Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[CdBrux]

Marginally more information from a recent speech by Mark Carne

https://cdn.networkrail.co.uk/wp-co...0-Northern-Chambers-Summit-railway-speech.pdf

And this particular bit of railway, and those of you who know this route know it's a complicated and difficult piece of railway, it's very winding, bendy, it goes through multiple tunnels and it goes right along the backs of people's houses and so on.


So a very detailed study has been done to look at this particular railway and all of the improvements that we would have to make to it. And we have to take into account it's a difficult railway to get at.

It rains a lot in the middle of the Pennines, so it's very difficult to construct in, there's lots of planning and heritage issues associated with some of the listed buildings registered and so on and so on.

But once we'd done all that, we were then able to set out very clearly for funders a range of different options and we presented that report to the Department of Transport last December, as we promised we would. And I'm not able to share with you the intimate detail of the different scenarios, but let me just say that there were four different scenarios that we set out.

The first one, scenario 1, you basically get all the things you want, but it's very expensive. So, I'm not giving any secrets away when I say that is full electrification of the route. You get all of the benefits you want, but blooming heck it's very expensive.

At the other extreme, you do not spend very much money, so it's really good on the cost side, but you just get a little bit of line speed upgrades and a few other bits, it's line straightening and not much else. And of course then there's something in the middle.

And the question from me really is, you're the funder, you're the community, you represent the communities that are going to use this railway – which is it you'd like to buy? You tell me which one you'd like to buy and I'll go and build it.

And I think that's the right question for the funders. It's not for me as the builder of the railway to tell you what kind of railway you need, it's for you as the communities that the railway serve to decide what kind of railway you want.

And the next steps are having to deliver that report. We'll now work with the Department and with Transport for the North to hone a specific option and then ultimately the funder, which is the DfT in this case, will, or the Secretary of State will then a make a decision as to which of those options he thinks is the appropriate one to go for.

I suspect scenario 1 (full electrification on top of a series of other interventions) is not going to happen and the video I referenced a few posts back says it doesn't do so much for speed. I suspect we get grade separation, track speed increases, maybe some 4 tracking and partial electrification in the areas where most is gained for capacity. What is signalling like between Manchester & Leeds?

 

[IanXC]

I have a feeling that Leeds- York will be electrified and to Selby. Improvements will be made to Huddleston Curve. 4 tracking will happen at Heaton Lodge to Ravensthorpe. Miles Platting area to Heyrod Grid Feeder will be electrified. As to the bits in the middle - I really have no idea.

Thats my view too. I struggle to see how the existing proposed services can fit between Leeds and Micklefield without electrification, but it seems to me that 3tph stopping services could be accommodated with electrification. I'm no expert on the other side of the Pennines but I can well believe a similar argument will apply between Victoria and Stalybridge.

4 tracking, select flyovers, and some linespeed improvements would seem the obvious improvements for the centre of the route, potentially alongside some of the separately proposed capacity improvements at Leeds. For instance, dealing with the capacity constraint that is p17 - which could mean moving the 'through platforms for transpennine' a platform across the station.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

The PWI lectures etc in the pinned thread said two feeders in addition to Heyrod. I wonder where they will be. However, if you do not electrify might not need all three. Having said that Grid Feeders and access are very long lead time items so cancelling one would not be good. I will be very interested when the final plan is released.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Marginally more information from a recent speech by Mark Carne

https://cdn.networkrail.co.uk/wp-co...0-Northern-Chambers-Summit-railway-speech.pdf



I suspect scenario 1 (full electrification on top of a series of other interventions) is not going to happen and the video I referenced a few posts back says it doesn't do so much for speed. I suspect we get grade separation, track speed increases, maybe some 4 tracking and partial electrification in the areas where most is gained for capacity. What is signalling like between Manchester & Leeds?

Quite. It's clear that full electrification is being talked down unfortunately. Of the 4 scenarios I'd be very surprised if what we end up with is closer to scenario 1 than it is to 4.

If you're looking at where to put your grid feeders, what are the things that make a particular location desirable? High-voltage power cables passing nearby? A handy bit of disused trackbed such as former sidings? Not in an environmentally sensitive area? Presumably not somewhere prone to flooding...

As a layperson familiar with the route, I can't think of any obvious places if my suppositions above are not too wide of the mark.

 

[snowball]

Ravensthorpe?

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.6...4!1slVMRORR0xrNKpCKBwjDCig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Between Garforth and Micklefield?

