Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[B Box]

The bit by bit announcements of the Transpennine Route Upgrade is rather underwhelming for what should be significant and momentous announcements.

Presumably the Huddersfield to Leeds announcement is the responsibility of a West of Leeds team, whereas Leeds/York/Selby rests with the still silent East of Leeds team.

When they will speak seems a closely guarded secret, but given all the delays and postponements over the years, one might of thought more vocal communication and an upbeat sense of urgency might prevail.

 

[Glenn1969]

Also wasn't the supposed 39 week blockade next year at Batley which is outside the scope of this TWAO. But there has been no announcement about Batley to Leeds either

 

[edwin_m]

The bit by bit announcements of the Transpennine Route Upgrade is rather underwhelming for what should be significant and momentous announcements.

Presumably the Huddersfield to Leeds announcement is the responsibility of a West of Leeds team, whereas Leeds/York/Selby rests with the still silent East of Leeds team.

When they will speak seems a closely guarded secret, but given all the delays and postponements over the years, one might of thought more vocal communication and an upbeat sense of urgency might prevail.

I think part of this relates to NPR.

NPR has proposals to upgrade the line between Leeds and York, potentially including four-tracking eastwards from Leeds and using part of the HS2 route. If a lesser upgrade and electrification goes ahead in the meantime then it might become abortive if these NPR schemes happen. So I'd guess anything east of Leeds is on hold until a decision is made on NPR (which today's announcement of a review of HS2 has probably delayed).

It's a bit different for Huddersfield-Dewsbury as NPR is planned to go via Bradford instead, so doesn't physically affect this section. So this scheme might be cancelled in favour of NPR, or used as a replacement if this part of NPR doesn't happen, or both might go ahead. But it's unlikely to go ahead and then have to be modified later.

 

[Glenn1969]

Think the Transpennine Upgrade will go ahead regardless of NPR which is a CP8 scheme at the earliest

 

[158756]

NPR or whatever we're calling it now is just an excuse to delay things. They need to get on with upgrading the existing line, because that's all that's likely to happen, in any of our lifetimes at least.

 

[Halifaxlad]

It's a bit different for Huddersfield-Dewsbury as NPR is planned to go via Bradford instead

Can we please get away from this assumption that NPHR is effectively one rail line, just because Bradford is supposedly to be served by NPHR services doesn't mean that all NPHR services will go via Bradford!

 

[Bantamzen]

Can we please get away from this assumption that NPHR is effectively one rail line, just because Bradford is supposedly to be served by NPHR services doesn't mean that all NPHR services will go via Bradford!

If the plan went ahead, the alignment of the new route would go via Bradford, so all services using it would go via Bradford. That was always the intention. Whether it will actually be built is a whole other matter, personally I don't think it will.

 

[edwin_m]

Can we please get away from this assumption that NPHR is effectively one rail line, just because Bradford is supposedly to be served by NPHR services doesn't mean that all NPHR services will go via Bradford!

If the plan went ahead, the alignment of the new route would go via Bradford, so all services using it would go via Bradford. That was always the intention. Whether it will actually be built is a whole other matter, personally I don't think it will.

If built as intended there will also be NPR services on other routes such as Manchester-Sheffield and Sheffield-Leeds. But the point I'm trying to make is that the new infrastructure for NPR trains between Manchester and Leeds won't touch the Huddersfield-Dewsbury section, so design and legal powers for that section can go ahead without much risk that NPR will want to change it later. NPR might lead to it being cancelled completely, but not amended.

 

[Glenn1969]

NPR won't lead to the Transpennine Route upgrade being cancelled because the upgrade will have finished before they start building NPR. What it might do is kill off any hopes for the Calder Valley and Hope Valley routes to be electrified if indeed there is much hope of that anyway

 

[edwin_m]

NPR won't lead to the Transpennine Route upgrade being cancelled because the upgrade will have finished before they start building NPR. What it might do is kill off any hopes for the Calder Valley and Hope Valley routes to be electrified if indeed there is much hope of that anyway

Not beyond the bounds of possibility for someone to say it's not worth doing the TP upgrade because NPR will provide the desired speed and capacity benefits. This wouldn't necessarily be true or right - we're talking about politicians here. It could be slipped out as part of a "good news" announcement bringing NPR forward.

