Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[SuperNova]

Some of the opening stuff says Huddersfield is going from 6 to 7 platforms. I think it is keeping 6 platforms, 4 through and 1 Penistone bay and 1 Leeds facing bay. I'm not sure if 7 was in a earlier plan.

I was told they looked at two terminating east bays, but there wasn't enough land to make it work.

No sidings in Huddersfield. I think there is room to leave one, but not there. 3 at Hillhouse, but no Overhead line supports on the plans.

Again, not enough land. Hillhouse will become the sidings for Northern.

The thing I can't find is anything about the phasing of works., and how this might affect rail services.

Probably because that's still being worked out - worsened by Covid and a training backlog. Not to forget approval on blockades has to be given by all stakeholders.

I think there is almost no change to the Penistone line platform either. But services bound to be affected by the work in the tunnels.

What is currently platform 2 will be extended to accommodate longer trains and Huddersfield station as a whole will shift eastwards.

 

[YorksLad12]

Some of the opening stuff says Huddersfield is going from 6 to 7 platforms. I think it is keeping 6 platforms, 4 through and 1 Penistone bay and 1 Leeds facing bay. I'm not sure if 7 was in a earlier plan.

No sidings in Huddersfield. I think there is room to leave one, but not there. 3 at Hillhouse, but no Overhead line supports on the plans.

The plans in the consultation suggested the overhead line would go slightly down the Penistone Branch. This is not shown in the current plans.

The thing I can't find is anything about the phasing of works., and how this might affect rail services.

Platform 4 in Huddersfield is staying put, but will be renumbered to platform 3. I was wondering if this was on purpose to keep some services to/from Manchester while the rest of the station gets rebuilt. I presume they would have to build the new footbridge first, before they start to change the underpass.

I think there is almost no change to the Penistone line platform either. But services bound to be affected by the work in the tunnels.

Pretty sure it's six platforms now. In fact, I was musing on this last night (I am so bored now...). In terms of phasing at Huddersfield, I'd build the new platforms 5 & 6 first as they're on the existing sidings, out of the way. When they're connected in decommission the current 5 & 6, and start the work on P8 (new P4). That means you still have the two through platforms for TPE services. P2 (new P1) was supposed to be extended back into the station, I believe... did that happen?

The good thing about this project is that it's effectively new railway between east of Huddersfield and west of Dewsbury, so a lot of railway work can take place without affecting services. Obviously the big infrastructure bits will. I remain quietly confident about this scheme... don't know why!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

A lot of detail. I've not read all of it, but I'll try to summarise what I thought were the interesting bits.

Who knew there was a parcels subway in Huddersfield? - it is getting filled in. But adding in some new service ducts to replace what is carried over the signalling bridge.

Some of the opening stuff says Huddersfield is going from 6 to 7 platforms. I think it is keeping 6 platforms, 4 through and 1 Penistone bay and 1 Leeds facing bay. I'm not sure if 7 was in a earlier plan.

No sidings in Huddersfield. I think there is room to leave one, but not there. 3 at Hillhouse, but no Overhead line supports on the plans.

The plans in the consultation suggested the overhead line would go slightly down the Penistone Branch. This is not shown in the current plans.

The thing I can't find is anything about the phasing of works., and how this might affect rail services.

Platform 4 in Huddersfield is staying put, but will be renumbered to platform 3. I was wondering if this was on purpose to keep some services to/from Manchester while the rest of the station gets rebuilt. I presume they would have to build the new footbridge first, before they start to change the underpass.

I think there is almost no change to the Penistone line platform either. But services bound to be affected by the work in the tunnels.

There are plans for a platform at Hillhouse, facing towards Leeds. This suggests a long term closure of most of Huddersfield station and the viaduct for services towards Leeds. The Hillhouse plans say Phase 1, so maybe this site will get re-arranged when the job is finished. The Huddersfield station re-arrange and the works to the Huddersfield viaduct, expecially John William Street, look really major.

The new Baker Viaduct at the Dewsbury end looks like a major piece of work. But it is away from the current lines. I suspect significant work can be done without disruption. Same for the Thornhill road Bridge just to the east of the viaduct.

Similar for the flyover. It is south of the existing Leeds lines, but North of the existing Wakefield lines. And you could connect the fast lines up before work started on Deighton, Mirfield and Ravensthorpe stations.







The 2 main road bridge replacements (in Huddersfield) are Leeds Road and Colne Bridge Road. They are both being done with a new Bridge along side, so I suspect the absolute closures will be for a few days while they plumb it in.

