Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[YorkshireBear]

Seems to be a lot of stanedge talk, wasn't it confirmed ages ago the issue is at Stalybridge Tunnel and the houses adjacent to Mossley Station.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Seems to be a lot of stanedge talk, wasn't it confirmed ages ago the issue is at Stalybridge Tunnel and the houses adjacent to Mossley Station.

Not sure about Stalybridge tunnel but absolutely the houses at Mossley are a key issue that would need to be resolved.

 

[grumpyoldman01]

Interesting article on 'The Guardian' website at:

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...-considering-flawed-transpennine-rail-upgrade

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Interesting article on 'The Guardian' website at:

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...-considering-flawed-transpennine-rail-upgrade

If this is true it does not include Leeds to York - that is absolutely effing stupid

 

[59CosG95]

If this is true it does not include Leeds to York - that is absolutely effing stupid

While I have no idea on shadow Transport Sec Andy McDonald's proposed policies for the route, they might well be a better alternative to what Chris Grayling is proposing should No. 10 Downing Street pass into a Labour gov't. And given all the recent hubbub about this Brexit business and the vote in Parliament on the 11th, the tables may well turn by the year's end.

 

[deltic08]

If this is true it does not include Leeds to York - that is absolutely effing stupid

Grayling is a waste of oxygen in everything he does.
Leeds to Micklefield was supposed to be quadrified before electrification and what about the bridges that have already been raised between Church Fenton and Colton Jnc?

 

[385001]

So Liverpool to Newcastle/Edinburgh services could end up as:

Liverpool to Manchester - Electric
Manchester to Huddersfield - Diesel
Huddersfield to Leeds - Electric
Leeds to York - Diesel
York to Newcastle/Edinburgh - Electric

Not electrifying Leeds to York seems absolutely crazy!

 

[yorksrob]

Seems like a dogs breakfast of a scheme. I can understand not widening tunnels for freight (if the corridor ever does gain a freight demand, reopening Woodhead would seem a less disruptive option) but they should certainly be looking to electrify what we have now (including the loops that we already have). They should also consider increasing loop provision where beneficial.

 

[Bantamzen]

Interesting article on 'The Guardian' website at:

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...-considering-flawed-transpennine-rail-upgrade

If this is true, and I fear it is, this is off the scale even for Grayling. What would be the point in wiring Leeds to Huddersfield if only a fraction of the services using it (i.e. the Leeds-Huddersfield stoppers) could ever run fully as EMUs, which is unlikely so even they would be TPEs bi-modes dragging diesel engines around with them. If Grayling goes ahead with this half arsed idea, it will just further evidence what an incompetent, idiotic government we have.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Network Rail will have given the DfT a priced menu of options.
Grayling has evidently set a project budget of £3 billion for the CP6 period.
This proposal looks like a selection from the menu which adds up to...£3bn.
It also probably includes ETCS in the central section (and maybe on the Castlefield corridor) to increase capacity.
We still have to see what linkage there is (if any) between this scheme and NPR/HS2 thinking - which will not be for early resolution or on CP6 timescales.
Freight needs a W12 trans-Pennine route but can always use Calder Valley or Hope Valley if one of those routes is cleared instead.
Freight via Standedge doesn't make much sense with a 2-track dense passenger service anyway.

 

[superkev]

If this is true, and I fear it is, this is off the scale even for Grayling. What would be the point in wiring Leeds to Huddersfield if only a fraction of the services using it (i.e. the Leeds-Huddersfield stoppers) could ever run fully as EMUs, which is unlikely so even they would be TPEs bi-modes dragging diesel engines around with them. If Grayling goes ahead with this half arsed idea, it will just further evidence what an incompetent, idiotic government we have.

