Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[Spartacus]

Can someone explain to me why Standedge tunnel is so much more difficult than other twin-track tunnels built quite late on in the nineteenth century? Elsewhere tunnels generally seem to have posed far fewer problems than a good many bridges do.

I wonder if it has anything to do with the proximity of the canal and the connecting passages?

 

[Jonny]

And how much of it is due to the Standedge Tunnels' unique and problematic geology, that also caused problems for the canal restoration?

http://www.penninewaterways.co.uk/huddersfield/standedge4.htm backup https://archive.is/LkdQE

 

[Jonny]

NR publicity is linking de-vegging work at Morley to electrification:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DGTOADfUQAAgkqk.jpg

It might be pre-survey work, if the vegetation is getting in the way of the surveyors.

 

[Ploughman]

I wonder if it has anything to do with the proximity of the canal and the connecting passages?

Having been in there and used some of the links.
I can think of no reason why they would be a problem.
They do not go under the Twin bore and do not protrude into the bore either.
The canal is mostly to the south of the main bore between the Single bore and the twin bore tunnels as the link passages go up and over the canal.

 

[snowball]

Press release:

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/feeds...nts-ahead-of-transpennine-route-upgrade-work/

Network Rail will hold a series of drop-in events across the Pennines as work continues to upgrade the Transpennine Route.

In preparation for the upgrade, which once complete will see faster and more regular journeys across the Pennines, vegetation will be removed from the side of the railway between Leeds and Manchester between September 2017 and May 2018.

Drop-in sessions for lineside neighbours will take place between 5pm and 7pm on the following days:

Dewsbury – Tuesday 8 August – Dewsbury Library, WF12 8EQ
Batley – Monday 14 August – Batley Library, Market Place, WF17 5DA
Deighton – Tuesday 15 August – Deighton Chestnut Centre, HD2 1HJ
Mirfield – Thursday 17 August – The Salvation Army Hall, WF14 8AF
Slaithwaite – Monday 21 August – Slaithwaite Community Centre, HD7 5XE
Marsden – Tuesday 22 August – Marsden Mechanics Hall, HD7 6BW
Huddersfield – Wednesday 23 August – Huddersfield Town Hall, HD1 2TA
Mossley – Tuesday 29 August – George Lawton Hall, OL5 0HR
Stalybridge – Wednesday 30 August – Stalybridge Civic Hall, Trinity Street, SK15 2BN
Greenfield – Monday 4 September – Greenfield Methodist Church, 9 Chew Vale, Greenfield, OL3 7EQ

For further information, residents should contact Network Rail’s National Helpline on 03457 11 41 41.

 

[Sceptre]

The actual statement according to the Dft website states



"Technology is advancing quickly, and this government is committed to using the best available technologies to improve each part of the network. New bi-mode train technology offers seamless transfer from diesel power to electric that is undetectable to passengers. The industry is also developing alternative fuel trains, using battery and hydrogen power. This means that we no longer need to electrify every line to achieve the same significant improvements to journeys, and we will only electrify lines where it delivers a genuine benefit to passengers.



These new technologies mean that we can improve journeys for passengers on the Great Western Main Line in south Wales, the Midland Main Line, and on the Lakes Line between Windermere and Oxenholme sooner than expected with state of the art trains, instead of carrying out disruptive electrification works along the whole of these routes."

Ah, the age old argument that the march of technology justifies skimping out on needed upgrades. Seems like only yesterday that Labour were claiming that hydrogen and biomass trains were Just Around The Corner and would make electrification obsolete.

Sadly, greener fuels are no nearer, probably because the people with enough money to sink into it get a tidy profit off oil already.

The irony is that while the DfT thinks (wrongly) that technology obviates the need for electrification, they think (rightly) that technology doesn't remove the need for HS2.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Ah, the age old argument that the march of technology justifies skimping out on needed upgrades. Seems like only yesterday that Labour were claiming that hydrogen and biomass trains were Just Around The Corner and would make electrification obsolete.

Sadly, greener fuels are no nearer, probably because the people with enough money to sink into it get a tidy profit off oil already.

The irony is that while the DfT thinks (wrongly) that technology obviates the need for electrification, they think (rightly) that technology doesn't remove the need for HS2.

Sadly you are correct

 

[InOban]

Note that the NR press release refers only to the TP upgrade. Electrification is not mentioned.