For short distance journeys to just the otherside, then it is a long way around. For Long distance journeys there are loads of options. I've moved now, but I used to have regular journeys that went over both those bridges, and 50:50 whether I went another way.

The John William street bridge just outside the station. That's a main route into town. But if they can keep Viaduct Street open one way. Or if they just remove the uphill bus lane from Northumberland street, then there will be no problem at all for car drivers. People who walk into town might struggle because there is no obvious diversion route.

The long term economic benefit for Huddersfield must surely offset this.

Another bonus, John William Street won't be such an attractive "drag strip" for the boy-racers while the work is going on!

P2 (new P1) was supposed to be extended back into the station, I believe... did that happen?

It was given a short extension towards the tunnel last summer. Not sure what the useable length is now, but the long-term plan for Penistone line services is 60m trains, with all stations on the route now capable of taking a 3-car 150 (not that Yorkshire has any of those ) except the current P2 at Huddersfield.

Slightly surprised that 1 & 2 are swapping numbers. Makes sense in terms of them being "in order" but as the current P1 is the first one accessed from the concourse (and a "main line" platform) those two would be better left with their current numbers IMO.

 

[Killingworth]

My estimates on how long this will take based on recent experience with the smaller Hope Valley Scheme;

1. Approved - 2023?
2. Tenders requested - 2025?
3. Construction starts - 2026/7?
4. Trains use it 2030?

Based on that experience I'd not expect 4 to be achieved before 2030. However, Project Speed is now underway so it should be a lot quicker.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Lots of good stuff in the Huddersfield Station Design (NR15A), assuming the preferred Option 0 gets the go-ahead.
Except for the new Roof B for the new island platform, with its leaning columns.
Looks reminiscent of P4 at the upgraded Newport station, which doesn't work for me.
Classical, angular lines are mandated for the main building changes at Huddersfield, but it all goes curved and lop-sided on the new island platform.

The piece mentions that Huddersfield has one of the last "Euston truss" roofs remaining.
I wonder how may others there are?
Rugby, Preston and Chester come to mind, perhaps Carlisle and Crewe.
Much discussion on what happened to the original "lantern" in the main roof, and if/how to reinstate it.
And has a Tea Room ever had such attention over its location and form?
Judging by the priority given to drivers' signal sighting, ETCS is not on the cards for the new signalling.
But overall, NR is at its most impressive when it sets out all the detail of its assets and plans like this.
We have to hope it leads somewhere better than the Piccadilly-Oxford Road TWAO.

 

[MarkLong]

Pretty sure it's six platforms now. In fact, I was musing on this last night (I am so bored now...). In terms of phasing at Huddersfield, I'd build the new platforms 5 & 6 first as they're on the existing sidings, out of the way. When they're connected in decommission the current 5 & 6, and start the work on P8 (new P4). That means you still have the two through platforms for TPE services. P2 (new P1) was supposed to be extended back into the station, I believe... did that happen?

The good thing about this project is that it's effectively new railway between east of Huddersfield and west of Dewsbury, so a lot of railway work can take place without affecting services. Obviously the big infrastructure bits will. I remain quietly confident about this scheme... don't know why!

The effectively new railway between east of Huddersfield and west of Dewsbury will built in top speed of 125 mph or 100 mph?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The effectively new railway between east of Huddersfield and west of Dewsbury will built in top speed of 125 mph or 100 mph?

The highest speed I noticed in the text was 110mph on the new fast lines (assuming some other realignments are made).

 

[61653 HTAFC]

And has a Tea Room ever had such attention over its location and form?

I too was surprised by the amount of work proposed for that building. It is grade 2 listed (unlike the main building which is grade 1) so perhaps that restricts what modifications can be done to the building itself- under normal circumstances, swapping the position of the Tea Room and toilets would generally be done by simply gutting the building and refitting the bits in the opposite half. Presumably doing so in this case would somehow compromise the historical (or structural) integrity of the building?

A bit early for this, but I do hope that once it's done we don't end up with a generic SSP brand outlet in there. FirstGroup tried that at the start of the first TPE franchise but there was uproar enough that they changed their minds.

 

[Halish Railway]

The highest speed I noticed in the text was 110mph on the new fast lines (assuming some other realignments are made).

It’s 100mph between Huddersfield and Westtown. The only stretches on TRU going above 100mph is east of Neville Hill East Jn.

