Todmorden Curve

[Hebden Bridger]

Well yes - line speed enhancements were originally part of CP4, so they were by no means new when they were "announced" as part of the Northern Hub - it just meant they had been postponed for two years (or more).

It strikes me that if the good citizens of Burnley get their pacer in 2015, they had better get used to losing it at weekends for replacement bus services at weekends like the rest of the Calder Valley line. (And before Paul asks, yes I'm sure the X43 will be faster than these bus replacements ). And when TPE come calling to use the line for diversions, to lose their service altogether (the last time this happened Northern were allowed a measly 1tph over the route - I cant see Burnley being a priority).

 

[Geeves]

I noticed today they have been messing with the fares on the Vic to Darwen and Vic, Tod to Blackburn areas

For some reason Manchester - Darwen Via darwen is cheaper than a regular and the weekly is also cheaper. Also appeared is Manchester Vic - Burnley via Todmorden, was Hebden Bridge, So hey ho at least something is happening!

Darwen via Darwen though... Very odd

 

[158756]

It strikes me that if the good citizens of Burnley get their pacer in 2015, they had better get used to losing it at weekends for replacement bus services at weekends like the rest of the Calder Valley line. (And before Paul asks, yes I'm sure the X43 will be faster than these bus replacements ). And when TPE come calling to use the line for diversions, to lose their service altogether (the last time this happened Northern were allowed a measly 1tph over the route - I cant see Burnley being a priority).

At the moment I don't believe the current Northern franchise will run any trains over the route. Burnley will most certainly not be a priority given the lack of willing to run the service with the line fully open and no diversions.
I'm increasingly struggling to see the point of running a rail service over the route - the bus company appears to actually want customers, which is more than can be said for the railway.

 

[Geeves]

I dont know if it has passed you by 158756, but the fact there are no trains is entirely the fault of the DFT. If Northern had the trains to run said service they would of been doing already! Northern has no blame in this what so ever and does exactly what it is told by the DFT minions and its pot of money.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

And when TPE come calling to use the line for diversions, to lose their service altogether (the last time this happened Northern were allowed a measly 1tph over the route - I cant see Burnley being a priority).

It wasn't quite as simple as the big bully TPE kicking Northern off the line though- the diverted TPE services called at Todmorden, Hebden Bridge and Rochdale to compensate for the reduced Northern services. Though I'm no advocate of the fast services becoming too dominant on any given route that has a mixture of large and smaller settlements.

 

[158756]

I dont know if it has passed you by 158756, but the fact there are no trains is entirely the fault of the DFT. If Northern had the trains to run said service they would of been doing already! Northern has no blame in this what so ever and does exactly what it is told by the DFT minions and its pot of money.

By ' the railway' I mean all parties involved in the thing- DfT,Network Rail,Northern,Lancashire County council. However, the general air of incompetence and disinterest that the railway has acquired in this project will concentrate on it's public face, which is Northern, regardless of whose fault it was to start with.
Basically, Northern/NR/DfT could have said 'services expected in 2016/17', which could then improve.
What they've done instead is '6months,another 6 months, just another 6 months', when it appears that one or more parties knew they couldn't meet that date.

As far as I am aware Northern would not be running the service if they had the train, because they haven't enough drivers.

Because of the signalling, lack of drivers and route knowledge, and now electrification delays, I wouldn't be at all surprised if in a few months we here of another six month delay and another after that.

 

[Hebden Bridger]

It wasn't quite as simple as the big bully TPE kicking Northern off the line though- the diverted TPE services called at Todmorden, Hebden Bridge and Rochdale to compensate for the reduced Northern services. Though I'm no advocate of the fast services becoming too dominant on any given route that has a mixture of large and smaller settlements.

My comment was tongue in cheek. Anyway only one one of the TPE services stopped, the other ran non-stop to Leeds. All Calder Valley stations, even Bradford and Halifax which lost their fast Leeds to Manchester service, suffered cuts in services which caused some chaos in the rush hours.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

By ' the railway' I mean all parties involved in the thing- DfT,Network Rail,Because of the signalling, lack of drivers and route knowledge, and now electrification delays, I wouldn't be at all surprised if in a few months we here of another six month delay and another after that.

April 2015 will see me celebrating my 70th birthday. I wonder what age I will attain when this service eventually runs ?

 

[Llama]

As far as I am aware Northern would not be running the service if they had the train, because they haven't enough drivers.

Because of the signalling, lack of drivers and route knowledge, and now electrification delays, I wouldn't be at all surprised if in a few months we here of another six month delay and another after that.

