Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates, CP6

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
4,927
Location
Dalton Georgia USA
Well it was suggested in the Manchester - Liverpool Electrification thread that we have a seperate Transpennine thread. Now I know that Manchester - Stalybridge is actually part of the Northern Hub project , but to me, haulage bashing Peaks in the 1970s-1980s - Liverpool-Newcastle was classed as Transpennine. What I mean is the electrification of the Manchester- York section - OK Colton Junction. So the Stalybridge bit is included.

Two press releases to start the thread.

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.c...chester-Stalybridge-electrification-1e3f.aspx

http://www.tpexpress.co.uk/about-ftpe/news-centre/2013/07/northwest-electrification-on-plan/
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
7,762
So with Windemere announced... how long till Hull gets announced :)

On positive news, I hear Standedge tunnel spare bore re-openings are being reinvestigated as part of the project to boost Transpennine freight capabilities. Which also helps Hull's case as they want to expand the port and they need more rail capacity to get it out!
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
5,636
Location
South Wales
So with Windemere announced... how long till Hull gets announced :)

On positive news, I hear Standedge tunnel spare bore re-openings are being reinvestigated as part of the project to boost Transpennine freight capabilities. Which also helps Hull's case as they want to expand the port and they need more rail capacity to get it out!
Hull will more than likely be getting electrified especially if First Group offer to pay for it in exchange for being given paths after 2016 is taken up
 

aformeruser

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
30,637
So with Windemere announced... how long till Hull gets announced :)
Windermere was included in the recent spending review as a CP5 project 'subject to a satisfactory business case being proven.' Hull looks set to be a CP6 project at the moment and unlike Windermere and Middlesbrough is set to retain an hourly diesel service to Manchester.
 

phil8715

Member
Joined
19 Aug 2007
Messages
266
No Preston-Colne electrification I see. That line has had hardly any investment since the 1980's. Still got the same trains we had since before privatisation.
 

aformeruser

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
30,637
No Preston-Colne electrification I see. That line has had hardly any investment since the 1980's. Still got the same trains we had since before privatisation.
A lot of lines will have a higher benefit:cost ratio for electrification than Preston-Colne.

Most Northern Rail services are operated using DMUs from the 1980s.
 

phil8715

Member
Joined
19 Aug 2007
Messages
266
jcollins:1531232 said:
No Preston-Colne electrification I see. That line has had hardly any investment since the 1980's. Still got the same trains we had since before privatisation.
A lot of lines will have a higher benefit:cost ratio for electrification than Preston-Colne.

Most Northern Rail services are operated using DMUs from the 1980s.
That's certainly true of Preston to Colne line.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
26,543
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
No Preston-Colne electrification I see. That line has had hardly any investment since the 1980's. Still got the same trains we had since before privatisation
The Calder Valley line, as a through Transpennine route, is far more worthy of electrification than the Preston to Colne branch line which sees all its Preston to Colne services confined to the west side of the Pennines. However, I would make the exception for a Preston- Blackburn -Copy Pit Line electrified link to Hebden Bridge as an electrified adjunct to an electrified Calder Valley Transpennine line.
 

lancastrian

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2010
Messages
516
Location
Bolton, Lancashire
The Calder Valley line, as a through Transpennine route, is far more worthy of electrification than the Preston to Colne branch line which sees all its Preston to Colne services confined to the west side of the Pennines. However, I would make the exception for a Preston- Blackburn -Copy Pit Line electrified link to Hebden Bridge as an electrified adjunct to an electrified Calder Valley Transpennine line.
Your quite right Paul, but with the re-opening of the Todmorden curve, then unless the Copy Pit line is Electrified, DMU's will be under the wires all the way from Manchester to Todmorden, plus the Preston to Gannow Junction section is part of the Transpennine services from Blackpool to York.

So what is really needed is for the Calder Valley route plus the East Lancashire lines from Preston to Colne/Todmorden being electrified. As that is being done, I will get onto one of my 'pet' projects' and say that the line from Gannow Junction to Clone needs to be redoubled and the line from Colne to Skipton, re-opened and electrified as well.

This would then give four Transpenine electric routes.
  • Standedge
  • Calder Valley
  • East Lancashire - Aire Valley
  • Copy Pit.

All that would remain would be to reverse the daft decision of closing the Woodhead route and re-open as an electrified route as well.

PS. Just noticed you mention the electrifying of the Preston - Copy Pit route.

(Note to self, make appointment for eye test!)
 