 

[Spartacus]

The selection of documents is very interesting indeed, particularly this one: https://sacuksprodnrdigital0001.blob.core.windows.net/twao-huddersfield-westtown/Listed Building Consents/Application No.1 - Huddersfield Station/Roof A OLE Support Details.pdf

Looks like Huddersfield won't need headspans after all!

Further details shows that the new feeder at Ravensthorpe will be a Static Frequency Converter (SFC) feeder, rather than an AT feeder. Not much point adding AT capability on a spur, after all!

On a more general note, the breakdown of the TRU works as a whole is included in the NR04 "Statement of Aims" doc.
View attachment 93512
In summary:

• W1 - happening, with details gathered
• W2a - happening, details a little sketchy
• W3 - happening, with details in abundance
• W4 - happening (only with regards to refs made in W3)
• W5 - happening (although it's the first I've heard of it!)
• E1 - happening - see posts upthread for progress

Stations requiring Step-Free Access (excluding Ravensthorpe-Huddersfield):

• Church Fenton
• Micklefield (possibly)
• Garforth
• Cottingley (if retained)
• Morley
• Batley
• Slaithwaite (possibly)
• Marsden
• Greenfield
• Mossley
• and an 11th one which I can't put my finger on. Man Vic, Ashton-u-L, Stalybridge, Huddersfield-Ravensthorpe (in scheme W3), Dewsbury, Leeds, Cross Gates, East Garforth & Ulleskelf are all accessible.

11th, Dewsbury? The down platform’s currently only step free during staffed hours when the lifts are open, and in my experience it’s usually half an hour short of that at the end of the day.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It’s 100mph between Huddersfield and Westtown. The only stretches on TRU going above 100mph is east of Neville Hill East Jn.

This is on p22 of NR15 Design and Access Statement (6.1.1):

Provision of the additional lines will allow direct trains to pass the stopping trains, a constraint which currently leads to delays.
This results in up and down slow lines with a maximum line speed of 75mph (as existing) and up and down fast line with maximum speeds of 110mph.

 

[Glenn1969]

What's the latest on Deighton-is that the 11th station or are there still plans to relocate it?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

What's the latest on Deighton-is that the 11th station or are there still plans to relocate it?

The present station is step-free to both platforms (though possibly not fully compliant with modern standards) so probably isn't the 11th station mentioned above.

I haven't looked at the latest documents for Deighton, but was under the impression that the relocation had been dropped and the station will be rebuilt on the present site.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The present station is step-free to both platforms (though possibly not fully compliant with modern standards) so probably isn't the 11th station mentioned above.
I haven't looked at the latest documents for Deighton, but was under the impression that the relocation had been dropped and the station will be rebuilt on the present site.

It will be rebuilt more or less on the present site, with a footbridge (at forecourt level) and lifts.
Details and visualisation in NR15 section 7.4, p31.

 

[Halish Railway]

This is on p22 of NR15 Design and Access Statement (6.1.1):

Thanks and wow; would it be necessary to render that linespeed graph from the PWI lecture useless then?

In addition, I believe that the graph said that the realigned Miles Platting curve would have a 60mph speed limit, whereas a more recent presentation said that it would be 55mph, not much but still a difference. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.

 

[SuperNova]

Thanks and wow; would it be necessary to render that linespeed graph from the PWI lecture useless then?

In addition, I believe that the graph said that the realigned Miles Platting curve would have a 60mph speed limit, whereas a more recent presentation said that it would be 55mph, not much but still a difference. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.

Spot on. Issue with Collyhurst sidings.

 

[Tim_UK]

Pretty sure it's six platforms now.

The plans all show 6 platforms in Huddersfield.

 

[IanXC]

It was given a short extension towards the tunnel last summer. Not sure what the useable length is now, but the long-term plan for Penistone line services is 60m trains, with all stations on the route now capable of taking a 3-car 150 (not that Yorkshire has any of those ) except the current P2 at Huddersfield.

Somewhere I've seen a picture of a 150+153 combo in that platform, so thats 63m worth of train. That said it looked very very tight.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Somewhere I've seen a picture of a 150+153 combo in that platform, so thats 63m worth of train. That said it looked very very tight.

The previous maximum formation was a 3-car 144 (approx. 46.5m). Having eyeballed the extension late last summer, it didn't look like more than 5m had been added at the Lockwood end... though that was some time ago, and I was looking from P4b so my guesstimate may be unreliable. I was under the impression that the buffers would need moving back to get the required length.

