• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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!

Timeline for recasting Transpennine services (TRU)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Halish Railway

Established Member
Joined
26 Apr 2017
Messages
2,029
Location
West Yorkshire / Birmingham
This thread has been made to discuss how and when the service pattern on the York to Manchester via Huddersfield line will change over the course of the TransPennine Route Upgrade's implementation.

This thread is also likely going to involve discussing how TransPennine Express will reintroduce services over the coming years, resulting in a timetable reminiscent of their pre-Covid offering (I.e. five fast trains per hour between Manchester and Leeds). Although I'd like to concentrate on the central Manchester Victoria and Piccadilly to Hull and York offering which will be directly effected by the TransPennine Route upgrade.

The first change we know for certain is that a half-hourly EMU-operated service from Stalybridge to Wigan North Western will begin in May 2024, replacing the current hourly Stalybridge to Southport service, as well as the between the hours Stalybridge to Manchester Victoria service, although that hasn't run since the start of the Pandemic.

The next significant way I can see a major timetable recast occurring is once the Huddersfield to Westtown works are complete, although I'm not sure when that will be. I hope that once that is complete we will see the introduction of a clock face half-hourly Huddersfield to Leeds stopping service, calling at all stations except maybe Cottingley if White Rose will take most of its custom. I also believe that the Leeds to Manchester Victoria and beyond via Brighouse service would also be accelerated, ideally calling at White Rose, Dewsbury and Mirfield where it will resume its current calling pattern. This is due to the fact that for the foreseeable future these trains will be operated by Diesel Multiple-Units, making them unsuitable for stopping services on a line where Express Passenger trains will take advantage of higher linespeeds.

The main debate regarding the implementation of a half-hourly Huddersfield to Leeds stopper is whether these services will continue to be operated by TPE or be handed back to Northern. I'd say that they should be handed back to Northern and worked by 195s as a stop gap until the line is completely electrified, at which point they could be worked by EMUs out of the same pool as the Leeds to Doncaster and Leeds Northwest Triangle services. If these services remain with TPE they'd have to be worked by 185s until electrification is complete and I don't see why TPE should procure EMUs designed for stopping services.

Apart from that does anyone else have any ideas for what services will work on the York to Manchester route once TRU is complete, when they will be implemented and what infrastructure works would be required to make the operation of these services possible?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Sonik

Member
Joined
7 Jun 2022
Messages
334
Location
WCML South
This thread has been made to discuss how and when the service pattern on the York to Manchester via Huddersfield line will change over the course of the TransPennine Route Upgrade's implementation.

does anyone else have any ideas for what services will work on the York to Manchester route once TRU is complete, when they will be implemented and what infrastructure works would be required to make the operation of these services possible?
The options are quite limited because the end-to-end electrification won't be completed for at least a decade or more. But the wires might get to Huddersfield before that.

So I'd guess that the 185's will carry on for now but over time there will be small improvements to timings due to interventions which may allow a partial recast of the timetable.

If some EMUs are needed TPE could always get some of the 350/2s back now LNWR have finished with them! Joking aside that would probably make sense in terms of training etc. and they are quick which helps with timetabling.
 

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
9,081
I think all the talk of pre covid service levels is irrelevant now. The talk from government is all leading us one way.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
18,517
Location
Yorkshire
I think all the talk of pre covid service levels is irrelevant now. The talk from government is all leading us one way.
That's not necessarily a bad thing to be honest. The original aims for 6 fast trains per hour were always going to cause intermediate stations to be neglected, so perhaps a more realistic plan of 4 fasts per hour will allow for a half-hourly stopper.

The disaster that was the 2018 timetable is still fresh in the memory!
 

Sonik

Member
Joined
7 Jun 2022
Messages
334
Location
WCML South
Lost for words. Wow.
It's not great

I'm guessing the reason for the protracted timetable is the scale of the civils interventions between Heaton Lodge and Dewsbury, which includes a new cutting, dive under and viaduct.

On the plus side works either end now seem to be progressing at pace, on the Manchester side especially.
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
8,111
Location
Leeds
It's not great

I'm guessing the reason for the protracted timetable is the scale of the civils interventions between Heaton Lodge and Dewsbury, which includes a new cutting, dive under and viaduct.
But at least physical work on that section is about to start. Some other sections seem way behind.
 

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
9,081
That's not necessarily a bad thing to be honest. The original aims for 6 fast trains per hour were always going to cause intermediate stations to be neglected, so perhaps a more realistic plan of 4 fasts per hour will allow for a half-hourly stopper.

The disaster that was the 2018 timetable is still fresh in the memory!
I agree but I fear nothing will fill the gap due to reduction in train operating costs. Maybe it's just a negative few weeks round the industry.
 

Manutd1999

Member
Joined
21 Feb 2021
Messages
388
Location
UK
That's not necessarily a bad thing to be honest. The original aims for 6 fast trains per hour were always going to cause intermediate stations to be neglected, so perhaps a more realistic plan of 4 fasts per hour will allow for a half-hourly stopper.