A Hope Valley upgrade is included in NPR, but like everything else in NPR it's very unclear what is actually being proposed.

 

[Glenn1969]

The Transpennine upgrade should finish in 2024. Even brought forward NPR will not start until at least 2027. IMHO NPR is just Manchester- Leeds and the alignment suggests it will effectively replace the Calder Valley express services (I believe Rochdale council have joined Bradford in lobbying for it to actually serve their area. Calderdale seem to be focussing on Calder Valley electrification and Elland station)

 

[Killingworth]

The Transpennine upgrade should finish in 2024. Even brought forward NPR will not start until at least 2027. IMHO NPR is just Manchester- Leeds and the alignment suggests it will effectively replace the Calder Valley express services (I believe Rochdale council have joined Bradford in lobbying for it to actually serve their area. Calderdale seem to be focussing on Calder Valley electrification and Elland station)

If the TransPannine Upgrade is finished in 2024 I'll eat my hat. After public consultations, possible public inquiries, consideration of the TWAO then all the costing and tendering procedures 2025 is probably the very earliest likely date. I hope I'm wrong.

 

[superkev]

It surprises me they have used this arrangement. There is already a diveunder at Bradley that brings trains from Huddersfield to the north side of the layout. Grade separation at Ravensthorpe could take the southernmost track over or under* the Wakefield lines for trains from Leeds via Dewsbury. That way the Calder Valley via Dewsbury and Huddersfield-Wakefield could simply switch between adjacent tracks somewhere between these two junctions and avoid any conflict with moves in the other direction. Or for a cheaper option both tracks could use the Bradley diveunder, which was double track in the past, with the two pairs simply diverging at Ravensthorpe with no need for grade separation.

Is the configuration of tracks definite and are reasons for choosing it known?

*The NR consultation mentioned above says it could be a bridge or a tunnel.

Before it was reduced from 4 to 3 tracks a few years ago trans pennine Huddersfield Leeds trains used the 2 track dive under at Heaton lodge. I see nothing wrong with simply restoring this arrangement.
Incidentally the dive under at Heaton lodge was originally the LNWR Leeds new line and was cleverly incorporated by BR when the New line via Heckmondwyke closed. How useful would it be now?
Also, Ravensthorpe Heaton lodge was used by the LMS as a trial of speed signalling with 3 position semaphores.
May be of interest.
K

 

[Senex]

Before it was reduced from 4 to 3 tracks a few years ago trans pennine Huddersfield Leeds trains used the 2 track dive under at Heaton lodge. I see nothing wrong with simply restoring this arrangement.
Incidentally the dive under at Heaton lodge was originally the LNWR Leeds new line and was cleverly incorporated by BR when the New line via Heckmondwyke closed. How useful would it be now?
Also, Ravensthorpe Heaton lodge was used by the LMS as a trial of speed signalling with 3 position semaphores.
May be of interest.
K

Perhaps because restoring the arrangement would not allow the desired speed (because of curvature, clearances)? There's quite a difference between the proposed unbroken 100 from Huddersfield to Mirfield and 100 but with a drop to 70 to pass under and then come up alongside the Calder Valley line.

 

[edwin_m]

The Transpennine upgrade should finish in 2024. Even brought forward NPR will not start until at least 2027. IMHO NPR is just Manchester- Leeds and the alignment suggests it will effectively replace the Calder Valley express services (I believe Rochdale council have joined Bradford in lobbying for it to actually serve their area. Calderdale seem to be focussing on Calder Valley electrification and Elland station)

The whole programme is much wider. See the map on this link.
https://transportforthenorth.com/northern-powerhouse-rail/

Northern Powerhouse Rail would link the North’s six main cities and Manchester Airport, as well as other significant economic centres. It could be developed in stages, making best use of existing rail infrastructure and planned investments (such as HS2) alongside new railway lines and significant upgrades.

