Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates, CP6

Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Philip Phlopp

Established Member
Joined
31 May 2015
Messages
2,892
Last I heard, TfN wanted to prioritise electrification of Leeds to Hull as the first stage of NPR. I think this is because it's a relatively easy section to do without much interface to things that haven't been planned/agreed yet, and for the political benefits of doing something for Hull where there hasn't been much rail investment recently.
Just that sodding swing bridge to deal with, Grade II listed and it'll need a lot of OLE structure on it...

Re the GWML, it's all in the RIA Electrification Cost Challenge, here: https://www.nsar.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/RIAECC.pdf

The interesting part for the Trans-Pennine Electrification is how many of the so called "lessons learnt" turn out to be "lessons destined to be forgotten" ....
Which of the GWEP lessons learnt do you think are being forgotten on the TPU ?
 

Nottingham59

Member
Joined
10 Dec 2019
Messages
77
Location
Nottingham
Which of the GWEP lessons learnt do you think are being forgotten on the TPU ?
I don't know enough about the TPU to be able to say, but it is a recurring issue on this forum that the stop-start nature of electrification in the UK results in the loss of knowledge and experience, so makes the forgetting of lessons learnt all too likely.

I was very struck by a line in the RIA report (p43): "It says something about the ability of the rail industry to forget hard won experience that the ECML lessons learnt included “The importance of obtaining listed building and other permissions was not appreciated at the outset”.

This just made me wonder what lessons might be being forgotten in TPU electrification.
 

SuperNova

Member
Joined
12 Dec 2019
Messages
254
Location
The North
The electrification works are several years away, even for the section between Colton Junction and Church Fenton, they'll be taking place in late 2021 through to early 2022 (from memory). It's also worth noting that COVID restrictions slow down engineering works too.
They're not as far as way as people think. Just need the green light from the treasury.
 

Ianno87

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
8,954
Surely you're not saying that a short curve between the ECML and the Leeds-Hull route would be left unwired if the latter was electrified?!
Now that *would* be nuts to electrify Leeds-Selby and not electrify the chords at Hambleton.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
19,344
Location
Nottingham
They're not as far as way as people think. Just need the green light from the treasury.
That's a rather big obstruction, and even if it was granted tomorrow there would still have to be design contracts let, surveys and design done before any construction work on the ground. Even longer delay if it requires a new Grid connection (which Leeds-Hull probably wouldn't), as the waiting list for those is about five years if I recall correctly.
 

37424

Member
Joined
10 Apr 2020
Messages
472
Location
Leeds
Hambleton to Leeds is only useful for a train heading from Doncaster to Leeds. Aside from Sunday diversions, I'm not aware of any train that goes that way. You'd need a half hourly service 7 days per week to make the case for wiring. The scheme years ago was about diverting the London to Leeds trains so they did a loop, pausing only at Leeds for a few minutes. That would be fine, except Wakefield would then loose half it's service as alternate trains would go the other way around. I guess that loss of revenue killed the idea.

Hambleton will get wired once the case is made for Leeds to Selby and on to Hull.
I believe LNER full IET Pre-Covid timetable proposed that the 2 hourly Harrogate London service would be routed that way but of course they need to be Bi-mode to go to Harrogate anyway. I don't get the fascination with Leeds to Selby or Selby to Hull at present surely the priority should be Manchester York. Yes I can understand it in the context of NPR but that's a long way off if it ever happens.
 

Ianno87

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
8,954
NR has form for that though. GWML to NLL and onwards to WCML at Acton for example not wired.
In those cases - what would actually use them regularly? Don't say "freight" as the respective terminals are not wired.

Hambleton would serve an obvious diversionary purpose when via Wakefield is blocked.
 

Philip Phlopp

Established Member
Joined
31 May 2015
Messages
2,892
In those cases - what would actually use them regularly? Don't say "freight" as the respective terminals are not wired.
Chicken and egg - without some of the routes around London being fully wired, it makes any projects at Felixstowe and London Gateway/Thames Haven impossible to progress, but similarly, without the freight terminals being wired, it makes infill around London impossible to progress.
 

StewLane

Member
Joined
2 May 2017
Messages
18
In those cases - what would actually use them regularly? Don't say "freight" as the respective terminals are not wired.