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.7...4!1swncT9IPHHglmyMfmwE7YiQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Hambleton (could also serve ECML)?

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.7...4!1sNHb96-uLkOndmheBVJJn5A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

[snowball]

If you're looking at where to put your grid feeders, what are the things that make a particular location desirable? High-voltage power cables passing nearby? A handy bit of disused trackbed such as former sidings? Not in an environmentally sensitive area? Presumably not somewhere prone to flooding...

I'm no expert either, but I would have thought the first of these was the most important, followed by the grid having spare capacity in the area. I wouldn't have thought many areas where a powerline crosses a railway would be so environmentally sensitive as to be a major problem, and as for flooding it's not very difficult to arrange for a substation to be a few feet above ground level (e.g. the Lostock ziggurat).

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'm no expert either, but I would have thought the first of these was the most important, followed by the grid having spare capacity in the area. I wouldn't have thought many areas where a powerline crosses a railway would be so environmentally sensitive as to be a major problem, and as for flooding it's not very difficult to arrange for a substation to be a few feet above ground level (e.g. the Lostock ziggurat).

One place I do know that there's a pylon run crossing the railway is between Batley signal box and the western portal of Morley tunnel. This area is pretty rural and not overly blessed with flat surface adjacent to the railway... there may well be others that are more suitable but none spring to mind from memory. Roughly how far apart to the supply points need to be for the proposed service intensity?

Ravensthorpe?

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.6...4!1slVMRORR0xrNKpCKBwjDCig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Between Garforth and Micklefield?

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.7...4!1swncT9IPHHglmyMfmwE7YiQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Hambleton (could also serve ECML)?

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.7...4!1sNHb96-uLkOndmheBVJJn5A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Cheers for that. Surprised I didn't remember the Ravensthorpe one, a shame there's no longer a power station there... not that it'd have much life left in it in 2018, as a coal-fired plant!

 

[The Ham]

I'm no expert either, but I would have thought the first of these was the most important, followed by the grid having spare capacity in the area. I wouldn't have thought many areas where a powerline crosses a railway would be so environmentally sensitive as to be a major problem, and as for flooding it's not very difficult to arrange for a substation to be a few feet above ground level (e.g. the Lostock ziggurat).

Even in areas not probe to flooding it's not uncommon for a substation to be up on a platform. As you only need a freek surface water flood to mess things up. Also I would guess that it also helps with heat distribution.

 

[YorkshireBear]

From what I can gather it will likely fall somewhere in the middle.

Electrification of steep bits, re-signalling, and some improvements around Huddersfield-Dewsbury.

 

[rich r]

Hambleton (could also serve ECML)?

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.7...4!1sNHb96-uLkOndmheBVJJn5A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Last Autumn a large platform was created alongside the embankment between Gascoigne Wood and South Milford (ie not far from the Milford junction). It's pretty substantial and has what looks to be be metal bases for some structure to bolt down to. Took Network Rail a few months to complete but I've been unable to find out what it's for. Perhaps it's related to future electrification?

 

[edwin_m]

Cheers for that. Surprised I didn't remember the Ravensthorpe one, a shame there's no longer a power station there... not that it'd have much life left in it in 2018, as a coal-fired plant!

Where there used to be a power station there are usually surviving high voltage connections. Heyroad ceased to be a power station way back in the 1980s but evidently was seen as a good place to supply power to the rail network. Unsurprising as it's probably the closest such place to the Pennine ridge. It's also one reason why many gas-fired stations have sprung up on the site of former coal-fired ones.

 

[InTheEastMids]

If you're looking at where to put your grid feeders, what are the things that make a particular location desirable? High-voltage power cables passing nearby?

All the planned/new/recent supply points for rail that I know about are where the 400 kV transmission system intersects the rail line (e.g. Ledburn, Patford Bridge, Braybrooke). So you could have a look at the OS maps that you can download from the link below, and this would quite quickly allow you to narrow it down to a relatively small number of locations.

https://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/abo...and-assets/gas-and-electricity-network-routes

 

[61653 HTAFC]

From what I can gather it will likely fall somewhere in the middle.

Electrification of steep bits, re-signalling, and some improvements around Huddersfield-Dewsbury.

You're probably right... considering that BR managed to electrify the northern end of the WCML in the 70s, it seems odd that doing the whole route is apparently beyond current capabilities. I note the mention of backs of houses close to the railway as a difficulty- presumably a reference to Mossley where I can appreciate that there would be issues.