 

[AndyHudds]

If they are going to go to the expense of relocating Ravensthorpe station will something be done to increase usage? The potential for park and ride doesn't look great to me but maybe some extra traffic could be attracted. It'll be a lot of money to spend on less than 40,000 passengers annually.

Given its remote location, relocation and a big car park for park and ride would be a boon. Relocation also gives the potential for Dewsbury travellers a commute to Wakefield and the potential for a London service with GC, I'm pretty sure that would increase usage.

 

[ainsworth74]

The discussion about battery tech and it's potential on the TransPennine route was interesting but getting a bit off-topic so can now be found in it's own thread here. Let's stick to what's actually been announced/is happening on this thread (for the most part).

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Before it was reduced from 4 to 3 tracks a few years ago trans pennine Huddersfield Leeds trains used the 2 track dive under at Heaton lodge. I see nothing wrong with simply restoring this arrangement.
Incidentally the dive under at Heaton lodge was originally the LNWR Leeds new line and was cleverly incorporated by BR when the New line via Heckmondwyke closed. How useful would it be now?
Also, Ravensthorpe Heaton lodge was used by the LMS as a trial of speed signalling with 3 position semaphores.
May be of interest.
K

The plan sees the Heaton Lodge dive-under returned to double track as it used to be, though it'll be the slow lines to/from Huddersfield which use it.

The reason it's being planned the way it is is to avoid conflicting moves over the fast lines.

 

[daikilo]

The plan sees the Heaton Lodge dive-under returned to double track as it used to be, though it'll be the slow lines to/from Huddersfield which use it.

The reason it's being planned the way it is is to avoid conflicting moves over the fast lines.

I shudder to think how many weeks closure of all routes that will require! And how Huddersfield will cope with the TPE reversals is beyond me.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I shudder to think how many weeks closure of all routes that will require! And how Huddersfield will cope with the TPE reversals is beyond me.

The old saying about omelettes and eggs springs to mind!

With regard to reversals at Huddersfield, with the current layout and signalling anything longer than a single 185 can only use P4. If the new platforms on the site of the sidings are added first, that will give at least one further platform (two if the new through platform is signalled to allow reversals, 3 if P8 is also altered to allow the same).

With regard to long-term closures, thought will be needed on how to best handle rail replacement buses at Huddersfield. If a few stands at one end of the bus station could be freed up from scheduled bus services, and dedicated to the RRBs, this could form a sort of ersatz-station with dedicated staff (from the railway station) on hand to assist passengers and check or sell tickets. Something a bit better than the situation during the signalling upgrades over the last couple of years will be required.

 

[hwl]

The old saying about omelettes and eggs springs to mind!

With regard to reversals at Huddersfield, with the current layout and signalling anything longer than a single 185 can only use P4. If the new platforms on the site of the sidings are added first, that will give at least one further platform (two if the new through platform is signalled to allow reversals, 3 if P8 is also altered to allow the same).

With regard to long-term closures, thought will be needed on how to best handle rail replacement buses at Huddersfield. If a few stands at one end of the bus station could be freed up from scheduled bus services, and dedicated to the RRBs, this could form a sort of ersatz-station with dedicated staff (from the railway station) on hand to assist passengers and check or sell tickets. Something a bit better than the situation during the signalling upgrades over the last couple of years will be required.

You mean something like the set up at Peterborough this weekend, which is being closely monitored as a case study? (Done by the team who previously handled the Brighton closures in Feb 2019). The work east of Bradley Junction could be phased to ensure there was always a route between Leeds and Huddersfield is open. Delaying the Huddersfield - Staylbridge work till east of Huddersfield is complete would make a big blockade and reversals more palatable.
Ensuring all the 185s are kept will also help....