Once the 4-track section east of Huddersfield is complete, there will be capacity for 4x fasts + 2x semi-fasts from Leeds to Manchester, plus 2x stoppers (probably split at Huddersfield) and the extras (Calder Valley, freight, Grand Central etc.). So at that point there could be a fairly major re-cast.

Whether all of that capacity is used is another question.....
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
9,345
Location
Dalton GA USA & Preston Lancs
But at least physical work on that section is about to start. Some other sections seem way behind.
Yes but if you have a total blockade for that section, common sense says you can do other stuff as well. Let’s say you have a total blockade of the line between Manchester and Leeds for work at Huddersfield, you can do work in other sections as well.
 
Last edited:

Halish Railway

Established Member
Joined
26 Apr 2017
Messages
2,029
Location
West Yorkshire / Birmingham
But at least physical work on that section is about to start. Some other sections seem way behind.
This brings into focus the nature of the project - It's 'piecemeal' nature won't necessarily result in piecemeal benefits, i.e. linespeed increases and better performance enabled by bi-mode trains on Express Passenger workings to take advantage of electrification where it exists on the route may only result in said trains catching up with stopping services originating from Huddersfield towards Leeds and Manchester quicker, unless these services can be operated by high performance trains with short dwell times, the only diesel only candidate in the North of England being the Class 195, which is still no match for its electric powered sibling in terms of acceleration.

Realistically, the ability for Express Passenger services on this route to be significantly recast and sped up is dependent on the completion interventions that will result in these services interacting with stopping services as little as possible, the most significant of which being W3: Huddersfield to Westtown. Not to mention projects that would take into account how Freight services would use the route.

That being said, when is the four tracking and remodelling as part of W3 expected to be complete?
 

LittleAH

Member
Joined
24 Oct 2018
Messages
1,148
Lost for words. Wow.
It's not surprising. It's not just a case of wires going up but total rebuilds of sections of track and future proofing for integration with the IRP's version of NPR. Morley station is currently a building site ahead of the moving of the station eastwards, the local stations between Huddersfield and Stalybridge will need completely remodelling.
Yes but if you have a total blockade for that section, common sense says you can do other stuff as wee. Let’s say you have a total blockade of the line between Manchester and Leeds for work at Huddersfield, you can do work in other sections as well.
With the diversionary routes, there won't be complete blocks except when Heaton Lodge/Ravensthorpe is shut off.
This brings into focus the nature of the project - It's 'piecemeal' nature won't necessarily result in piecemeal benefits, i.e. linespeed increases and better performance enabled by bi-mode trains on Express Passenger workings to take advantage of electrification where it exists on the route may only result in said trains catching up with stopping services originating from Huddersfield towards Leeds and Manchester quicker, unless these services can be operated by high performance trains with short dwell times, the only diesel only candidate in the North of England being the Class 195, which is still no match for its electric powered sibling in terms of acceleration.
Rumour has it Northern's order of new bi-mode fleets has been binned off... Not particularly useful with the upgrades going on.
 

Neptune

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2018
Messages
2,625
Location
Yorkshire
It's not surprising. It's not just a case of wires going up but total rebuilds of sections of track and future proofing for integration with the IRP's version of NPR. Morley station is currently a building site ahead of the moving of the station eastwards, the local stations between Huddersfield and Stalybridge will need completely remodelling.

With the diversionary routes, there won't be complete blocks except when Heaton Lodge/Ravensthorpe is shut off.

Rumour has it Northern's order of new bi-mode fleets has been binned off... Not particularly useful with the upgrades going on.
Northern haven’t ordered any new bi-modes. They looked at 20 hybrid class 195’s but with the ridiculous price quoted and ETCS not being an immediate concern it was cancelled.

News on any new Northern bi-mode (whatever the self powered ‘fuel’ is) to replace the 15x fleet should be confirmed in the new year at the earliest.
 

mike57

Established Member
Joined
13 Mar 2015
Messages
1,985
Location
East coast of Yorkshire
The options are quite limited because the end-to-end electrification won't be completed for at least a decade or more. But the wires might get to Huddersfield before that.
I would be very surprised if electrification is complete by 2032 or even 2034, whatever current plans call for. Based on recent electrification projects the omens are not good. May be we should start a thread for people to guess how late and how much over budget it will be when the final section is energised, and then reopen it when electification is complete to see who was right.

The other problem is the current TPE mess, unless this is sorted the improvements are pointless, TPE cannot even run the current reduced timetable. Even if decisions were taken immediately sorting the current mess out it will take time, and add to that a significant period of diversions and changes due to the ongoing works which TPE seem unable to resource based on recent performance during diversions a few weeks ago, and one wonders if the investment should be paused whilst more pressing problems are resolved, as without resolution we are building infrastructure that will not be fully utilised. At the moment the reduced timetable has 2 fasts per hour with a couple of extras at morning and evening peaks, and even this seems to be more than can be reliably provided, with frequent further cancellations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top