That isn't an issue that will cause problems. There is no 'lack of drivers' at Manchester Victoria, what there is is a lack of productive drivers, ie there are a lot of new drivers (and some not so new) that have yet to sign all their routes. The Burnley / Blackburn work will almost certainly be done by Manchester Victoria drivers, training can commence once a firm date for the Burnley services to start has been set. Existing services from Hebden Bridge to Blackburn can be used, the actual route learning has all been planned and costed, extra trainee drivers have already been recruited to cover the effect on depot establishment.

 

[WatcherZero]

Complete blockade 31st January/1st February 2015 for final Todmorden line works, bi-directional service will commence May timetable change (Though Wigan-Manchester was extended to Todmorden using the chord since last May).

TfGM saying Liverpool-Airport electric service delayed into early 2015 but will commence as soon as work completed and before May timetable change.

 

[L&Y Robert]

April 2015 will see me celebrating my 70th birthday.

Post-war youngster!!!

 

[HowardGWR]

Post-war youngster!!!

No, there was another month to go for VE Day and longer for VJ.

 

[L&Y Robert]

No, there was another month to go for VE Day and longer for VJ.

Yes, of course - I remember it well.

 

[Ironside]

Complete blockade 31st January/1st February 2015 for final Todmorden line works, bi-directional service will commence May timetable change (Though Wigan-Manchester was extended to Todmorden using the chord since last May).

TfGM saying Liverpool-Airport electric service delayed into early 2015 but will commence as soon as work completed and before May timetable change.

Finally an end in site!

 

[L&Y Robert]

So the long-awaited track is there, the re-furbed Burnley Manchester Road is there, the intention is there, the will is there but no service because there’s no trains. Well, I’ll go to the foot of our stairs! But I see trains running to and fro all the time, some to Colne, some go to Halifax, Leeds and wot-not, some go to Rochdale - and so-on. With a little ingenuity, imagination, lateral thinking and sheer devilment isn’t it possible to bend, re-direct, re-arrange, twist one or two of these services to do Burnley-Manchester via Tod now and then?
We in Land-use Planning make forecasts about the future, develop strategies, and organise development in a structured and ordered way. We don’t allow the developers to build a lot of houses and then say, “Well sorry mate, nice houses but there’s no water or electricity or bus service or drainage system for this site just yet. It’s in next year’s budget, you see, and don’t forget the period of consultation, public meetings and all that. And in any case it depends on construction crews and materials being cascaded from Skelmersdale. Year after next before you’ll be able to put the kettle on in your new houses”.
No, we don’t do that. We plan it all out so that when the rails are laid, the trains can run on them. Planning, we call it. Why can’t the railway do it?

And another thing: somewhere in the Forum I read about loco-hauled (NOT "Dragged", please) trains being tried. What's wrong with that? They were all like that in my day. If we had two of them, one could do the Burnley-Bolton-Manchester-Tod circular, and the other the same route the clockwise way. There are sidings full of coaches and spare engines they say.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Can't imagine either Network Rail nor Northern Rail would be too keen on either circular services nor loco-hauled services, never mind both The former is a nightmare reliability-wise (especially considering the single-track stretches between Bolton and Blackburn and the busy Bolton-Manchester corridor) and the latter from what I can gather is a pain in the backside both financially and maintenance-wise.

 

[Darren R]

So the long-awaited track is there, the re-furbed Burnley Manchester Road is there, the intention is there, the will is there but no service because there’s no trains. Well, I’ll go to the foot of our stairs! But I see trains running to and fro all the time, some to Colne, some go to Halifax, Leeds and wot-not, some go to Rochdale - and so-on. With a little ingenuity, imagination, lateral thinking and sheer devilment isn’t it possible to bend, re-direct, re-arrange, twist one or two of these services to do Burnley-Manchester via Tod now and then?
We in Land-use Planning make forecasts about the future, develop strategies, and organise development in a structured and ordered way. We don’t allow the developers to build a lot of houses and then say, “Well sorry mate, nice houses but there’s no water or electricity or bus service or drainage system for this site just yet. It’s in next year’s budget, you see, and don’t forget the period of consultation, public meetings and all that. And in any case it depends on construction crews and materials being cascaded from Skelmersdale. Year after next before you’ll be able to put the kettle on in your new houses”.
No, we don’t do that. We plan it all out so that when the rails are laid, the trains can run on them. Planning, we call it. Why can’t the railway do it?

And another thing: somewhere in the Forum I read about loco-hauled (NOT "Dragged", please) trains being tried. What's wrong with that? They were all like that in my day. If we had two of them, one could do the Burnley-Bolton-Manchester-Tod circular, and the other the same route the clockwise way. There are sidings full of coaches and spare engines they say.