 

[AndyHudds]

The old saying about omelettes and eggs springs to mind!

With regard to reversals at Huddersfield, with the current layout and signalling anything longer than a single 185 can only use P4. If the new platforms on the site of the sidings are added first, that will give at least one further platform (two if the new through platform is signalled to allow reversals, 3 if P8 is also altered to allow the same).

With regard to long-term closures, thought will be needed on how to best handle rail replacement buses at Huddersfield. If a few stands at one end of the bus station could be freed up from scheduled bus services, and dedicated to the RRBs, this could form a sort of ersatz-station with dedicated staff (from the railway station) on hand to assist passengers and check or sell tickets. Something a bit better than the situation during the signalling upgrades over the last couple of years will be required.

I live in Huddersfield and work in Leeds and travel by train to Monday to Friday. The talk of a 5 year blockade is extremely unpalatable. What will happen? Will Brighouse be used as a starting point for Huddersfield passengers to get to Leeds via Halifax? And where does leave the potential starting of construction on Elland station if there is no through route to Leeds?

 

[Grumpy]

The whole thing is a nonsense. Achieving a 3 minute journey time reduction between Leeds and Manchester Victoria plus a couple of extra paths isn't worth the £3billion estimated cost and disruption.

 

[edwin_m]

The latest Modern Railways is raising the possibility I mentioned earlier, that TP upgrade could be cancelled in favour of bringing the new NPR route forward. If that happened Huddersfield could end up with maybe 2TPH of semi-fasts and 2TPH of stoppers.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Did George Stephenson originally build it in broad gauge then?

I'm pretty sure broad gauge never made it beyond the Midlands (Wolverhampton I think).
Brunel came to watch Robert Stephenson's Britannia Bridge being lifted across the Menai Straits, but otherwise I think he stuck to GWR-land.

 

[AndrewE]

The latest Modern Railways is raising the possibility I mentioned earlier, that TP upgrade could be cancelled in favour of bringing the new NPR route forward. If that happened Huddersfield could end up with maybe 2TPH of semi-fasts and 2TPH of stoppers.

Hooray! At last some common sense has emerged... Let's have an express base tunnel built as a matter of urgency, then we can divert the through services onto it while we upgrade the existing routes.
My vote is for Oldham to Huddersfield as the key-stone core section...

 

[AndyHudds]

Hooray! At last some common sense has emerged... Let's have an express base tunnel built as a matter of urgency, then we can divert the through services onto it while we upgrade the existing routes.
My vote is for Oldham to Huddersfield as the key-stone core section...

No that's not common sense for Huddersfield I'm afraid. Oldham to Huddersfield, what do you mean? Without have to trawl back through the whole thread?

 

[AndrewE]

No that's not common sense for Huddersfield I'm afraid. Oldham to Huddersfield, what do you mean? Without have to trawl back through the whole thread?

Edwin_m said

bringing the new NPR route forward.

For me that means the base tunnel that the region so desperately needs.
"Standedge too difficult," "2-track western approach too restrictive" and so on... so why not side-step both "problems," plus bring Oldham back onto the rail network and make life easier for everyone while (when) the old lines are upgraded?

 

[Glenn1969]

Huddersfield to Stalybridge is not due to be electrified now anyway unless they have changed their minds again. Don't forget for diversions they can bypass Huddersfield and go via Brighouse between Heaton Lodge and Manchester.

And NR wouldn't be consulting if the project was going to be cancelled. TpRU is stated on the NPR map you posted Edwin.

 

[edwin_m]

And NR wouldn't be consulting if the project was going to be cancelled. TpRU is stated on the NPR map you posted Edwin.

Neither NR nor TfN who produced that map have the final say in the matter. Funding relies on central government, and in the recent past they've cancelled schemes far closer to delivery than this one (electrification north of Market Harborough and west of Cardiff). With effectively a new (unelected) government, all bets are probably off.