 

[rebmcr]

From what I can gather it will likely fall somewhere in the middle.

Electrification of steep bits, re-signalling, and some improvements around Huddersfield-Dewsbury.

Or possibly electrification of the "core" Manchester-Leeds corridor, where the greatest number of trains would benefit?

Do any of the tunnels along that section pose specific problems?

 

[Bantamzen]

Reading some of the latest press releases is like playing a game of public sector management excuses bingo. "Its too costly", "Its too difficult", and a new one even on me, "It rains a bit"!!! (I'd love to know what engineers think of that!)

The first fundamental question for any electrification project should be "Why did the last one cost so much, when it can clearly be achieved for less elsewhere?", something that is quite typical of publicly funded projects in the country. We don't seem to learn and improve, we just accept that because it cost so much last time it will cost the same and more per unit. The next one should be "Is partial wiring preferable, and what will the cost be of carrying around all that extra fuel especially when in just 20 years diesel engines are being scaled back by government policy?". This is an example of a disjointed government department, given a long term remit in one hand and having to potentially go against it in the other. Has no-one at DfT thought this one out? No doubt if the Grayling Gaps happen, there will be some vague promise to fill them in at some point in the future, but the issues of cost will be by proxy even greater given current thinking. So if they don't get fully filled now, they likely never will, and DfT will be left trying to find a way of providing traction for 20 year old units across the GGs. As for the rain issue, well this sums up the thinking in Whitehall & DfT. Look for an excuse and try and make it stick. It rains a lot in Manchester, and many other parts of the country & rest of the world too, but that doesn't get in the way of new projects.

There is one serious red herring in all of this too, the issue of speed benefits from electrification. The studies seem to suggest a minimal benefit, however given that the North TP has long been a combination of Intercity (or at least pseudo), semi-fast, stoppers and freight, and given that this pattern will continue, quite honestly short of 4 tracking pretty much all of the route this will continue to be an issue into the future. What they are really saying is that they can maybe chuck in a few track work improvements, maybe a few shortish sections of 4 track and get slightly more benefit at best. However without 4 track throughout there will always be pinch points dictated by the slowest services using the North TP. So if 4 tracking throughout is not an option, and I'd be very surprised if it was for £3Bn, then the same problems will continue. However with electrification the slower services can be given better acceleration to get out of the way or at least to a point where they can be overtaken.

Half solutions like the ones possibly being hinted at are not the answer, and sooner or later will come back to haunt. We are not talking about a massive distance involved, it really should not be this hard to get the wires in from Manchester to York / Selby. Bi-modes can fill the gaps its true, but they are only really a viable option for a couple of decades a the most, sooner or later the diesel engines will have to go and if battery or another other fuel source isn't developed enough to operate services at higher speeds than currently offered the the franchise holder of the North TP is going to be faced with problems. In fact the whole franchise might become something of weight around any potential bidders neck, enough to put some or many off. All to save a bit of cash now.

 

[snowball]

Do any of the tunnels along that section pose specific problems?

No idea but Grayling has appeared to suggest that Standedge does.

 

[YorkshireBear]

No idea but Grayling has appeared to suggest that Standedge does.

Stanedge should be the easiest one! Reopen the old twin bores as electric, close the double bore, electrify and reopen. Hey Presto a 4 track electrified tunnel!!!!!

 

[YorkshireBear]

Or possibly electrification of the "core" Manchester-Leeds corridor, where the greatest number of trains would benefit?

Do any of the tunnels along that section pose specific problems?

I think that has now almost been explicitly ruled out.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Looks like they are making a start on the Manchester - Stalybridge section anyway

https://twitter.com/TheGNRP

 

[snowball]

Here's the press release on that:

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/feeds...hanges-to-services-through-ashton-under-lyne/

Ashton-under-Lyne station will close for 16 days while work takes place to provide passengers with better journeys between Manchester Victoria and Stalybridge.

As part of the Great North Rail Project, Team Orange will be working round-the-clock to remove a signal box, resignal sections of the railway and remodel the track from Saturday 14 April to Sunday 29 April 2018.

The upgrade will increase the linespeed in the area, helping to provide faster journeys, and renew the signalling system, which will make journeys more reliable.

During the work, Northern services will be replaced by buses between Manchester Victoria and Stalybridge. TransPennine Express trains will not run between Manchester Victoria and Liverpool Lime Street, only Manchester Piccadilly. Trains will continue to run from Stalybridge to Manchester Piccadilly station.

