59CosG95
Established Member
The Man Vic - Stalybridge Piling tracker has been updated slightly; the section from Ashton Moss to Clayton LC has now gone red, while the section west of Clayton LC to Miles Platting has reverted to blue.
Interesting. From an earlier post I had 473 piles total. That update tracker says 543 piles.
My initial thought was ‘Oooh, painful’, but then the penny dropped with the last sentence!
This was the post I was referring to.This got me really interested. Obviously do not want to go into speculative mode and take the thread OT but - the data is published right there on the home page.
473 piles
8 months project
(7m deep - but not relevant for this comment)
60 metres apart approximately
project length 8 miles.
So first of all I googled to be sure the distance between Manchester Victoria and Stalybridge even though I already knew it because of years of Peak and Generator bashing in the 1970s and 1980s. Then I did the mathematics on the published data.
Manchester to Stalybridge project
number of piles 473
metres between piles (stated) 60
total distance metres 28320 = 60 x (473-1) metres
but piles needed both sides of line so divide by 2 = 14160 metres
Both sides miles 8.799 miles
Now of course there are 4 track section and anchor terminators etc. But this looks like conclusive proof the whole section is getting piled and if you are doing that then it is going to get sparked up.
Are all of them electrification though?
This was the post I was referring to.
Hmmm good thinking. Still enough piles by my calculations though for all the way to StalybridgeAre all of them electrification though?
The Queens Road bridge works need some sheet piling during the blockade for example.
Would they be piling all the way to where the feeder station is at Heyrod?Hmmm good thinking. Still enough piles by my calculations though for all the way to Stalybridge
That is the other side of the Stalybridge tunnel so I very much doubt it.Would they be piling all the way to where the feeder station is at Heyrod?
Afaik The Great Extension Lead is permanentHow much did the great extension lead cost?
Will it be needed?
Is that the same tunnel that was said to be difficult to electrify a while ago?That is the other side of the Stalybridge tunnel so I very much doubt it.
Yes.Is that the same tunnel that was said to be difficult to electrify a while ago?
IIRC the "Great Extension Lead" will become an Independent Feeder between Heyrod and the Ordsall Lane Auto Transformer Feeder Station? It will enable Heyrod to continue to feed the Bolton and Chat Moss lines if the OLE between Stalybridge and Victoria has to be isolated because of an incident or during maintenance.Afaik The Great Extension Lead is permanent
No decision has yet been taken to electrify Stalybridge-Huddersfield. The rest is almost certain.im slightly confused here- are they electrifying the whole route ie man vic-colton jcn or just parts of it? cheers
Or already in progressNo decision has yet been taken to electrify Stalybridge-Huddersfield. The rest is almost certain……..
If they'd included Stalybridge to Guide Bridge then the GEL could probably have been curtailed to Stalybridge, because there would have been two independent OLE routes for the power to get to the rest of the network. But now they've built it the cost is sunk - another example of how lack of agreed forward plans increases costs.IIRC the "Great Extension Lead" will become an Independent Feeder between Heyrod and the Ordsall Lane Auto Transformer Feeder Station? It will enable Heyrod to continue to feed the Bolton and Chat Moss lines if the OLE between Stalybridge and Victoria has to be isolated because of an incident or during maintenance.
No decision has yet been taken to electrify Stalybridge-Huddersfield. The rest is almost certain.
I think that a typical ATFS of 2x40MVA will need a dedicated, troughed XLPE cable from its grid supply point, near or far, not just several OLE feeds, one of which is quite old. Ordsall Lane is clearly the right site for the main feeder, if an Aston uL pidgeon is not to immobilise the entire Manchester rail system!If they'd included Stalybridge to Guide Bridge then the GEL could probably have been curtailed to Stalybridge, because there would have been two independent OLE routes for the power to get to the rest of the network. But now they've built it the cost is sunk - another example of how lack of agreed forward plans increases costs.
Those sections will be affected one way or another by whatever decisions are made on HS2 eastern leg and NPR. That's why we haven't heard anything.You say that, but I've heard next to no mention anywhere of either Raventhorpe to Leeds, or Church Fenton to Leeds. You'd think they'd be obvious, but so far I'm hearing absolutely nothing, which makes me wonder how much discontinuous electrification for use by bi-modes oy there will be in practice.
Ravensthorpe to Leeds isn't affected any more than Huddersfield to Ravensthorpe is. I suspect there's someone somewhere working on it with the intention of finishing about the same time as that section, but they can start later because it will mainly be just electrifying what is there now, not building new tracks and junctions as they are further west.Those sections will be affected one way or another by whatever decisions are made on HS2 eastern leg and NPR. That's why we haven't heard anything.
Approval so far is just for the Grayling era partial scheme. More recent work on full electrification hasn't been approved yet.Ravensthorpe to Leeds isn't affected any more than Huddersfield to Ravensthorpe is. I suspect there's someone somewhere working on it with the intention of finishing about the same time as that section, but they can start later because it will mainly be just electrifying what is there now, not building new tracks and junctions as they are further west.
The papers for the Huddersfield to Westtown TWAO application mention electrifying "from Huddersfield to Westtown and right through to Leeds".You say that, but I've heard next to no mention anywhere of either Raventhorpe to Leeds, or Church Fenton to Leeds. You'd think they'd be obvious, but so far I'm hearing absolutely nothing, which makes me wonder how much discontinuous electrification for use by bi-modes oy there will be in practice.
I cannot believe Leeds to Church Fenton is not a definite.Electrification is currently in scope between MCV/GUI and SYB, and then HUD and LDS. All other electrification is tbc.
I'd got the impression that GUI to SYB wasn't currently included?Electrification is currently in scope between MCV/GUI and SYB, and then HUD and LDS. All other electrification is tbc.
What about Church Fenton to Colton Junction? That seems to be the most advanced on the ground.Electrification is currently in scope between MCV/GUI and SYB, and then HUD and LDS. All other electrification is tbc.
I can't imagine a decision would be taken before the IRP is released that will probably decide/suggest/reccomend on whenever it is to be four tracked or not.I cannot believe Leeds to Church Fenton is not a definite.
I imagine it is but there are a few design questions to deal with before it goes ahead:I cannot believe Leeds to Church Fenton is not a definite.