Watching a cab ride Leeds Manchester on Don Coffe's YouTube site at

I couldnt help but thinking upgrading the route for higher speeds and more capacity is almost impossible.
Best start thinking of a new route under the pennines but I suppose this is north of Watford so try bridge the existing. Incidentally Leeds Manchester is roughly the same as London as central line and I read somewhere that with modern machinery tunnelling cost little more than surface when red tape and land purchase was factored in.
Tunnel from Brighouse to Oldham perhaps!!!
K

 

[AndrewE]

Tunnel from Brighouse to Oldham perhaps!!!
K

I'm beginning to think that this would be the best solution, as long as the Manchester station is connected to all (or at least most) of the conurbation's radial routes.
One problem: unfortunately Oldham hasn't got any heavy rail any more, but I suppose it could get a new route!

 

[Halifaxlad]

If this is true it does not include Leeds to York - that is absolutely effing stupid

I thought Leeds - York was getting a brand new line as part of NPHR from what I read somewhere.

 

[deltic08]

I thought Leeds - York was getting a brand new line as part of NPHR from what I read somewhere.

The route bypassed York and joined the ECML somewhere near Northallerton.

It was to give a Leeds- Newcastle timing of one hour, but was cancelled in 2017.

 

[Chester1]

So Liverpool to Newcastle/Edinburgh services could end up as:

Liverpool to Manchester - Electric
Manchester to Huddersfield - Diesel
Huddersfield to Leeds - Electric
Leeds to York - Diesel
York to Newcastle/Edinburgh - Electric

Not electrifying Leeds to York seems absolutely crazy!

Piccadilly and Victoria to Stalybridge will be electrified as part of their own scheme which is enormously delayed but not cancelled. So the gaps would be Stalybridge-Huddersfield and Leeds-York. The latter would be more strange to leave unelectrified.

 

[Ken H]

Piccadilly and Victoria to Stalybridge will be electrified as part of their own scheme which is enormously delayed but not cancelled. So the gaps would be Stalybridge-Huddersfield and Leeds-York. The latter would be more strange to leave unelectrified.

Surely Leeds-York would be easy. Its already done Leeds stn to Neville Hill and Colton Jct - York. No tunnels or complicated bits. No mining once past Micklefield (I think)

 

[Chester1]

Surely Leeds-York would be easy. Its already done Leeds stn to Neville Hill and Colton Jct - York. No tunnels or complicated bits. No mining once past Micklefield (I think)

I agree, it would be odd to leave out. Stalybridge-Huddersfield is different though. I suspect one of the issues is finding the time after altering alignments and replacing the entire signalling system. The upgrade will probably do a lot of the gauge clearing required so it would be a easy infill project after 2024. The Scarborough and Hull services will be diesel or bi modes. If the whole route is wired the best outcome would be EMUs on stoppers and replacing the locos for Mark Vs and putting them on Liverpool-Newcastle-Edinburgh and Manchester Airport-Newcastle. Middlesbrough, Scarborough and Hull services could then be run with 802s when possible. Its not a vast improvement compared with wiring a slower line elsewhere in the north e.g. the CLC.

 

[greyman42]

Surely Leeds-York would be easy. Its already done Leeds stn to Neville Hill and Colton Jct - York. No tunnels or complicated bits. No mining once past Micklefield (I think)

It would also benefit the ECML regarding diversions.

 

[td97]

If a route with a minimum of 4tph of BMMU/EMU capability, including the benefits of fast-accelerating stoppers, of basically flat open countryside is not worthy of electrification then I don't know what is. For comparison with recent schemes; Chat Moss: 3tph EMU (and that's only on 1/2 the route), St Helens: 3tph EMU, Bolton: 4tph EMU (until Cl.769 in service and a question mark over the return of TPE).

Something that did occur to me is the differences with the west/east of Leeds having different contractors & consultants
West: Amey, BAM, Arup i.e. standard structure of consultant and contractors with good recent experience.
East: VolkerRail, Murphy, Siemens - notable lack of dedicated, experienced design consultant.