 

[snowball]

Note that the NR press release refers only to the TP upgrade. Electrification is not mentioned.

Yet it seems to be the same series of meetings as the one in #737, which did mention electrification.

 

[CdBrux]

Sadly you are correct

Depends what your objectives are for the upgrade. We have already seen that sorting out line speeds has a much greater impact on journey times than electrification for example

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Depends what your objectives are for the upgrade. We have already seen that sorting out line speeds has a much greater impact on journey times than electrification for example

Cleaner more user friendly form of energy not dependent on the Middle East that does not produce particulate Carbon Dioxide etc.

 

[InOban]

But it should be fettled as much as possible before the masts go up. Relocated junctions with higher limits, possibly relocated stations to meet present-day traffic demand. Once the masts go in, the layout is fossilised.

 

[CdBrux]

Cleaner more user friendly form of energy not dependent on the Middle East that does not produce particulate Carbon Dioxide etc.

Better hope the marginal energy supply in UK is not coal or liquefied gas then!
I am also intrigued how, when you flip a switch in your house, the way electricity is generated determines how user friendly it is !!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Better hope the marginal energy supply in UK is not coal or liquefied gas then!
I am also intrigued how, when you flip a switch in your house, the way electricity is generated determines how user friendly it is !!

Absolutely - we need a long term strategy. Move bit by bit to a low carbon strategy. As you say gas is still a hydrocarbon so x HC + 02 = CO2 + H20 - I find it horrifying and constantly look at this http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

How little nuclear and how much gas is used. So electric road vehicles and rail progressively moved to electric powered - all based on non HC resources.

 

[ainsworth74]

Absolutely - we need a long term strategy. Move bit by bit to a low carbon strategy. As you say gas is still a hydrocarbon so x HC + 02 = CO2 + H20 - I find it horrifying and constantly look at this http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

How little nuclear and how much gas is used. So electric road vehicles and rail progressively moved to electric powered - all based on non HC resources.

Indeed when you look at yearly demand it never drops below about 25GW whether it be summer or winter, rain or shine, day or night. Logically, therefore, our nuclear output should be around 25GW seeing as nuclear is great at just being run at full power day in day out. Yet it only actually comes to around 7 or 8GW. You'd then make up the shortfall between the base load and the rest through whatever mixture or renewables and CCGT is required and/or available (i.e. on a very sunny day in July you'd probably make the rest up through solar).

 

[notlob.divad]

But it should be fettled as much as possible before the masts go up. Relocated junctions with higher limits, possibly relocated stations to meet present-day traffic demand. Once the masts go in, the layout is fossilised.

I don't think that is as true as it once was. The new masts used on the North West Electrification seem to have significantly easier methods of adjustment than older styles. (From my untrained eye) The approaches to Manchester Victoria must have been re-fettled at least twice now since the original wires went up.

That doesn't mean I don't agree that it is better to fettle the track now before putting the wires up, but I don't think once there up it is necessarily as fossilized as you imply.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

That doesn't mean I don't agree that it is better to fettle the track now before putting the wires up, but I don't think once there up it is necessarily as fossilized as you imply.

Agreed - there seems to be some element of future proofing in most designs etc now.

 

[AE]

Absolutely - we need a long term strategy. Move bit by bit to a low carbon strategy. As you say gas is still a hydrocarbon so x HC + 02 = CO2 + H20 - I find it horrifying and constantly look at this http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

How little nuclear and how much gas is used. So electric road vehicles and rail progressively moved to electric powered - all based on non HC resources.

It's coal and oil that are the main offenders for CO2 emissions. Take a look at this website to see how we compare. We're doing a lot better than many other countries for CO2 emissions.

https://www.electricitymap.org

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It's coal and oil that are the main offenders for CO2 emissions. Take a look at this website to see how we compare. We're doing a lot better than many other countries for CO2 emissions.

https://www.electricitymap.org

I don't disagree - I stand by what I said - I would like a continued long term strategy - even burning bionic duckweed produces CO2. Electrify nice and steady bit by bit including freight and produce electricity by renewables/nuclear.

 

[xotGD]

TPE could always stipulate that the 68s run on used cooking oil to minimise their carbon footprint.

 

[AndrewE]

from the Beeb
What next for high speed northern rail? By Brian Wheeler Political reporter
It's http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40860938
too long to quote in full,

Transport Secretary Chris Grayling risked turning himself into a hate figure for train passengers in the north of England, Wales and the Midlands when he ditched long-promised rail electrification schemes last month.

