Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates, CP6

lancastrian

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2010
Messages
513
Location
Bolton, Lancashire
Rebuilding a Bridge (and a big one st that) is a non trivial task. There will be site compounds to erect, road closures to arrange, utilities to move, lay down areas to clear, environmentsl mitigation measure to install, line closures to arrange (timescale for major closures: minimum 14 months, maximum 26 months). Then when it is done, the site compounds / lay down areas have to be cleared, and restored ready for future use. Only then is it finished.
Fair enough, I was just asking. Also the comments about Health & Safety are well considered.
It seems to me that even with all these considerations that it still seems to be a long time.
But as a printer I accept the view and comments of those who are more experienced than me in these matters.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Tim_UK

Member
Joined
9 Jan 2019
Messages
73
I have a simple question. Why is this taking so long (26 months) to complete?
How long do you think it should take?

For planning you want a date where the whole thing is finished and cleaned up. With recovery time for contingencies.


And there will be lot of prep and surveys. Then actually doing the job. I’m sure lots of bits won‘t be finally ordered until some work is done. Pre made concrete bits can take 3 months to set. And you won’t know the dimensions until started.
 

deltic08

On Moderation
Joined
26 Aug 2013
Messages
2,497
Location
Ripon
So to clarify
York to church fenton,
Church fenton/garforth to Leeds,
Leeds to Huddersfield and
Stalybridge to Manchester electrification
Will be done in phases but all depends on the government.
The problem with electrifying 5 miles at a time is that it is very expensive and doesn't encourage the DfT to buy more.
 

M60lad

Member
Joined
31 May 2011
Messages
500
Replacing the Bridge at Queens Road is going to be one big headache of the scheme considering it will involving a major road closure and bus diversions, probably will mean both Rochdale and Oldham Roads being much busier than normal while this happens whenever it will be.
 

mwmbwls

Member
Joined
14 Dec 2009
Messages
438
Will advantage be taken of the reduced traffic from Stalybridge to Victoria to advance the electrification of that line section?
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
18,790
Location
Nottingham
Will advantage be taken of the reduced traffic from Stalybridge to Victoria to advance the electrification of that line section?
I don't think the reduced traffic makes much difference. There will be fewer passengers but the number of trains and the times of the first and last ones will be close to normal.
 

Ianno87

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
7,746
Will advantage be taken of the reduced traffic from Stalybridge to Victoria to advance the electrification of that line section?
Freight (e.g. Biomass trains) may still need to head that way to access the Calder Valley, plus Empty Stock to/from Newton Heath.
 

59CosG95

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2013
Messages
4,795
Location
ECM1 79m 34ch
I don't think the reduced traffic makes much difference. There will be fewer passengers but the number of trains and the times of the first and last ones will be close to normal.
Freight (e.g. Biomass trains) may still need to head that way to access the Calder Valley, plus Empty Stock to/from Newton Heath.
If it was possible, work would probably take place between the Miles Platting triangle & Stalybridge in any case.

Queens Rd is going to be quite the reconstruction, and that's all that I can impart on this.
 

Mollman

Member
Joined
21 Sep 2016
Messages
547
Why Batley? I wasn’t aware any major work was planned there; it’s well to the north of the bit that’s being quadrupled
I seem to recall Batley and Dewsbury stations are being remodeled. Dewsbury is having the eastbound platform widened to eliminate the need for stopping trains to have to slow for the turnout for the platform loop. Batley is having a westbound loop added to create an island platform.
 

59CosG95

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2013
Messages
4,795
Location
ECM1 79m 34ch
I seem to recall Batley and Dewsbury stations are being remodeled. Dewsbury is having the eastbound platform widened to eliminate the need for stopping trains to have to slow for the turnout for the platform loop. Batley is having a westbound loop added to create an island platform.
So, in essence, Dewsbury drops down to having 2 tracks, and Batley gets a 3rd track? Makes sense, given that Dewsbury's current function (of looping an eastbound Slow train to allow a Fast train to pass) can now be taken by Ravensthorpe; and of course completely separating Slow & Fast between Ravensthorpe & Huddersfield has its own advantages. Looping a westbound Slow at Batley to allow a Fast to pass then gives a pretty clear run to the separate tracks at Ravensthorpe too.
 

lancastrian

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2010
Messages
513
Location
Bolton, Lancashire
How long do you think it should take?

