that, and if HS2 connected to the ECML (not that far from Nottingham) it would go via that, but since the government have an allergy to spending money anywhere that doesn't benefit London, this is the bonkers route we ended up with.

 

[LittleAH]

Well I was under the impression that this new line would come out just below Rochdale and head into Manchester via Victoria. Which would seem the most logical and obvious, since a new line via Diggle either above or underground will be very expensive and difficult.

Thinking about it now I suspect they will propose a tunnel from Piccadilly curving round northwards, before surfacing just before Moston, running parallel to the existing line to Rochdale before diverging off just before Slattocks, running adjacent to the M62 for a little while before tunneling under the Moor towards Marsden.

Surely if cost is an issue other avenues should be explored. Such as quadding the lines through to Guide Bridge with 100mph running and separating out the fasts and slows. A new bit of track from just east of Marsden to Guide Bridge is far cheaper than going out of the way to the M62.

 

[Purple Orange]

How do people think the NPR line between Manchester & Marsden will affect frequency?

The Trans Pennine Route Upgrade is set to deliver the following:

• 8 trains per hour:
  • 4 fast (42 mins v 49 today; no change in frequency)
  • 2 semi-fast (1 more than today)
  • 2 stoppers (1 more than today)

The NPR line is set to enable the fastest services travel between Manchester & Leeds in 33 minutes, with a total of 8 trains each hour.

1. Should that just mean no uplift in frequency, but simply faster journeys?
2. Where will the new capacity bottlenecks be along the route?

 

[CdBrux]

How do people think the NPR line between Manchester & Marsden will affect frequency?

The Trans Pennine Route Upgrade is set to deliver the following:

• 8 trains per hour:
  • 4 fast (42 mins v 49 today; no change in frequency)
  • 2 semi-fast (1 more than today)
  • 2 stoppers (1 more than today)

The NPR line is set to enable the fastest services travel between Manchester & Leeds in 33 minutes, with a total of 8 trains each hour.

1. Should that just mean no uplift in frequency, but simply faster journeys?
2. Where will the new capacity bottlenecks be along the route?

Isn't NPR also meant to create an additional freight path? Might also create further opportunities for stoppers west of Marsden?

 

[HSTEd]

Well the optimal solution would probably be to terminate all old line services from the west at Marsden and operationally decouple it from the NPR traffic.

This would dramatically accelerate the stoppers over the eastern half of the line in terms of Manchester journey time and make them available for end to end traffic.

 

[Purple Orange]

Well the optimal solution would probably be to terminate all old line services from the west at Marsden and operationally decouple it from the NPR traffic.

This would dramatically accelerate the stoppers over the eastern half of the line in terms of Manchester journey time and make them available for end to end traffic.

How do you mean? Having stoppers from Leeds use HS2 track?

 

[HSTEd]

How do you mean? Having stoppers from Leeds use HS2 track?

The leeds end stoppers would run over NPR west of Marsden.

Although slower than trains running fast throughout, they will still be useful for end to end journeys, for example Birmingham-Northeast.

The Semi Fasts would probably be fast enough to be useful for Liverpool Leeds

 

[Bigman]

Maybe they should go ahead and build the HS2 station in Leeds as it was meant to be. You can then have fast lines heading out past Woodlesford, Normanton (remodelled), Wakefield Kirkgate (remodelled) and then straight across to meet up with the new TPU alignment at Thornhill LNWR Jcn. If you could get a reasonably straight alignment you should be able to get to a good high speed all the way. Plus it gets Wakefield on the TPU map.

You then reopen Normanton to Swinton which will enable HS2 trains to extend from Sheffield avoiding the current relatively slow alignment, and also a link from Woodlesford to Church Fenton for trains heading North. This takes the TPE trains off of the existing alignment all the way from Thornhill LNWR to Church Fenton which means more local stopper trains can operate on the existing routes and removes the need for the flyover at Thornhill. This should also release capacity on the existing Leeds station formation to benefit other routes.

This would also increase the future possibility that the full HS2E could eventually be built in its entirety as some of the biggest engineering bits would already have been dealt with. (Sorry if this potentially strats into other subjects but I do feel it is still related).

 

[Purple Orange]

The leeds end stoppers would run over NPR west of Marsden.

Although slower than trains running fast throughout, they will still be useful for end to end journeys, for example Birmingham-Northeast.

The Semi Fasts would probably be fast enough to be useful for Liverpool Leeds

Sorry, but I’m still not following. You’re suggesting that stoppers from Leeds would continue to Birmingham & Newcastle?

To be honest I can’t see a scenario where there will be stoppers or semi-fasts using the NPR line in to Piccadilly. I’d expect them to continue on the classic line to Stalybridge and Victoria.

 

[HSTEd]

Sorry, but I’m still not following. You’re suggesting that stoppers from Leeds would continue to Birmingham & Newcastle?