What angered many people, including newly-elected mayors Andy Burnham and Steve Rotheram, was Mr Grayling's simultaneous decision to get behind a £30bn scheme to build a new electric railway in London.

It seemed like a classic case of the regions being starved of investment in favour of the south-east of England.

Mr Grayling hopes to redeem himself by delivering faster, more reliable train services, with far less disruption to passengers while the work is being carried out, by using "smarter" technology.

But he faces scepticism from political and business leaders, particularly in the north of England, home of the much-vaunted Northern Powerhouse...

 

[IanXC]

Cleaner more user friendly form of energy not dependent on the Middle East that does not produce particulate Carbon Dioxide etc.

For better or worse this isn't a consideration for any of the objectives of the Transpennine Route Upgrade.

 

[Bantamzen]

from the Beeb
What next for high speed northern rail? By Brian Wheeler Political reporter
It's http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40860938
too long to quote in full,

Interesting that deeper into that article it talks about the possible overhead of using heavier bi-modes on the assents in the Pennines. But what really intrigues me is how & when Grayling / DfT might envisage a "seamless" switchover from wired to diesel power on such a route should, for example, Standedge not be wired. So when might a diesel engine be switched on in such an example, on approach to the tunnel, at the previous stop, somewhere in-between? I know 185s often have engines that were either idling or off powered up on route, and sometimes on the climbs, but how might this work with bi-modes and what contingencies might be needed should the switchover fail (I know it occasionally happens with overhead to third rail)?

 

[edwin_m]

From what I've gathered elsewhere the diesel is switched on automatically some time before reaching the end of the wires to give it time to warm up. Presumably needs to be a fairly clever system that knows what route the train is taking, in case it terminates or diverges before the end of the wires. With several engines per train then if one fails to start the performance penalty won't be huge - probably less than stopping and spending time trying to start it manually.

 

[AndrewE]

Presumably needs to be a fairly clever system that knows what route the train is taking, in case it terminates or diverges before the end of the wires.

Probably would be more reliable (and a cheaper train) if it used an even cleverer system called a "Driver!" I think they have a fair idea of whether their train would diverge from the wires.

(Btw if it just terminated short of the end of the wires why start the engines?)

 

[Bantamzen]

From what I've gathered elsewhere the diesel is switched on automatically some time before reaching the end of the wires to give it time to warm up. Presumably needs to be a fairly clever system that knows what route the train is taking, in case it terminates or diverges before the end of the wires. With several engines per train then if one fails to start the performance penalty won't be huge - probably less than stopping and spending time trying to start it manually.

If this is the case it does beg the question is it really going to be value for money to have several trains per hour, 363/4 days per year firing up the engines some distance from the tunnel just to cover 3 miles of unwired tunnel, or is it in the long run going to be simpler to resolve what engineering issue there may be (after all it is far from the first Victorian built tunnel to be electrified).

I fully understand the rationale for having bi-modes to cover final stretches away from the wires, maybe even for long distances between them, but Grayling’s idea that they could be used to fill in “difficult” gaps is sounding more and more ridiculous.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

If politicians were just to say: --- "Bi-modes buy us time so we do not need to rush electrification and can spread the cost over longer periods and when times are good accelerate the program a little" but in the meantime we will have a nice steady rolling program" - I think people would understand.

We will concentrate on eliminating diesel from big cities first and go from there - I actually think this would be a vote winner, positive spin, be the truth and plain freaking commonsense. But hey - that is just me.

 

[deltic08]

TPE could always stipulate that the 68s run on used cooking oil to minimise their carbon footprint.

As it's the North don't you mean used chip fat? And can't you somehow add in the words flat cap, whippet and racing pigeons?

 

[deltic08]

It's coal and oil that are the main offenders for CO2 emissions. Take a look at this website to see how we compare. We're doing a lot better than many other countries for CO2 emissions.

https://www.electricitymap.org

Moving to battery power will not help. In fact it will make air pollution worse as vehicles are heavier, in comparison to petrol or diesel propulsion, and therefore cause more wear particles in the air especially low speed turns in towns and cities where tyre, brake and road wear are accelerated.