For planning you want a date where the whole thing is finished and cleaned up. With recovery time for contingencies.


And there will be lot of prep and surveys. Then actually doing the job. I’m sure lots of bits won‘t be finally ordered until some work is done. Pre made concrete bits can take 3 months to set. And you won’t know the dimensions until started.
I don't know, it just seemed like a long time to me, especially as many of our railways were built much faster in the Victorian period. I know different Health & Safety now. But a lot of work was done to this stretch of line before the TP Electrification was scraped (sorry paused), so why must does this need to take that long? Just a question I was asking.
 

Tim_UK

Member
Joined
9 Jan 2019
Messages
73
I don't know, it just seemed like a long time to me, especially as many of our railways were built much faster in the Victorian period. I know different Health & Safety now.
It's not just health and safety. Drainage, not chucking mud all over local roads. Utilities to divert, landscaping .... A planning inspector will want to come round at the end and see that all is proper, before the end date of the planning permission.

There might be fibre optic cables on the route as well. Those will all have to have new ducts and then spliced before you take the bridge out.
 

Brissle Girl

Member
Joined
17 Jul 2018
Messages
832
It's not just health and safety. Drainage, not chucking mud all over local roads. Utilities to divert, landscaping .... A planning inspector will want to come round at the end and see that all is proper, before the end date of the planning permission.

There might be fibre optic cables on the route as well. Those will all have to have new ducts and then spliced before you take the bridge out.
Steventon bridge proves your point as to why NR can’t cheerfully come in with a JCB one day and pull the old bridge down without going through the due process.
 

mwmbwls

Member
Joined
14 Dec 2009
Messages
438
I am sorry but I do not take the view that this is taking a long time in engineering terms. The original plan to electrify to Stalybridge was part of the North West electrification programme that got bogged down on the Agecroft section. IIRC iit was cancelled as part of Chris Grayling's response to that situation despite the operating logic of continuing. Works were already under way on bridges near Ashton Station and the rebuilding of Ashton Moss Junction - which are now complete. I stand open to correction but the Queens Road bridge is the only major civil as opposed to electrical infrastructure work that remains outstanding and is not exceptional when compared to similar bridge work on motorways.
 

Revaulx

Member
Joined
17 Sep 2019
Messages
160
Location
Saddleworth
I don't know, it just seemed like a long time to me, especially as many of our railways were built much faster in the Victorian period. I know different Health & Safety now. But a lot of work was done to this stretch of line before the TP Electrification was scraped (sorry paused), so why must does this need to take that long? Just a question I was asking.
I am sorry but I do not take the view that this is taking a long time in engineering terms. The original plan to electrify to Stalybridge was part of the North West electrification programme that got bogged down on the Agecroft section. IIRC iit was cancelled as part of Chris Grayling's response to that situation despite the operating logic of continuing. Works were already under way on bridges near Ashton Station and the rebuilding of Ashton Moss Junction - which are now complete. I stand open to correction but the Queens Road bridge is the only major civil as opposed to electrical infrastructure work that remains outstanding and is not exceptional when compared to similar bridge work on motorways.
Some good points here, but it needs to be remembered that when the decision was taken to electrify to Stalyvegas, the line was operating as a local branch. The reason for prioritising it was so that stopping services on the lines then being electrified to the west of Victoria would have somewhere to run through to. The plan was electrics to Stalybridge and diesels to Rochdale; hence the restoration of bays at both. The slow speeds at MP and over the junction at Stalybridge towards Ashton didn't really matter.

What then happened was that the line again became part of the main Trans-Pennine route. So the scope of the engineering project has increased accordingly; eliminating the worst speed restrictions now becoming vital. Plus the line is a great deal busier now. Simply diverting all the TPs back through Guide Bridge for the duration would have a horrendous knock-on effect at Piccadilly.
 