 

[IanXC]

The previous maximum formation was a 3-car (approx. 46.5m). Having eyeballed the extension late last summer, it didn't look like more than 5m had been added at the Lockwood end... though that was some time ago, and I was looking from P4b so my guesstimate may be unreliable. I was under the impression that the buffers would need moving back to get the required length.

That'd be a 3 car 144 for the record.

I've no idea if the buffer stops have been moved or not (or even if p1 has been cut back further?), but I have definitely seen a picture with 150+153 in there.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

That'd be a 3 car 144 for the record.

I've no idea if the buffer stops have been moved or not (or even if p1 has been cut back further?), but I have definitely seen a picture with 150+153 in there.

Not sure how I managed to forget to type "144"... cheers for the heads-up.

The buffer-stops don't appear to have been moved since Platform 2 was created in 1989. A 150+153 wouldn't usually be permitted there AIUI, though if the 153 was locked out and there was something occupying 4b there's nowhere else for it to go. Unless it was in the last 6 months, that formation would be too long for several stations on the route anyway.

Platforms 5 & 6 have a system known as "Lime Street Control" installed, so the signals won't clear for a formation that's too long (>40m for P5, >75m for P6) but don't know if that system is in place for P2.

 

[59CosG95]

TransPennine Wiring East Progressometer Post 3.0 - accurate to 06/04/21.
Route announced as 'to be wired' in CP6: Church Fenton - Colton Jct.

E1. Church Fenton North Jct (NOC/CFM 10m 36ch) to Colton Jct (NOC 5m 41ch/ECM4 182m 79ch)
Electrification work underway.
Southern limit of OLE confirmed to be short of Church Fenton Stn itself due to
a) HS2 Phase 2b works; and
b) the Common Ln Underbridge/Rose Lane UWC situation (i.e. "Steventon with S&C")
With completion scheduled for October 2022; steelwork up in May 2021 (Normanton side only) & wires up in Jan 2022.
Leeds side steelwork in Autumn 2021.

All piles presumed installed.
Colton Jn - Colton Lane O/B: 3 S1 TTCs up, followed by a S1 Monoboom, a UKMS Std portal, another S1 TTC, a second Monoboom, then 4 S1 TTCs to Colton Lane O/B.
TTCs only up over the Normanton lines at present.
5 S1 TTCs up and boomed on the Normanton side south of Colton Ln O/B. The lone S1 Monoboom leg up on the Leeds side has now been paired with its doppelganger, and boom installed. Two S1 TTCs await installation north of the monoboom .3 S1 TTCs follow south of that, before reaching a UKMS std 'Vierendeel' portal (of Heathrow Express electrification vintage) immediately before Brumber Hill O/B. It is unknown whether that'll be a mid-point anchor or a boom bearing surge arresters.
South of Brumber Hill Bridge, almost all S1 TTCs appear to be up and boomed (on the Up Normanton Side) as far as signals Y745 (DL)/Y742(UL)/Y747(DN)/Y44(UN). A S1 Monoboom, close to the trackman's hut on the UN side, is now fully boomed, and its adjustable leg struts are also present & correct. Its overlap compadre, 3 spans south, only has the Normanton side mast up.
South of that overlap are 7 S1 TTCs, followed by a UKMS std PF DC portal leg (with a compadre already up on the Leeds side); this is (at a guess) for a mid-point anchor (MPA). One S1 TTC is up south of here, with another waiting to be installed south of that.
A handful of masts (UKMS standard I think) are up between the Normanton lines on the old site of Bolton Percy station.

Between Bolton Percy & Ulleskelf, around 7 S1 TTCs, 5 S1 single track masts and a monoboom (sans boom) are up. 3 piles between the Dn & Up Normanton lines are also in place north of Ulleskelf, and clearances from the railway boundary to the Dn Leeds line are tight, so I suspect 3-track TTCs will go in over the Dn Normanton & both Leeds lines (unless more piles for the Leeds lines come later). Within Ulleskelf itself, 2, poss. more single track masts are also in place (one between the road bridge & the footbridge), and a pair south of the station that are very tall indeed (perhaps to give aerial clearance over the RRAP which they sandwich). A UKMS legacy TTC (from the Mk3 & Series 2 ranges) is also present south of Ulleskelf.

Between Ulleskelf & CF north Jn, around 20 or so masts (mainly S1 TTCs) are up on the Up Normanton side. Oddly enough, a standard UKMS mast (either a PF double channel or a UC - it's hard to tell from a telephoto shot) is up north of the current CF726/CF724 gantry. This makes me think that the crossover at CF North Jn could be repositioned for higher speed running.