Nick Brown, project manager for Network Rail, said: “As part of the Great North Rail Project, this work will help us move towards a more modern railway. Not only are we aiming to improve the line speed but the signalling system at Ashton Moss will be changed so it can be controlled from our state-of-the-art rail operating centre in Manchester.”

Liam Sumpter, regional director for Northern, said: “We’re very sorry for any disruption this vital engineering work will cause for our customers. We are working closely with our partners in the rail industry to help keep people on the move and we will have a robust rail replacement system in place to get our customers where they need to be.”

Customer experience director for TransPennine Express Kathryn O’Brien said: “This essential work will deliver notable enhancements for rail customers across the North.

“There will be changes to our services between Liverpool, Manchester and Leeds, York and the North East over the 16 days and customers are encouraged to check and plan their journeys in advance.”

Preparation work will take place in the area over the coming weeks which will not affect services.

We will also be holding community drop-in sessions on Wednesday 14 March and Monday 16 April 2018 at Ashton Cricket Club, Reyner Lane, Richmond Street, Ashton-under-Lyne, OL7 0AU. Members of the project team will be on hand to answer any questions residents may have in relation to this work.

Passengers are advised to check before they travel at www.nationalrail.co.uk.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Or possibly electrification of the "core" Manchester-Leeds corridor, where the greatest number of trains would benefit?

Do any of the tunnels along that section pose specific problems?

No idea but Grayling has appeared to suggest that Standedge does.

Objection! We can't have sensible talk like that going on! It's all about bi-modes, discontinuous electrification and a refusal to make omelettes here...

 

[59CosG95]

Objection! We can't have sensible talk like that going on! It's all about bi-modes, discontinuous electrification and a refusal to make omelettes here...

Indeed! One could argue that the bi-modal basket is where all of the Grayling eggs are...

 

[jyte]

Note, no mention of wires in that press release.

I'm praying (well not really, I'm agnostic) that the new signalling is AC immunised otherwise someone's going to have to explain at some point why 10-20 year old signalling is being ripped out half way through its lifespan.

Come to think of it, I think all major re-signalling projects should involve with full or provision for AC immunisation.

 

[rebmcr]

Come to think of it, I think all major re-signalling projects should involve with full or provision for AC immunisation.

I think the current trend for axle counters renders immunisation moot.

Does immunisation protect any other systems than track circuits?

 

[snowball]

Note, no mention of wires in that press release.

I'm praying (well not really, I'm agnostic) that the new signalling is AC immunised otherwise someone's going to have to explain at some point why 10-20 year old signalling is being ripped out half way through its lifespan.

Come to think of it, I think all major re-signalling projects should involve with full or provision for AC immunisation.

Any resignalling between Victoria and Stalybridge will have been designed two or three years ago, at a time when the line was due to be electrified by the end of 2017 (if not 2016).

 

[Senex]

I have a feeling that Leeds- York will be electrified and to Selby. Improvements will be made to Huddleston Curve. 4 tracking will happen at Heaton Lodge to Ravensthorpe. Miles Platting area to Heyrod Grid Feeder will be electrified. As to the bits in the middle - I really have no idea.

Why the Huddleston Curve? That's 90 already. Aren't the curves at Neville Hill (50) and Church Fenton (70/80) more significant problems between York and Leeds? (OK So Church Fenton would be difficult, but all Neville Hill needs is to return to the original alignment, still railway-owned.)

 

[Mollman]

I think Mark Carne is canny in his speech by saying - tell us what you (the locals) want and we'll deliver it. Rail North etc all want full electrification, when it isn't proposed Carne can blame the DfT for picking that option and the DfT can say "if you want it you have to pay the difference"

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Why the Huddleston Curve? That's 90 already. Aren't the curves at Neville Hill (50) and Church Fenton (70/80) more significant problems between York and Leeds? (OK So Church Fenton would be difficult, but all Neville Hill needs is to return to the original alignment, still railway-owned.)

On reflection you are probably correct - I still think Leeds -York will get electrified though.

 

[59CosG95]

On reflection you are probably correct - I still think Leeds -York will get electrified though.

Seems likely, given the distance between the two is relatively short and allows for more electric services between the two cities.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Seems a little odd that the Government have announced what they are going to pay for upgrades (£3bn) without apparently saying what upgrades they are going to do (beyond a hint at the possibility of new stations - which doesn't seem very compatible with faster journey times).

Realistically, what kinds of things would £3bn pay for? It seems quite a large amount of money, even by railway upgrade standards.