Ianno87

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
7,746
And how long does a motorway bridge scheme of a similar style take from end to end?

Not forgetting the differences in working methods and safety considerations.
Motorways usually have the benefit of being surrounded by green fields rather than city centre infrastructure.

E.g. a few years back, a new bridge as part of the remodelling of the M1-M6-A14 Catthorpe interchange only required one weekend closure.
 

InOban

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
2,695
I would expect that the Queen's Road bridge carries a variety of services.
Maybe it will help if I describe the stages (as I remember them) in the replacement of the Kerse Road bridge in Stirling as part of EGIP.

1. Lane closures to confirm the location of the services under the road, often uncertain in an old structure. Only then can plans be finalised.

2. Erection of a temporary foot and cycle bridge. This will need a weekend closure.

3. Closure of the road and diversion of the services to run under the new footway. Railway open during this.

4. Main line closure to remove the existing bridge, including its wing walls, and erection of a completely new structure (In the Stirling case the new bridge is 50 % wider). Once the deck is in place, OHLE can be installed underneath. AIRC, this main closure lasted 6 months, but it will depend on the geology - Stirling was on alluvial silt and the piles were tens of metres deep.

5. Restoration of the services to channels in the new deck, and removal of the temporary footbridge.

It's a world away from erecting a brand new bridge where the wing walls can be built some way back from the tracks and the deck lifted in over a weekend.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
12,919
I would expect that the Queen's Road bridge carries a variety of services.
Maybe it will help if I describe the stages (as I remember them) in the replacement of the Kerse Road bridge in Stirling as part of EGIP.

1. Lane closures to confirm the location of the services under the road, often uncertain in an old structure. Only then can plans be finalised.

2. Erection of a temporary foot and cycle bridge. This will need a weekend closure.

3. Closure of the road and diversion of the services to run under the new footway. Railway open during this.

4. Main line closure to remove the existing bridge, including its wing walls, and erection of a completely new structure (In the Stirling case the new bridge is 50 % wider). Once the deck is in place, OHLE can be installed underneath. AIRC, this main closure lasted 6 months, but it will depend on the geology - Stirling was on alluvial silt and the piles were tens of metres deep.

5. Restoration of the services to channels in the new deck, and removal of the temporary footbridge.

It's a world away from erecting a brand new bridge where the wing walls can be built some way back from the tracks and the deck lifted in over a weekend.
I have no doubt that Queens Road carries multiple utilities, however the fact remains that the road runs under the railway.
 

mwmbwls

Member
Joined
14 Dec 2009
Messages
438
Some good points here, but it needs to be remembered that when the decision was taken to electrify to Stalyvegas, the line was operating as a local branch. The reason for prioritising it was so that stopping services on the lines then being electrified to the west of Victoria would have somewhere to run through to. The plan was electrics to Stalybridge and diesels to Rochdale; hence the restoration of bays at both. The slow speeds at MP and over the junction at Stalybridge towards Ashton didn't really matter.

What then happened was that the line again became part of the main Trans-Pennine route. So the scope of the engineering project has increased accordingly; eliminating the worst speed restrictions now becoming vital. Plus the line is a great deal busier now. Simply diverting all the TPs back through Guide Bridge for the duration would as you say have a horrendous knock-on effect at Piccadilly.
I do not dispute your account of what happened and why but I would question your interpretation as to how events will turn out. I don't think anybody is assuming all TP trains to be redirected. The key event that you did not account for the opening and then failure of the Castlefield Chord. If. as seems, reasonable to expect that the "Sparks" effect still lives, then a post electrification upturn in passenger numbers is to be expected but the capacity in the Castlefield corridor will be constrained. The solution will be to continue to use the route between Piccadilly and Guide Bridge for semi fast services. We now know that platform capacity at the Airport is now more constrained by the stabling of only one train in its platforms at the same time. The 2mile 35 chain link will also provide direct access to the maintenance facilities at Ardwick - Newton Heath not seeming to have made the cut.
 