Hambleton would serve an obvious diversionary purpose when via Wakefield is blocked.
Why not freight? Last mile bi mode locos such as class 88 could do the long haul and then diesel in the yards. Suspect that yards will not get electrified for safety but we need to start getting the long hauls switching to electric and small obvious infills should start to be completed
 

Philip Phlopp

Established Member
Joined
31 May 2015
Messages
2,892
Why not freight? Last mile bi mode locos such as class 88 could do the long haul and then diesel in the yards. Suspect that yards will not get electrified for safety but we need to start getting the long hauls switching to electric and small obvious infills should start to be completed
Container terminals have never been wired, the wires tend to interfere with lifting containers on and off wagons.
 

Ianno87

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
8,954
Why not freight? Last mile bi mode locos such as class 88 could do the long haul and then diesel in the yards. Suspect that yards will not get electrified for safety but we need to start getting the long hauls switching to electric and small obvious infills should start to be completed
If you've got a bi mode 88, then there's no point wiring the gaps...
 

takno

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
2,353
If you've got a bi mode 88, then there's no point wiring the gaps...
The gap at Acton is relatively steep slope, and it's straight onto a busy passenger route at the top. I'm not sure you want to be restricted by the power output capabilities of a last-mile engine. While that isn't true of all infill schemes, it is quite likely to be true of any chords
 

StewLane

Member
Joined
2 May 2017
Messages
18
If you've got a bi mode 88, then there's no point wiring the gaps...
It is worth wiring the gaps. You can of course switch to diesel but you will going slower and possibly delaying other traffic. Better to keep going and have all the extra power available if needed.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
5,792
Chicken and egg - without some of the routes around London being fully wired, it makes any projects at Felixstowe and London Gateway/Thames Haven impossible to progress, but similarly, without the freight terminals being wired, it makes infill around London impossible to progress.
The are quite number of similar chicken and egg issues that need addressing with many potential electrification schemes in England, less so in Scotland after some of the recent works.
 

Ianno87

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
8,954
It is worth wiring the gaps. You can of course switch to diesel but you will going slower and possibly delaying other traffic. Better to keep going and have all the extra power available if needed.
On Acton Bank you're only doing 15/20mph due to the various junctions anyway.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
5,792
I

Is this gap the one which prevents class 345s from moving between Ilford and Old Oak Common under their own power, thus necessitating the use of diesel haulage?
yes, but they were expecting to have the tunnel to be able to do it 2 years ago!
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
19,344
Location
Nottingham
It is worth wiring the gaps. You can of course switch to diesel but you will going slower and possibly delaying other traffic. Better to keep going and have all the extra power available if needed.
Plus the risk that the diesel won't start when commanded, leaving the train stranded probably across a critical junction or two.
 

59CosG95

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2013
Messages
4,918
Location
ECM1 79m 34ch
Plus the risk that the diesel won't start when commanded, leaving the train stranded probably across a critical junction or two.
Speaking of - I don't have the necessary major feeding diagrams to hand (why would I?!), but you'd definitely need a Neutral Section between the GWML & the NLL. I don't even know where the NLL is fed from, but it certainly isn't Kensal Green to the best of my knowledge. There's always a risk of trains being stranded across a neutral section, which is very bad indeed.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
19,344
Location
Nottingham
Wasn't TfL looking at this route along with the Dudding Hill Line towards Cricklewood to run trains on?
It was a different connection in the Kew area, to run between Cricklewood or Brent Cross and maybe Hounslow.

The West London Alliance wishes to procure consultants in order to carry out a feasibility study into the case for running a new passenger service between Barnet, Brent, Ealing and Hounslow serving locations such as Cricklewood, Neasden , Harlesden, Acton Central, Old Oak Common, Brentford and Hounslow.
 

Class 170101

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
6,171
(Another) Consultation released today for Huddersfield to Dewsbury

We’re proposing an upgrade to a section of railway between Huddersfield and Westtown (Dewsbury) to deliver passenger benefits along the Transpennine railway.
We want to create a better performing railway that passengers can depend on with more seats, more trains and faster journeys. By creating a better-connect North, this will provide people with more opportunities to travel to work, study or see family and friends.

 

Top