Last edited:

HowardGWR

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2013
Messages
4,888
Forgive a stranger's possible ignorance, but were not the multiple rail links across the Pennines mainly to do with shifting coal rather than people? Could it not be an irony that the M62 road created demand for people links that TPE type services can now exploit? In this regard, perhaps the GC Woodhead coal road could be needed eventually?
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
4,927
Location
Dalton Georgia USA
Forgive a stranger's possible ignorance, but were not the multiple rail links across the Pennines mainly to do with shifting coal rather than people? Could it not be an irony that the M62 road created demand for people links that TPE type services can now exploit? In this regard, perhaps the GC Woodhead coal road could be needed eventually?
Possibly. With lines and junctions around Manchester all electrified and also the area around Sheffield shortly to be electrified, the case for Hope Valley route is certainly increased, but Woodhead reopening would certainly have to be in the future after most electrification of the country is done.
 

brompton rail

Member
Joined
28 Oct 2009
Messages
750
Location
Doncaster
Possibly. With lines and junctions around Manchester all electrified and also the area around Sheffield shortly to be electrified, the case for Hope Valley route is certainly increased, but Woodhead reopening would certainly have to be in the future after most electrification of the country is done.
How could Woodhead be re-opened given that National Grid have their cables in the 1950's tunnel?
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
5,636
Location
South Wales
How could Woodhead be re-opened given that National Grid have their cables in the 1950's tunnel?
Rail magazine did do a good article last year I think on re-opening the woodhead route. I think it did state that it would be possible to re-open the line if there is demand.

I think National grid also mentioned that the cables could be moved if the line is going to be re-opened.

The Woodhead route is one line that should be re-opened as it provide a good link and should not really have been closed in the 1st place
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
11,594
And if you have to bore a new tunnel you might as well make it far longer.
ie. a Pennine Base Tunnel.

And woodhead has no case for reopening, it offers nothing that the Hope Valley route can't offer at far lower cost.
 

brompton rail

Member
Joined
28 Oct 2009
Messages
750
Location
Doncaster
Rail magazine did do a good article last year I think on re-opening the woodhead route. I think it did state that it would be possible to re-open the line if there is demand.

I think National grid also mentioned that the cables could be moved if the line is going to be re-opened.

The Woodhead route is one line that should be re-opened as it provide a good link and should not really have been closed in the 1st place
Only by stringing the cables over the top of the moor above the tunnels. Imagine the public outcry!

Hope Valley is not at capacity, it leads directly into Sheffield Midland, and via the Dore Curve directly towards Chesterfield. Linking the Woodhead line into Sheffield Midland would be a huge engineering task, and please no suggestions that Victoria could re-open. Sheffield does not need two unconnected railway stations.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
11,594
Well presumably you could just reopen the line west of Penistone and run via that line into Sheffield Midland.
But either way that is stupid compared to upgrades/electrification of the Hope Valley.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
26,543
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
I think National Grid also mentioned that the cables could be moved if the line is going to be re-opened.
Would there be a major problem with a reduced electricity supply during the process of the removal of these particular cables from the tunnel system and what would be the main problems to be faced in relocating them, noting the type of surface terrain in the area ?
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
5,636
Location
South Wales
Would there be a major problem with a reduced electricity supply during the process of the removal of these particular cables from the tunnel system and what would be the main problems to be faced in relocating them, noting the type of surface terrain in the area ?
I don't know I am just qouting what I read. Perhaps it will be more major than we think as well as being very expensive.
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
4,927
Location
Dalton Georgia USA
Well so far, I think the majority of us agree, if we could get the Hope Valley line electrified that would be a huge step in the right direction for Trans-Pennine travel along with Stalybridge - Huddersfield etc. Woodhead route is realistically "pie-in-the-sky".
 
Last edited:

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
19,142
Location
Nottingham
Would there be a major problem with a reduced electricity supply during the process of the removal of these particular cables from the tunnel system and what would be the main problems to be faced in relocating them, noting the type of surface terrain in the area ?
Presumably you'd build the new cables and then switch over from the old to the new. The National Grid is designed to cope with outages on individual legs by re-configuring other cable routes nearby.

If they had to they could probably move the cables back into one or both of the single line tunnels, possibly inserting a concrete lining first if the stonework is deteriorating. Or just build a new tunnel of suitable diameter.