At Church Fenton North Jn, 4 masts (all on the Up Normanton side) have gone up south of the signal gantry supporting signals CF726 (UN) & CF724 (UL); these are 2 no. Tensorex Monoboom Anchor masts sandwiching a pair of S1 style hook-and-pin TTC masts. This must be for an overlap - potentially the southern limit of works.

Track Sectioning Cabin to be built in Church Fenton.

Compounds established at:
Church Fenton;
Ulleskelf;
Bolton Percy (Oxton Lane);
Braegate Lane;
Earfit (Earfitts?) Lane;
Copmanthorpe (Moor Lane);
Tadcaster Road, Copmanthorpe (by A64); and Dringhouses (Model Railway).
(N.B. All dates are subject to alteration, whether due to COVID-19 or otherwise)

E2. Leeds Departures (presumed Leeds - Neville Hill - Cross Gates) - Development of final scheme scope to GRIP 3.

E3. Cross Gates to Micklefield - Development of final scheme scope to GRIP 3.

E4. Micklefield to Church Fenton - Development of final scheme scope to GRIP 3.


Do let me know if I've missed anything!

 

[superkev]

Ive been looking back through this thread for a start and finish date for the 5 miles of wiring between Colton and north of Church Fenton. Prob missed it. Anyone update.
Thanks.
K

 

[zwk500]

Ive been looking back through this thread for a start and finish date for the 5 miles of wiring between Colton and north of Church Fenton. Prob missed it. Anyone update.
Thanks.
K

Not sure about start date, lockdown may have meant it was missed, but the post 1 before yours gives the fnish date as:

E1. Church Fenton North Jct (NOC/CFM 10m 36ch) to Colton Jct (NOC 5m 41ch/ECM4 182m 79ch)
<SNIP>
With completion scheduled for October 2022; steelwork up in May 2021 (Normanton side only) & wires up in Jan 2022.
Leeds side steelwork in Autumn 2021.

 

[Purple Orange]

Does anyone know how long the TWOA take for the 5 miles at Church Fenton take to be approved?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Do let me know if I've missed anything!

You have not missed anything with regards to what is posted. If I may I would like to add the following for completeness and by way of summary.

W1 - Manchester Victoria - Stalybridge
W1a - Manchester Victoria - Miles Platting (edited see below)
W1b- Miles Platting - Stalybridge (edited assumed see below)
W2a - Stalybridge station
W2b - Stalybridge -Huddersfield
W3 - Huddersfield - Ravensthorpe
W4 - Ravensthorpe - Leeds
W5 - Morley station
E1 - as above

 

[snowball]

Does anyone know how long the TWOA take for the 5 miles at Church Fenton take to be approved?

[Edit: when I wrote the following I misread the question as being about the Huddersfield TWAO.]
It depends on what objections there are. If there are serious objections there could be a public inquiry. Time would be taken trying to resolve the objections without an inquiry, then time taken to organise and prepare for an inquiry, time for the hearings, time for the inspector to write up his or her report, time for the DfT to consider the report. Could be up to a couple of years in all.

You have not missed anything with regards to what is posted. If I may I would like to add the following for completeness and by way of summary.

W1 - Manchester Victoria - Stalybridge
W2a - Stalybridge station
W2b - Stalybridge -Huddersfield
W3 - Huddersfield - Ravensthorpe
W4 - Ravensthorpe - Leeds
W5 - Morley station
E1 - as above

Furthermore, though the Huddersfield-Westtown documents don't mention W1 as being subdivided, earlier stuff on this thread refers to the Victoria to Miles Platting work as W1a, so presumably Miles Platting to Stalybridge is W1b.

 

[Bald Rick]

Does anyone know how long the TWOA take for the 5 miles at Church Fenton take to be approved?

If you mean electrifying Colton to Church Fenton, there wasn’t a TWAO - no need.

 

[swt_passenger]

If you mean electrifying Colton to Church Fenton, there wasn’t a TWAO - no need.

Wouldn‘t electrification itself come under permitted development? I assume it’s the major enabling work such as bridge rebuilds or alterations to listed station buildings that might make a TWA order necessary, (or other approval in cases such as listed building)?

 

[snowball]

Sorry, I misread Purple Orange's post. I assumed he was asking about the TWAO for Huddersfield to Westtown. My reply in #3957 was relevant to that.

As others have said, the current works near Church Fenton don't require a TWAO. Furthermore, if they did, they would be in trouble with the law, as they're already well in progress.