Whilst I'm not denying that the ongoing saga of the Toddy Curve is an abject lesson in the failure of joined-up Government that we do so well in this country, I think you're comparing apples and pears in your analogy. You mention planning and forecasts and what-not in land-use planning and ask why can't the railways do the same. It is the job of Network Rail to do that sort of long-term planning for the railways, but in this instance they were bypassed and presented with completed (and apparently unfeasible) plans along with the money from a pot labelled Capital Expenditure. At no point did anyone concerned with the planning pay any heed (or undertake any consultations) with those who were to be charged with actually running the trains. Moreover, having secured the Capital Expenditure, no-one involved seems to have thought about making representations to those who hold the pot of cash labelled Revenue Expenditure about securing the money needed to actually run trains. It is somewhat akin to a Local Authority ignoring the expert advice of the Planners and going unsolicited to a property developer with both planning permission and the cash* to build an estate somewhere on the edge of town. Having bypassed any long-term planning like that, it wouldn't be at all surprising if the development went somewhat awry leading to homes not being connected to utilities (and I suspect it would be even longer before they were served by a bus route!)

The bid was part of a wider urban regeneration project for the area and was comprised entirely of Capital Expenditure. By definition this would pay for the infrastructure, but not the running costs. Planning such a scheme without considering the day-to-day running costs (and who would pay for them) was guaranteed to lead to exactly the situation we now have.

Incidentally, loco-hauled circular Grand Tours are not going to happen, for several reasons:
1: It would require six of them to provide an hourly service in both directions
2: Most of the platforms en route are only long enough for three carriages
3: The timings don't work and a three-quarters-of-an-hour layover would be required somewhere en route
4: Most importantly, there is still no money to pay for the b****y trains to actually leave the depot!

* Yes, I know, this couldn't actually happen!

 

[Ironside]

Whilst I'm not denying that the ongoing saga of the Toddy Curve is an abject lesson in the failure of joined-up Government that we do so well in this country, I think you're comparing apples and pears in your analogy. You mention planning and forecasts and what-not in land-use planning and ask why can't the railways do the same. It is the job of Network Rail to do that sort of long-term planning for the railways, but in this instance they were bypassed and presented with completed (and apparently unfeasible) plans along with the money from a pot labelled Capital Expenditure. At no point did anyone concerned with the planning pay any heed (or undertake any consultations) with those who were to be charged with actually running the trains. Moreover, having secured the Capital Expenditure, no-one involved seems to have thought about making representations to those who hold the pot of cash labelled Revenue Expenditure about securing the money needed to actually run trains. It is somewhat akin to a Local Authority ignoring the expert advice of the Planners and going unsolicited to a property developer with both planning permission and the cash* to build an estate somewhere on the edge of town. Having bypassed any long-term planning like that, it wouldn't be at all surprising if the development went somewhat awry leading to homes not being connected to utilities (and I suspect it would be even longer before they were served by a bus route!)

The bid was part of a wider urban regeneration project for the area and was comprised entirely of Capital Expenditure. By definition this would pay for the infrastructure, but not the running costs. Planning such a scheme without considering the day-to-day running costs (and who would pay for them) was guaranteed to lead to exactly the situation we now have.

Incidentally, loco-hauled circular Grand Tours are not going to happen, for several reasons:
1: It would require six of them to provide an hourly service in both directions
2: Most of the platforms en route are only long enough for three carriages
3: The timings don't work and a three-quarters-of-an-hour layover would be required somewhere en route
4: Most importantly, there is still no money to pay for the b****y trains to actually leave the depot!

* Yes, I know, this couldn't actually happen!

Well put!

 

[edwin_m]

I'm really not sure why the various elements of this scheme haven't arrived as planned, but having worked with them in the early stages I can report that the Burnley and Lancashire council offiers were very knowledgeable about the rail industry and the issues likely to arise. They would also have been very familiar with the convoluted system of local government finance, where I know Westminster approved this funding unusually quickly and the inclination would be to "use it or lose it" even if it wasn't officially time-limited. So I think the alternative to getting the curve and its trains a bit later than first thought, and not quite at the same time, might actually have been to get neither.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I'm really not sure why the various elements of this scheme haven't arrived as planned, but having worked with them in the early stages I can report that the Burnley and Lancashire council offiers were very knowledgeable about the rail industry and the issues likely to arise. They would also have been very familiar with the convoluted system of local government finance, where I know Westminster approved this funding unusually quickly and the inclination would be to "use it or lose it" even if it wasn't officially time-limited. So I think the alternative to getting the curve and its trains a bit later than first thought, and not quite at the same time, might actually have been to get neither.

