Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[hwl]

I hear what you are saying. So, speed improvements and probable electrification to Stalybridge with all the little infills around Baguley fold Jct. Then York-Leeds and to Selby then Leeds - Huddersfield with 4 tracking Heaton Lodge to Ravensthorpe with electrification. The advantage of this is, the core Huddersfield to Stalybridge can be done by another government.

Precisely - as I said in post 1781 above, much easier and palatable to justify when the "rest" has been done.

 

[AndrewE]

Precisely - as I said in post 1781 above, much easier and palatable to justify when the "rest" has been done.

But please acknowledge that as yet nobody has yet come up with any real reason why it needs to be made any more palatable! Maybe various parties just want to postpone the investment. After all, money is going to have to be found from somewhere to get the Elizabeth line finished.

Which reminds me, I've seen lots of shiny new trains sitting round taking up siding space (just to rub salt in our wounds up here)... any chance of using some of them as congestion-busters on a long-platform electrified urban or inter-urban route outside London? Actually I've realised, there probably isn't a single one. How about shortening a few of them and lending them out instead?

 

[Meerkat]

After all, money is going to have to be found from somewhere to get the Elizabeth line finished.

London is paying for most of the extra. Come back when Northern authorities start offering to raise half the cost of TPU from their own taxpayers.....

 

[hwl]

But please acknowledge that as yet nobody has yet come up with any real reason why it needs to be made any more palatable! Maybe various parties just want to postpone the investment. After all, money is going to have to be found from somewhere to get the Elizabeth line finished.

Which reminds me, I've seen lots of shiny new trains sitting round taking up siding space (just to rub salt in our wounds up here)... any chance of using some of them as congestion-busters on a long-platform electrified urban or inter-urban route outside London? Actually I've realised, there probably isn't a single one. How about shortening a few of them and lending them out instead?

1. Staylbridge - Huddersfield risks delaying the rest of the improvements. So better to get started on the rest which are more defined + costed and will bring benefits to lots more people on more local services on either side of the Pennines than the gap and sooner.
2. If they go ahead with NPR justifying Staylbridge - Huddersfield electrification becomes far harder, but much easier when NPR quietly disappears.
3. The level of disruption to TP services during the works, works are needed on diversionary routes first e.g. Calder Valley, Hope Valley, the tentative Skipton - Colne re-opening for freight etc. which will all take time. To the East and West the are already more diversionary route options for Weekend / Evening closures with less disruption. There are limits to how many different sections you can close at once.
4. We have a spineless SoS...
5. One of the lessons from GW was trying to do to much in the same short period of time.


Crossrail trains - so when would Northern or TPE install the platform mounted DOO camera and the leaky feeder systems to transmit the images to the cabs and win an argument with the RMT.

 

[hwl]

London is paying for most of the extra. Come back when Northern authorities start offering to raise half the cost of TPU from their own taxpayers.....

Yep. it all goes very quiet at that point!

 

[w1bbl3]

If that's the case, it's hardly surprising that Grayling's baulked over it, given the farce with the listed bridge at Steventon! Then again, as Secretaries of State for Transport go, he does seem to have a distinctive lack of vertebrae...

There are ways to deal with Listed Building Consent Orders en-mass if planned at the outset, Steventon IMHO appears to be more case of assuming the demolition consent was a formality then running into local councillors focused on local interests. The route and all associated works should have been dealt with nationally, the "Goring Gap" farce is still rumbling on some two years after the masts went up.

 

[Bantamzen]

London is paying for most of the extra. Come back when Northern authorities start offering to raise half the cost of TPU from their own taxpayers.....

Yep. it all goes very quiet at that point!

Can we please not have another round of North vs South? This thread is specifically about the TP route potential upgrades, not how it's finances compare to projects elsewhere.

 

[CdBrux]

Can we please not have another round of North vs South? This thread is specifically about the TP route potential upgrades, not how it's finances compare to projects elsewhere.

Quite. And good on the two that you quoted for pointing out the error (through ignorance or deliberate) of the person who tried to start that!

 

[CdBrux]

1. Staylbridge - Huddersfield risks delaying the rest of the improvements. So better to get started on the rest which are more defined + costed and will bring benefits to lots more people on more local services on either side of the Pennines than the gap and sooner.
2. If they go ahead with NPR justifying Staylbridge - Huddersfield electrification becomes far harder, but much easier when NPR quietly disappears.
3. The level of disruption to TP services during the works, works are needed on diversionary routes first e.g. Calder Valley, Hope Valley, the tentative Skipton - Colne re-opening for freight etc. which will all take time. To the East and West the are already more diversionary route options for Weekend / Evening closures with less disruption. There are limits to how many different sections you can close at once.
4. We have a spineless SoS...
5. One of the lessons from GW was trying to do to much in the same short period of time.
.