Like others I don't see the Woodhead line as having much value for Manchester-Sheffield traffic. It might have been useful if we had decided to revive the Great Central for freight as proposed by Central Railway, in which case it would have made the connection to Manchester and Liverpool. However the decision to build HS2 and release capacity for freight on the WCML probably puts paid to that one.

As a long shot, building a few miles of new alignment to the east of Woodhead would connect it to the Barnsley line near Darton or even to the HS2 Leeds route. This could create an alternative for Manchester-Leeds route where the real Transpennine capacity problem lies, but it might be too indirect to be of much use.
 

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
5,005
Only by stringing the cables over the top of the moor above the tunnels. Imagine the public outcry!

Hope Valley is not at capacity, it leads directly into Sheffield Midland, and via the Dore Curve directly towards Chesterfield. Linking the Woodhead line into Sheffield Midland would be a huge engineering task, and please no suggestions that Victoria could re-open. Sheffield does not need two unconnected railway stations.
The problem with the Hope Valley line is the presence of the stopping trains which make it difficult to add any more express services, except during the off-peak hours on Monday to Friday when the stopping trains run every 2 hours.

From Sheffield, a stopping train departs immediately after a TPE service to Manchester. By the time the stopper reaches New Mills South junction, the following East Midland Norwich - Liverpool service is only a few minutes behind it.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
26,543
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
The Hope Valley line stopping services sees essential rail transport links being maintained between settlements as well as enabling visitors to access the great natural facilities in the area.

Remember what happened to all the railway stations that used to be situated between Preston and Lancaster which were all closed to facilitate a fast line service,
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
11,594
Electrification would improve the stopper's performance significantly, allowing flighting of express services as required.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
19,142
Location
Nottingham
The Northern Hub was looking at overtaking facilities on the Hope Valley but I don't know if they have decided what (if anything) is needed, apart from doubling through Dore.
 

Invincibles

Member
Joined
12 Jul 2009
Messages
511
Location
Suzhou, Jiangsu, China
If there was a way to be dictatorial about it then I would love to see a HS route running east from Manchester to a delta junction with the eastern arm to allow fast services to Leeds and Sheffield.

The problems begin in Manchester where presumably the line would take the spare alignments past Guide Bridge - but this would chop off Guide Bridge to Stalybridge (not a massive loss, and could be replaced with a light shuttle to a new platform on the goods yard with passengers crossing HS on a footbridge to join other services.

From there it would have to be a tunnel as the old Woodhead route is two track and there does not seem to be an obvious bit of land to squeeze a surface line through. Running pretty much underneath the M67 could work.

Into the peaks I see no reason to surface, since it is a nice area for walking and the Woodhead route allows flat walking suitable for more people. Tunnels are expensive but it would be a shame to lose the Woodhead paths.

Out the other side I am not really sure, but would hope it was possible to build on the surface with short tunnels towards Barnsley where the delta would be. This might meet opposition but again I think the overall consideration of the route could be used to win out. Again needs a bit of "greater good" thinking.

I dont know the distance that would make it from Manchester to Leeds or Sheffield, but I guess it can not be too far over 50 miles meaning a high speed train should be able to do it in 30 minutes station to station non stop.

With potential extensions to Newcastle it could be quite a game changer for the business layout of the North East.

Entering further into fantasy we might see services extended to the airport with connections to the big flights to Dubai or America - working with the major airlines could offer real benefits to the North East (who do not have the connections that Manchester offers)

While all that is complete fantasy as NIMBYs would ruin it it probably does feedback into the topic of TPE electrification, since such a plan would allow the services through Huddersfield to provide turn up and go frequencies for most of the main settlements on the line given better acceleration from the EMUS. It would also render electrifying Guide Bridge to Stalybridge pointless.
 

pablo

Member
Joined
30 Apr 2010
Messages
606
Location
53N 3W The blue planet
Whichever tunnel(s) the cables are in, NG was prepared to shift the cables to the other tunnels. No need to go over the top. Doing this sort of thing all the time. Beefs up the network while they're at it. :o
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
26,543
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
The problems begin in Manchester where presumably the line would take the spare alignments past Guide Bridge - but this would chop off Guide Bridge to Stalybridge (not a massive loss), and could be replaced with a light shuttle to a new platform on the goods yard with passengers crossing HS on a footbridge to join other services.
This suggestion appears to overlook the projected future intensive use of this stretch of line by the electrified services from Manchester Piccadilly bay platforms to Leeds, that are part of the railway vision of recent major projects in the North of England.
 
Last edited:

Top