Yes, stoppers on the Leeds-Marsden section would continue to destinations like Birmingham and Newcastle, and would utilise the NPR trackwork west of Marsden

To be honest I can’t see a scenario where there will be stoppers or semi-fasts using the NPR line in to Piccadilly. I’d expect them to continue on the classic line to Stalybridge and Victoria.

Not running stoppers over the NPR track does not provide any additional paths on NPR, given that the constraint will not be on the new line at all.

A train that runs as a stopper to Marsden and then fast to Picadilly will still be useful for travel over longer distances.
By trying to constrain stoppers to the old line throughout you throw away NPR capacity and gain nothing in return.

EDIT:

Marsden-Manchester via the old line would be operated as a standalone service, like the Glossop Branch.
Even the stopper stopping pattern between Leeds and Marsden would let a Birmingham-NE train thrash the route via the MML.

 

[Glenn1969]

The TfN board met yesterday. They are writing to Shapps to try and secure other funding sources so they can still get the NPR network they want which includes Leamside and Leeds-Sheffield as well as improvements to Liverpool, Hull and Bradford infrastructure. They still oppose the IRP Marsden route because they think new build in full equals less disruption to existing passengers . But isn't the upgrade happening anyway- what to do with the stoppers is an issue I had wondered about

 

[HST43257]

To not have a non Dewsbury route in from Thornhill to Leeds is criminal imo.

That route should be metro-ised with minimum 4tph local and 1-2tph semifast TPE (not NPR)

That’d then enable a fully segregated* NPR from Manchester to just west of Garforth**

6tph NPR (2 Liverpool to Hull, 2 Liverpool to beyond York and 2 Birmingham to beyond York). Liverpool to Hull and Birmingham to beyond York would call at Huddersfield.

* - With a new Thornhill to Leeds route and 4 tracking on Marsden to Thornhill
** - Leeds would probably be changed up slightly, with 1-2tph remaining of through TPE services using non 15/16 platforms

 

[Purple Orange]

Yes, stoppers on the Leeds-Marsden section would continue to destinations like Birmingham and Newcastle, and would utilise the NPR trackwork west of Marsden

Not running stoppers over the NPR track does not provide any additional paths on NPR, given that the constraint will not be on the new line at all.

A train that runs as a stopper to Marsden and then fast to Picadilly will still be useful for travel over longer distances.
By trying to constrain stoppers to the old line throughout you throw away NPR capacity and gain nothing in return.

EDIT:

Marsden-Manchester via the old line would be operated as a standalone service, like the Glossop Branch.
Even the stopper stopping pattern between Leeds and Marsden would let a Birmingham-NE train thrash the route via the MML.

There will only be 2 tph to Birmingham and 4 tph to Liverpool though from Piccadilly HS2. They will be the fast Leeds-Manc services. I can’t see any situation where a train from Curzon Street will be calling at Dewsbury, Slaithwaite, Marsden and Deighton.

My initial thought was by bypassing Stalybridge, Mossley and Greenfield, could we see increased capacity on the classic line in to Victoria? That section of line sees 4 fast and 2 stoppers from Stalybridge head to Victoria today, while the Marsden-Stalybridge section will be able to take 2 semi-fast and 2 stoppers too.

There could we have the following services?

• 4 fast NPR York-Leeds-Piccadilly-Liverpool
• 2 fast NPR Newcastle-Piccadilly-Birmingham
• 2 semi-fast Hull-Selby-Leeds-Dewsbury-Huddersfield-Stalybridge-Victoria
• 2 stoppers Huddersfield-Victoria-onwards
• 2 stoppers Huddersfield-Leeds-onwards
• 2 stoppers Stalybridge-Victoria-onwards

 

[Greybeard33]

There could we have the following services?

• 4 fast NPR York-Leeds-Piccadilly-Liverpool
• 2 fast NPR Newcastle-Piccadilly-Birmingham
• 2 semi-fast Hull-Selby-Leeds-Dewsbury-Huddersfield-Stalybridge-Victoria
• 2 stoppers Huddersfield-Victoria-onwards
• 2 stoppers Huddersfield-Leeds-onwards
• 2 stoppers Stalybridge-Victoria-onwards

That seems like a reasonable guess, given the lack of detail in the IRP. The additional capacity provided by the new line to Marsden enables 6 fasts vice 4 under TRU.

I think it is possible that either the semi-fasts or the stoppers might go to Piccadilly main shed via Guide Bridge rather than to Victoria. A lot depends on what infrastructure interventions there are to increase central Manchester capacity in the next 20 years, and the consequent options for cross-Victoria services.

The IRP envisages 6tph between Manchester and Liverpool, of which only 4tph will be from Leeds. That implies that the other 2tph might be from Sheffield via the CLC line, rather than the Leeds semi-fasts continuing to Liverpool via the Chat Moss.