A very good and clear summary. The project has 3billion, has had so from some time (is it 3bn today or 3bn from some past time + inflation?) so lets spend it on the key capacity and speed projects that have the least risk associated and get started!

 

[Bantamzen]

A very good and clear summary. The project has 3billion, has had so from some time (is it 3bn today or 3bn from some past time + inflation?) so lets spend it on the key capacity and speed projects that have the least risk associated and get started!

I'm not sure what the project had been provisionally allocated, but its just worth considering that by kicking some parts of it down the line (in this possible case Stalybridge-Huddersfield wiring), there then runs a risk that the budget might be recast and lowered as a result. This is often how things play out in the public sector, especially where there is nervousness about a project. My fear is that by starting to chop holes in the overall aspiration, combined with the veiled promise of NPR, TP North improvements will continue to be stalled until such time that they are only token gestures whilst the budget is slowly & quietly moved elsewhere. This week it might be Stalybridge-Huddersfield wiring, next week Huddersfield-Leeds, then the following some of the speed improvements, eventually being "Well you are going to get NPR, sometime, maybe.....".

 

[AndrewE]

Yep. it all goes very quiet at that point!

It doesn't, it's just that people benefitting from the status quo don't hear the replies, or just dismiss them.
Pension funds, insurance companies, all sorts of providers of the most lucrative employment (and which would have provided business rates income regionally) have vanished from most of the UK's provinces (except Edinburgh) into the south-east. So a significant proportion of what money is still earned outside London gets siphoned away to fund jobs and almost unbelievable salaries there. Even funding our "public sector" put more high-paying work into the City as finance brokers ballooned to match lenders and PFI deals. Finance that is being repaid out of fares and taxes across the country.
There has been a big net movement of financial and other activity into London, beggaring the rest of the country, ever since Thatcher and all her followers since decided that regional aid merely propped up cases that should have been subject to euthanasia instead...
However this is off-topic and will probably get deleted, unlike comments that provincial investment can't be defended.

Now back to the topic: Still no explanation about why the Standedge section should be any more difficult to wire than any other bit of railway.
The best I have seen yet is that the budget won't cover the whole route, so pretend that this is difficult and postpone it and come back when people have got sick of maintaining feeble bi-modes.

 

[CdBrux]

I'm not sure what the project had been provisionally allocated, but its just worth considering that by kicking some parts of it down the line (in this possible case Stalybridge-Huddersfield wiring), there then runs a risk that the budget might be recast and lowered as a result. This is often how things play out in the public sector, especially where there is nervousness about a project. My fear is that by starting to chop holes in the overall aspiration, combined with the veiled promise of NPR, TP North improvements will continue to be stalled until such time that they are only token gestures whilst the budget is slowly & quietly moved elsewhere. This week it might be Stalybridge-Huddersfield wiring, next week Huddersfield-Leeds, then the following some of the speed improvements, eventually being "Well you are going to get NPR, sometime, maybe.....".

As I understand the project has been allocated 3bn (or 2.9bn) and NR were asked to say what they could do for that money. So not doing something ought not result in the reduction of the money available. What would more likely result in the reduction of things done is significant overspend on one aspect of the overall package.

 

[hwl]

Quite. And good on the two that you quoted for pointing out the error (through ignorance or deliberate) of the person who tried to start that!

I've got rather bored of the N vs S arguments too.

 

[hwl]

As I understand the project has been allocated 3bn (or 2.9bn) and NR were asked to say what they could do for that money. So not doing something ought not result in the reduction of the money available. What would more likely result in the reduction of things done is significant overspend on one aspect of the overall package.

Precisely - In terms of capacity and journey time improvements if you salami slice the entire project by individual route section and proposed interventions (electrification, resignalling, 4 tracking/passing loops, longer platforms, realignments for line speed) then electrifying Staylbridge - Huddersfield isn't likely to feature in the top 15 items. (or 20 items if diversionary route items are added too)

 

[hwl]

It doesn't, it's just that people benefiting from the status quo don't hear the replies, or just dismiss them.
Pension funds, insurance companies, all sorts of providers of the most lucrative employment (and which would have provided business rates income regionally) have vanished from most of the UK's provinces (except Edinburgh) into the south-east.

Actually those type of mostly clerical jobs have been replaced by computers. Just look at Insurance /Pension company head count over the last 30 years. Plenty of those jobs have gone in the SE too e.g. L&G at Kingswood (Tattenham Corner Branch main employer) and Fidelity at Tonbridge as recent examples. Upper Hundreds of jobs in both cases too. And plenty of jobs off-shored too. The UK is part of a global economy which leads to agglomeration with in countries and wider regions (e.g. Europe)

So a significant proportion of what money is still earned outside London gets siphoned away to fund jobs and almost unbelievable salaries there.

the quantity of lower level employment has been reduced which starts to skew averages

Even funding our "public sector" put more high-paying work into the City as finance brokers ballooned to match lenders and PFI deals. Finance that is being repaid out of fares and taxes across the country.