InOban

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
2,695
I have no doubt that Queens Road carries multiple utilities, however the fact remains that the road runs under the railway.
Previous posters were arguing about that!
In which case it may depend on whether the authorities want to widen the road at the same time. Did I read above that they wish to relocate the bridge slightly, I assume to ease a curve? That will still require replacing not just the deck but also the wing walls. Trouble is, modern construction standards will extend the time and increase the costs.
 

Revaulx

Member
Joined
17 Sep 2019
Messages
160
Location
Saddleworth
I do not dispute your account of what happened and why but I would question your interpretation as to how events will turn out.
I have no idea how things will turn out! I was merely pointing out that circumstances have changed since the electrification was first mooted, and it's not as simple as "just dig out and implement the plans that were prepared before it got Graylinged".
I don't think anybody is assuming all TP trains to be redirected.
Fair enough, but they need to go somewhere.
The key event that you did not account for the opening and then failure of the Castlefield Chord. If. as seems, reasonable to expect that the "Sparks" effect still lives, then a post electrification upturn in passenger numbers is to be expected but the capacity in the Castlefield corridor will be constrained. The solution will be to continue to use the route between Piccadilly and Guide Bridge for semi fast services. We now know that platform capacity at the Airport is now more constrained by the stabling of only one train in its platforms at the same time. The 2mile 35 chain link will also provide direct access to the maintenance facilities at Ardwick - Newton Heath not seeming to have made the cut.
Well I was always doubtful about the benefits of the Castlefield chord; it always seemed obvious that it was just moving problems from one pinch point to another. Again, I was only thinking there might be good reasons why the works at Queens Road/MP, and indeed the whole Stalybridge electrification project, might not be that straightforward.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
14,387
Location
Mold, Clwyd
From what I recall, the plan for Victoria-Stalybridge wiring was cut back twice, initially to Miles Platting and then finally to Brown St just east of Victoria.
There was also some complication with the scope of the TP scheme, as the original DfT approval (for CP5) was just for wiring the route (Manchester-York) without any other enhancements.
Once it was realised that would not achieve the desired benefits, attention turned to a more comprehensive upgrade which would begin by upgrading parts of the route first, which is where we are now.
 

gimmea50anyday

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2013
Messages
2,851
Location
Back Cab
If a long term closure is required through Ashton, I would suggest the liverpool services would be diverted via Hebden bridge while the airport services revert to running via Guide Bridge. That I would expect would have the lease impact on Piccadilly congestion while maintaining most of the service pattern and frequency
 

Revaulx

Member
Joined
17 Sep 2019
Messages
160
Location
Saddleworth
If a long term closure is required through Ashton, I would suggest the liverpool services would be diverted via Hebden bridge while the airport services revert to running via Guide Bridge. That I would expect would have the lease impact on Piccadilly congestion while maintaining most of the service pattern and frequency
That makes sense. Huddersfield would lose a couple of trains an hour, but there would be plenty left.

Diverting the two Ordsall Chorders through GB would mean a reversal at Picc, but no need to cross the entire throat, and it would relieve pressure at the rest of the Ordsall Chord pinch points. Might even improve things...
 

Ianno87

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
7,746
If a long term closure is required through Ashton, I would suggest the liverpool services would be diverted via Hebden bridge while the airport services revert to running via Guide Bridge. That I would expect would have the lease impact on Piccadilly congestion while maintaining most of the service pattern and frequency
That makes sense. Huddersfield would lose a couple of trains an hour, but there would be plenty left.

Diverting the two Ordsall Chorders through GB would mean a reversal at Picc, but no need to cross the entire throat, and it would relieve pressure at the rest of the Ordsall Chord pinch points. Might even improve things...
Making a huge assumption that the old Picc-Airport throat-crossing paths can be found again. Possibly lost now other timetable changes have eradicated them (a benefit of the Chord everybody always forgets about)

Terminating 2tph at Picc probably more likely.
 

Top