 

[deltic08]

I agree, it would be odd to leave out. Stalybridge-Huddersfield is different though. I suspect one of the issues is finding the time after altering alignments and replacing the entire signalling system. The upgrade will probably do a lot of the gauge clearing required so it would be a easy infill project after 2024. The Scarborough and Hull services will be diesel or bi modes. If the whole route is wired the best outcome would be EMUs on stoppers and replacing the locos for Mark Vs and putting them on Liverpool-Newcastle-Edinburgh and Manchester Airport-Newcastle. Middlesbrough, Scarborough and Hull services could then be run with 802s when possible. Its not a vast improvement compared with wiring a slower line elsewhere in the north e.g. the CLC.

Why should we have to wait another 7 or 8 years for electrification of our main east/west artery connecting 4 of our 6 Northern Powerhouse commercial hubs.

Using IETs to Middlesbrough/Newcastle/Edinburgh would be better as they would fit in with other 125mph electric stock on the ECML Keep the Mark Vs on lower speed unelectrified routes to Hull and Scarborough unless very straight Selby-Brough is upgraded to 125mph.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It would also benefit the ECML regarding diversions.

It would also allow Leeds Scotland direct electric service

 

[superkev]

Why should we have to wait another 7 or 8 years for electrification of our main east/west artery connecting 4 of our 6 Northern Powerhouse commercial hubs

Its taken Network rail and its gravy train longer than the 2nd world war to electrify the 30 miles from Preston to Manchester authorised 2012 so I wouldn't live in hope.
K

 

[yorksrob]

The route bypassed York and joined the ECML somewhere near Northallerton.

It was to give a Leeds- Newcastle timing of one hour, but was cancelled in 2017.

To be fair, it's pointless to exclude York. It's a major urban centre. Why did people consider going out of it anyway ?

 

[edwin_m]

To be fair, it's pointless to exclude York. It's a major urban centre. Why did people consider going out of it anyway ?

Going from Leeds to Newcastle via York is indirect compared to a route that approximately follows the A1. However I agree York is an important centre, and also it neatly bypasses the four-track section of the ECML to land back on the two-track section where capacity is more under pressure.

 

[Chester1]

Why should we have to wait another 7 or 8 years for electrification of our main east/west artery connecting 4 of our 6 Northern Powerhouse commercial hubs.

Using IETs to Middlesbrough/Newcastle/Edinburgh would be better as they would fit in with other 125mph electric stock on the ECML Keep the Mark Vs on lower speed unelectrified routes to Hull and Scarborough unless very straight Selby-Brough is upgraded to 125mph.

Mark Vs are designed for 125mph. I agree it should be electrified but if the cost is considered worse value than £3bn of other upgrades to the line then you have to question how much improvement it will actually bring. The price of the UKs obsession with make do and mend that leads to huge opposition to any new piece of infrastructure is that we are reliant on upgrades that are disruptive and time consuming. I am happy with £600m a year of investment in the line for 5 years while plans for NPR are worked out. I am open to what options are the best use of that money. If NPR doesn't go ahead then there should be a huge push for the same funding for another 5 years (this time including Hope Valley), at that point electrification would nearly certainly be better value for money than other upgrade options.

 

[deltic08]

Mark Vs are designed for 125mph.

But the class 68 locos propelling them are maximum 100mph.

 

[swt_passenger]

Is it possible to narrow down exactly which length of track “12 miles east of Leeds” means? I see this is sometimes being interpreted as affecting Leeds to York passenger traffic, but is that definitely correct?

 

[Ploughman]

Approx 19m 6c @ Neville Hill West to Micklefield mileage change @10m 50 = 8m 36
5m 40 at Colton to Micklefield 15m 62c mileage change = 10m 22c

makes 18m 58c
Bit more than 12m

 

[bluenoxid]

What is Neville Hill-Hambleton Junction and Neville Hill - Selby?

Could someone have pulled out the decade plus plans for an electric horseshoe?

 

[Ploughman]

It's about 15m to Hambleton south from N Hill West.
These mileages are from a Quail Map.