Have a look at where tax take (including employee PAYE taxes) is generated in the UK - you might not like the answer

There has been a big net movement of financial and other activity into London, beggaring the rest of the country, ever since Thatcher and all her followers since decided that regional aid merely propped up cases that should have been subject to euthanasia instead...

it is globalisation and is happening in most other countries too

However this is off-topic and will probably get deleted, unlike comments that provincial investment can't be defended.

I do believe in provincial investment and doing the whole TP job

Now back to the topic: Still no explanation about why the Standedge section should be any more difficult to wire than any other bit of railway.

I usually end up getting involved in projects when they have already gone wrong and end up writing the autopsies.
1. Stalybridge - Huddersfield electrification is significantly less spade ready than the rest. The listed bridges discussion arguments will go on for years e.g. how many over bridges can be saved by track lowering.
2. Stalybridge - Huddersfield electrification is significantly less disruptive to passengers to electrify after everything else is done. e.g. improved Huddersfield - Leeds and Stalybridge - Manchester services can still run while the gap is electrified reducing disruption (bustitutuion requirements which people hate) and The Calder Valley can take the limited number of diverted TP services

The best I have seen yet is that the budget won't cover the whole route, so pretend that this is difficult and postpone it and come back when people have got sick of maintaining feeble bi-modes.

The first bit is almost certainly true or rather given cost uncertainties they can't be sure it will. The key rolling stock impact is making sure the Northern 150s get replaced with EMUs during the next franchise...

 

[td97]

1. Stalybridge - Huddersfield electrification is significantly less spade ready than the rest. The listed bridges discussion arguments will go on for years e.g. how many over bridges can be saved by track lowering.
2. Stalybridge - Huddersfield electrification is significantly less disruptive to passengers to electrify after everything else is done. e.g. improved Huddersfield - Leeds and Stalybridge - Manchester services can still run while the gap is electrified reducing disruption (bustitutuion requirements which people hate) and The Calder Valley can take the limited number of diverted TP services

3. A flagship Government programme could consume the electrification resources and workforce available at the time of the TPRU.

 

[AndrewE]

Actually those type of mostly clerical jobs have been replaced by computers. Just look at Insurance /Pension company head count over the last 30 years. Plenty of those jobs have gone in the SE too e.g. L&G at Kingswood (Tattenham Corner Branch main employer) and Fidelity at Tonbridge as recent examples. Upper Hundreds of jobs in both cases too. And plenty of jobs off-shored too. The UK is part of a global economy which leads to agglomeration with in countries and wider regions (e.g. Europe)
the quantity of lower level employment has been reduced which starts to skew averages Have a look at where tax take (including employee PAYE taxes) is generated in the UK - you might not like the answer
it is globalisation and is happening in most other countries too I do believe in provincial investment and doing the whole TP job

I was thinking of things like the smaller insurance companies that had provincial headquarters, so their directors and senior management weren't focussed only on life and conditions (hence applying their political influence for improvements to life) in London. Agree it's globalisation at work though.

1. Stalybridge - Huddersfield electrification is significantly less spade ready than the rest. The listed bridges discussion arguments will go on for years e.g. how many over bridges can be saved by track lowering.

Still no reason (in fact even less reason) to assert that it will somehow be an unusually difficult or expensive job to do. In fact given the local frustration with what they have received to date I can't see a commuter village being allowed to stop the whole programme... if there was I imagine the neighbouring tribes might well descend and do the bridge demolition to move things on! However on reflection, Saddleworth/Uppermill is a bit alternative and may be precious though...

2. Stalybridge - Huddersfield electrification is significantly less disruptive to passengers to electrify after everything else is done. e.g. improved Huddersfield - Leeds and Stalybridge - Manchester services can still run while the gap is electrified reducing disruption (bustitutuion requirements which people hate) and The Calder Valley can take the limited number of diverted TP services

Agreed

 

[ainsworth74]

That's enough on the North / South stuff thank you, let's get back into what's actually happening in regards to this project. It is an interesting topic but any further posts need to be in a new thread. Any further posts are liable for deletion.

Thanks,
ainsworth74

 

[hwl]

3. A flagship Government programme could consume the electrification resources and workforce available at the time of the TPRU.

I'm very worried about availability of skilled workforce in a number of areas and a number of the contractors for a certain government flagship programme certainly are...
Being too ambitious on project scope and timing will only get messy in the near future as throwing more labour at things as a solution will be tricky.