A most excellent posting that corrects a number of incorrect suppositions about the Local Government involvement that have been floated in past months.

 

[Viscount702]

Having the funding in place to run the trains is as has been discussed different to the funding for the capital infrastructure costs.

So getting it built but with no trains to run on it was possible but far from ideal.

But what I can't understand is why the infrastructure is still incomplete and the curve only usable from one direction. All should have been done when the line was closed because of the tunnel works. They had long enough.

 

[deltic08]

Having the funding in place to run the trains is as has been discussed different to the funding for the capital infrastructure costs.

So getting it built but with no trains to run on it was possible but far from ideal.

But what I can't understand is why the infrastructure is still incomplete and the curve only usable from one direction. All should have been done when the line was closed because of the tunnel works. They had long enough.

Looking back at #1, a NR spokesman in 2011 said it could be up and running by 2013 so how can anyone say Network Rail didn't have enough notice?

 

[edwin_m]

Having the funding in place to run the trains is as has been discussed different to the funding for the capital infrastructure costs.

So getting it built but with no trains to run on it was possible but far from ideal.

But what I can't understand is why the infrastructure is still incomplete and the curve only usable from one direction. All should have been done when the line was closed because of the tunnel works. They had long enough.

That's what I don't understand either. I think signalling was mentioned somewhere, so presume it is some sort of problem with the signalling at the Burnley end of the curve which prevents this end being used. Does anyone know if there are temporary stops, possession markers etc on this bit of track?

I also think it must have been a drop-off that wasn't known about in advance, otherwise the delay would have been announced further ahead. Possibly a question of non-compliance with one of the many standards, only picked up once the equipment was installed on site.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

4: Most importantly, there is still no money to pay for the b****y trains to actually leave the depot!

"Do not ask for rolling stock, as a refusal often offends" could well be the wording on an engraved plaque hanging on the wall of a certain organization...

 

[L&Y Robert]

Darren R says: "Incidentally, loco-hauled circular Grand Tours are not going to happen, for several reasons" and gives the several.

When I worked at Northampton, we had a General Manager who would say, in one of those high pressure Management Meetings and when perplexed by a list of 'reasons why not':

"Right guys, what has to happen to get this project under way - and don't tell me why we can't, tell me how we can".

So, in the view of this Forum, what has to happen to establish a service from Burnley M.Rd. to Manchester Vic?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That's what I don't understand either. I think signalling was mentioned somewhere, so presume it is some sort of problem with the signalling at the Burnley end of the curve which prevents this end being used. Does anyone know if there are temporary stops, possession markers etc on this bit of track?

There's a facing crossover which, I read somewhere, is due for "Heavy" maintenance? re-furbishment? Well, making it fit for purpose, anyway.

 

[spongsdad]

"Do not ask for rolling stock, as a refusal often offends" could well be the wording on an engraved plaque hanging on the wall of a certain organization...

Or better, perhaps, "We've provided the infrastructure and the slots, please make sure you supply your own trains"

 

[Deerfold]

Darren R says: "Incidentally, loco-hauled circular Grand Tours are not going to happen, for several reasons" and gives the several.

When I worked at Northampton, we had a General Manager who would say, in one of those high pressure Management Meetings and when perplexed by a list of 'reasons why not':

"Right guys, what has to happen to get this project under way - and don't tell me why we can't, tell me how we can".

That requires someone in the organisation to have that attitude. No-one's likely to as there's no money in it for them.

Besides the senior staff at Northern had rather expected their franchise to have ended by now.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

The problem, perhaps, is one of openness and honesty to the public.

If the capital resources were there but not the revenue, why not be honest with the public instead of stringing them along?

Being economical with the truth / facts, leads to suspicion, rumour and conspiracy theories.

I see no reason why, today, a date cannot be given for the introduction of the services. That should then focus minds and drive project management to meet that deadline.

Not having a deadline generally means no action, as everyone is rather busy and there are competing activities which do have deadlines, so they get delivered first.

 

[edwin_m]

That requires someone in the organisation to have that attitude. No-one's likely to as there's no money in it for them.

Besides the senior staff at Northern had rather expected their franchise to have ended by now.

It also rather depends on the chosen solution being a suitable one in the first place.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I noticed today that the 20mph restriction through Holme Tunnel has been removed.
That means trains are passing through at the 45mph of the rest of the line (nothing to write home about!).
It might have happened weeks ago, but I don't recall it being mentioned here.
The new station building at Burnley Manchester Road still appears to be behind a construction fence.