 

[Purple Orange]

That seems like a reasonable guess, given the lack of detail in the IRP. The additional capacity provided by the new line to Marsden enables 6 fasts vice 4 under TRU.

I think it is possible that either the semi-fasts or the stoppers might go to Piccadilly main shed via Guide Bridge rather than to Victoria. A lot depends on what infrastructure interventions there are to increase central Manchester capacity in the next 20 years, and the consequent options for cross-Victoria services.

The IRP envisages 6tph between Manchester and Liverpool, of which only 4tph will be from Leeds. That implies that the other 2tph might be from Sheffield via the CLC line, rather than the Leeds semi-fasts continuing to Liverpool via the Chat Moss.

Yes, if there is no reason for the semi-fasts to run west of Manchester, perhaps the best place for them to go would be in to the existing Piccadilly P1-4. Alternatively they could be married up with services towards Blackpool or Chester, and as you point out, the 5th & 6th to Liverpool will probably be coming from Sheffield.

I think the stoppers would be good candidates for running 4 tph around the chord and down the Styal line to the airport.

 

[Brooke]

I think we’ve seen e.g. from Bald Rick that the Marsden to Huddersfield section will likely be 3 or 4-tracked.

How might this be done, since the two-tracking slews back & forward to get the speed up? Presumably it implies the curves basically being straightened out by buying up bits of land at the sides, building new viaducts and so on?

 

[quantinghome]

I think we’ve seen e.g. from Bald Rick that the Marsden to Huddersfield section will likely be 3 or 4-tracked.

How might this be done, since the two-tracking slews back & forward to get the speed up? Presumably it implies the curves basically being straightened out by buying up bits of land at the sides, building new viaducts and so on?

Who knows? There's certainly no detail in the public domain. The government have yet to respond to TfN's request to release the detailed documentation supporting the IRP.

Given the IRP it talking about 8 fast trains an hour between Manchester and Leeds, you would certainly need more tracks to have a hope of running a local service. Maybe they'd be willing to revert the track to previous alignment, slow down the service over the Marsden-Huddersfield and take a hit on NPR journey times.

 

[Bald Rick]

I think we’ve seen e.g. from Bald Rick that the Marsden to Huddersfield section will likely be 3 or 4-tracked.

How might this be done, since the two-tracking slews back & forward to get the speed up? Presumably it implies the curves basically being straightened out by buying up bits of land at the sides, building new viaducts and so on?

Or slowing it down...

 

[Brooke]

Or slowing it down...

That thought occurred to me as well, as my train was grinding slowly through Marsden just now…

But then there is very little journey time saving: what if anything you gain elsewhere you give back here

 

[Bald Rick]

But then there is very little journey time saving: what if anything you gain elsewhere you give back here

No, you don’t lose anything (or very little), but you don’t gain either.

 

[Brooke]

No, you don’t lose anything (or very little), but you don’t gain either.

Seems like!

 

[HST43257]

My default would be to say that 4 tracks is needed on Marsden to Huddersfield, but I think I’d go for 3. This balances cost, speed and capacity. The third track would effectively be a crawlers lane for stopper/freight services out of Huddersfield, and I think stuff in the opposite direction can fit around NPR and just coast down the hill.

 

[edwin_m]

My default would be to say that 4 tracks is needed on Marsden to Huddersfield, but I think I’d go for 3. This balances cost, speed and capacity. The third track would effectively be a crawlers lane for stopper/freight services out of Huddersfield, and I think stuff in the opposite direction can fit around NPR and just coast down the hill.

@Bald Rick has just set out on another thread how the double track from Westtown to Leeds could work with a mix of NPR and stoppers, and Marsden to Huddersfield is shorter with fewer stops. The crawler lane is a good thought, considering the gradient.

 

[snowball]

This seems to be the most appropriate thread as I don't think there's one for the route between Warrington and Rostherne, and this item could be either about that or Piccadilly to Marsden, or both.

I don't usually read The Railway Magazine, but I bought the December issue to see what it says about the IRP. On page 8, bottom of the middle column, it says

Congestion in the Manchester area means that a 40-mile new line will be built between Warrington and Marsden

This way of expressing it is unclear in a way that occurs in much coverage elsewhere (failing to point out that part of the line is the already-proposed HS2 Manchester spur). However the Railway Magazine then continues in words which I don't remember seeing elsewhere:

This new line will mostly be built on disused trackbeds, effectively reopening closed lines.

Is this based on anything in the IRP, or is Railway Magazine using unpublished info, or is it making this bit up?

If it's not pure imagination it could be a reference to the first two or three miles out of Warrington BQ and across the Ship Canal at Latchford, or it could be a reference to the route from Piccadilly towards Standedge mentioned by Greybeard at the end of post #59.