 

[hwl]

Still no reason (in fact even less reason) to assert that it will somehow be an unusually difficult or expensive job to do.

But not knowing exactly what you want to do in detail adds plenty of complexity and uncertainty with wire runs typically being well over a kilometre uncertainties can prevent you getting on with quite a lot on electrification schemes (or wasting lots of cash on aborted work), not a productive way to work.

 

[AndrewE]

But not knowing exactly what you want to do in detail adds plenty of complexity and uncertainty with wire runs typically being well over a kilometre uncertainties can prevent you getting on with quite a lot on electrification schemes (or wasting lots of cash on aborted work), not a productive way to work.

Agreed, but it still doesn't justify the often-repeated assertion that it will be difficult and hence expensive to do. When it is actually surveyed and designed (and built) it could turn out to be a nice interesting straightforward job, if a bit fiddly. In fact the sort that used to give me most satisfaction. At the end you ask yourself whether you spotted and headed off problems, planned your way round them, or whether it was just a cushy job, but that no-one else spotted it!

 

[Angelmoon]

I was wondering if any thought had been given to re boring one of the single bore Standedge, similar to at the Farnworth Tunnel? That seemed to go pretty well and provided a very large diameter tunnel that could accommodate the OLE. The remaining single bore could be retained as emergency access with cross passages and road access.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I was wondering if any thought had been given to re boring one of the single bore Standedge, similar to at the Farnworth Tunnel? That seemed to go pretty well and provided a very large diameter tunnel that could accommodate the OLE. The remaining single bore could be retained as emergency access with cross passages and road access.

Welcome - I see this is your first post.

What information we have in the public domain is that a number of options were put in front of Grayling with probable costs. I am sure a rebore would have been considered but current information we have is that this option will not happen for the foreseeable future.

 

[Angelmoon]

Welcome - I see this is your first post.

What information we have in the public domain is that a number of options were put in front of Grayling with probable costs. I am sure a rebore would have been considered but current information we have is that this option will not happen for the foreseeable future.

Thankyou, long time lurking and as Im about to start work in the rail industry thought I should dive in.

I would assume that any reactivation of the tunnel would come with its own costs, that includes rebuilding as single bore with lowered floor for OLE clearance.

As for the Transpennine Route Upgrade as a whole I know there are a number of smaller projects that are being undertaken but as a whole is it even likely to entail 4 or even 3 tracking the route? With HS3 or Northern Powerhouse Rail as its now called in the works would a second pair of tracks even be needed?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I was wondering if any thought had been given to re boring one of the single bore Standedge, similar to at the Farnworth Tunnel? That seemed to go pretty well and provided a very large diameter tunnel that could accommodate the OLE. The remaining single bore could be retained as emergency access with cross passages and road access.

Farnworth tunnel is way, way shorter than Standedge... they're also in very different terrain. In theory widening one of the closed bores at Standedge would be simpler than Farnworth (which IIRC did have a bit of a hiccup at one point due to geological conditions being different to how they'd been anticipated)... but the cost would probably be higher than just adding a new 5th bore.

 

[HowardGWR]

Is the fixed rail OLE, as installed in the Severn Tunnel, not an option?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Is the fixed rail OLE, as installed in the Severn Tunnel, not an option?

One would think so - but reading between the lines quite a few wanted it all - FREIGHT with W12 gauge etc. So I do not think that conductor bar as per Severn Tunnel would on its own be the whole solution -if I am making sense?

 

[Legolash2o]

Deleted as I realised I made a mistake.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Welcome!

With HS3 or Northern Powerhouse Rail as its now called in the works would a second pair of tracks even be needed?

Great question: the feeling I get on here at times is that most people tend to forget about NPR or just feel that it is never going to happen!

Although with the Transpennine route to be electrified to Huddersfield, it does look like its going via the Calder Valley. I also suspect this is why the TP route isn't going to be fully electrified.

 

[td97]

That seemed to go pretty well

It really didn't! Have a read over this article and try and propose the same conclusion!
Some quotes include:

As the machinery was bespoke and effectively prototype, a number of early breakdowns occurred... the anticipated daily advance of three rings – or 4.2 metres – was reduced to just one

a second fall inundated the working face with 100 tonnes of sand which had to be removed by hand

the Down tunnel monitoring issued a red alert, a movement of 14mm having been recorded – a 4mm exceedance of the trigger threshold.

That's not to say lessons haven't been learnt, but geotechnical issues such as running sands are so unpredictable (and without consulting a geological map, I'd guess the tunnel is through till of varying degrees of consolidation in such an upland area).
(And thanks for the discussion point too!)