We wear out 50 million tyres annually in the UK producing 430,000 tons of rubber dust every year. Lorry and bus tyres are the worst culprits because of the increased weight. They wear 60% faster than car tyres. Where does all this dust go? Into the air of course then into you and me as the particles are small enough, less than 20 microns, to be constantly suspended and small enough to enter the deepest parts of our lungs.

Carbon black in tyre dust and tar in road dust have serious carcinogenic and mutatogenic properties and we are producing them by the millions of tons.

Even worse, there is evidence to show that brake disc wear dust is entering the food chain both on land and sea because metallic globules are being found in plaques in the brain that only exist in dementia sufferers. Could this be the reason for the increase in dementia cases in modern times?

49,000 premature deaths annually from tail pipe pollution could be just a drop in the ocean if the link between road traffic and dementia is definitely proved.

 

[NotATrainspott]

If this is the case it does beg the question is it really going to be value for money to have several trains per hour, 363/4 days per year firing up the engines some distance from the tunnel just to cover 3 miles of unwired tunnel, or is it in the long run going to be simpler to resolve what engineering issue there may be (after all it is far from the first Victorian built tunnel to be electrified).

I fully understand the rationale for having bi-modes to cover final stretches away from the wires, maybe even for long distances between them, but Grayling’s idea that they could be used to fill in “difficult” gaps is sounding more and more ridiculous.

His comments would make much more sense about batteries, for sure. Fitting enough batteries to make it through Standedge wouldn't add much mass or volume of equipment to an arbitrary modern EMU design. It's also easier to have sufficient performance ready on tap, as you need a diesel engine big enough to handle maximum power draw regardless of how long it'll actually be running. A small battery with a large cooling system should do a reasonable job of giving full power for a few minutes at a time before recharging.

Moving to battery power will not help. In fact it will make air pollution worse as vehicles are heavier, in comparison to petrol or diesel propulsion, and therefore cause more wear particles in the air especially low speed turns in towns and cities where tyre, brake and road wear are accelerated.

We wear out 50 million tyres annually in the UK producing 430,000 tons of rubber dust every year. Lorry and bus tyres are the worst culprits because of the increased weight. They wear 60% faster than car tyres. Where does all this dust go? Into the air of course then into you and me as the particles are small enough, less than 20 microns, to be constantly suspended and small enough to enter the deepest parts of our lungs.

Carbon black in tyre dust and tar in road dust have serious carcinogenic and mutatogenic properties and we are producing them by the millions of tons.

Even worse, there is evidence to show that brake disc wear dust is entering the food chain both on land and sea because metallic globules are being found in plaques in the brain that only exist in dementia sufferers. Could this be the reason for the increase in dementia cases in modern times?

49,000 premature deaths annually from tail pipe pollution could be just a drop in the ocean if the link between road traffic and dementia is definitely proved.

Electric vehicles aren't necessarily that much heavier. When you design a car from scratch, like Tesla's Model 3, you can use the large battery as a structural member and then take advantage of the lack of need for other heavy components. A Tesla Model 3 weighs about 1.7 tonnes compared to 1.5 tonnes for a BMW 3 series. That difference will only get smaller in future as batteries get better (there's a very strong incentive to use higher energy density to reduce mass and price rather than increase range now) and internal combustion vehicles are laden with more and more heavy emissions cleaning and mitigation devices.

It'll be even better for commercial vehicles, as electric drivetrains make it possible to better match the design against the requirements for its role. For instance, a commercial operator will be able to order trucks and vans with batteries only as large as they absolutely need to be. Many delivery vans will only ever need to go 50 kilometres a day going around a city centre, but today's designs have to be the same as those used to go across the country all day every day. That means commercial vehicle masses will probably decrease with electrification, and it is most likely the case that these particulate emissions will go up superlinearly with vehicle mass.

What this means is that there isn't any way that things can be worse with electric vehicles than they are today. While tyre and road particulates might not be the nicest things in the world, I'm sure we would all rather deal with them alone rather than with them plus brake and ICE emissions too. Electric vehicles have very, very little reason to use their friction brakes when driven properly. For a commercial operator the cost saving from rarely having to use the friction brakes will be quite significant and more than enough to make sure their drivers don't learn to rely on them alone. The effectiveness of regenerative braking drops with speed but there isn't much kinetic energy left by then for the brakes to have to deal with. If brake emissions are really still a problem I'm sure someone will come up with a way of using the motors to brake even more.