Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[Halish Railway]

Which "freight" is being discussed here? At the moment barely any freight uses the lines through Huddersfield, as almost all of it runs via Brighouse and the Calder Valley anyway.

There were aspirations of a cross-Pennine intermodal service.

 

[fishwomp]

Yes, I wondered about that. Some of the Drax empties come that way, back to Liverpool but I can't think of anything else regular, east to west.

Well.. there had been Crewe-Leeds freightliners (daily both directions) in the past recent years - via Guide Bridge which the Calder Valley route can't offer a route to. But not much.. so perhaps they have a point, worrying about something not real when they could save a bit of spend. Leeds and Immingham - Trafford park are Q paths in the timetable, the immingham one would liekly be loaded I guess.

Crossing over at the bottom of the incline (Huddersfield) means the freight can't take a run at the incline and will probably be slower all the way up. Doing so at Marsden, it will decelerate rapidly as it is still climbing, and after crossing over it will soon enter the level section through Standege tunnel where it can pick up speed relatively soon. So I'd say Huddersfield is the larger problem.

It was a little badly written - as Modern Railways said 'the overtaking service', which would actually not be something you'd wait for at Huddersfield, the point is to go to the crawler lane before it overtakes (between Huddersfield and Marsden, or it doesn't and you sit at Marsden). You'd not sit at Huddersfield for something to overtake you, and then go to the crawler lane, it'd defeat the point of the crawler lane. Keeping the freight on the fast line between Mirfield (6 miles and then to Marsden 7 miles, and then all the way to Stalybridge (another 12 miles) (and possibly to Man Vic, or Pic, depending on who's going where...) seems to be putting the 60-75mph freight in the 90-100mph fast line for rather a long distance- 25 miles!.

Agreed - seems to me it's not been fully thought through. It's also fairly steep ascending most of the way from Mirfield to Huddersfield where the freight would be trying to use the "fast" line. The ideal situation would be a fast crossover just west of Huddersfield station and speeds to allow freight to get through the station and join the two-track section with the minimum of braking. But there are probably all sorts of reasons that won't work.

Yep. The gradient profile is in an earlier post this week on this thread (on this page - #7383)

It might even be cheaper to buy a batch of electric locos and hand them over to freight operators on the condition they use them for all trains on this route.

Check with NRM if they've got a spare pair of EM1s for banking?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Isn't the aim to get W12 gauge via Standedge?
That would be capable of traffic that currently can't use any of the trans-Pennine routes.

The Modern Railways article points out some options from reports, but the main thrust from advisors is that the project needs to be a holistic one and not just an infrastructure silo project to suit the engineers.
The third track up to Marsden could also be added when the NPR scope is better defined (ie the western approach to the tunnel).
Huddersfield-Stalybridge is also likely to be an ETCS-only section, with the sections east to Leeds and west to Manchester using overlays on existing signals.

Also noted is that Rob McIntosh, who has just switched from running NR's Eastern Region to North West & Central, has taken TRU responsibility with him.

 

[quantinghome]

TRU promised 35 minutes after upgrades in track alignments, electrification and increased lie speeds.#

Where did they promise this? I've never seen it.

A Don Coffey video showed that 45 minutes is possible now albeit non-stop.
£Billions spent on a new, straighter alignment to save 5 minutes on journey time is a complete waste.

Euston-Glasgow is possible in 3h53 'albeit non-stop', but that's not really relevant for a standard timetabled train in full traffic.

The aim of TRU is to achieve reliable journey time and capacity improvements within the limitations of the existing infrastructure. It's very expensive for sure, but that's what you get for decades of faffing.

 

[billh]

Check with NRM if they've got a spare pair of EM1s for banking?

You well know there's only 26020. However, a couple of EM2s are still about , just fit a transformer /SMPS where the train heat boiler was and a modern rectifier and there you go.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Would it be possible for someone to post the text from this Modern Railways article? It's sparked a fair bit of discussion but many forum users have no context for the points being made in response.

TIA.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I think the idea is that people buy a copy, or subscribe...
It's Roger Ford's analysis of the costs of TRU ("£3.9 billion more for TRU while cost pressures continue").

 

[deltic08]

Where did they promise this? I've never seen it.

I attended a presentation in Leeds at least ten years ago on TRU where an aspiration was for 35 minutes Manchester-Leeds with one stop at Huddersfield or 60 minutes Manchester-York stopping at Huddersfield and Leeds. Leeds-York is already 20 minutes so should be sub 20 minutes when all speed limits from Leeds are increased by 20/25 mph The original plan was for 125mph on the Dewsbury-Huddersfield section which has been downgraded to 110mph now.

 

[snowball]

I attended a presentation in Leeds at least ten years ago on TRU where an aspiration was for 35 minutes Manchester-Leeds with one stop at Huddersfield or 60 minutes Manchester-York stopping at Huddersfield and Leeds.

I thought that ten years ago the plan was for electrification only, with no track upgrades.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

The PWI one in February 2017 also gave quite a bit of detail. That of course was after McCloughlin unpaused it.

PWI Seminar about Northern Programmes with a good chunk on Transpennine Upgrade

 

[deltic08]

I thought that ten years ago the plan was for electrification only, with no track upgrades.

Must have been more than ten years then.

 

[snowball]

Press release

Amended: Transpennine Route Upgrade wraps up Christmas and New Year upgrades

Transpennine Route Upgrade successfully concludes Christmas and New Year Projects, paving the way for a greener, faster and more reliable railway.

www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk

Transpennine Route Upgrade successfully concludes Christmas and New Year Projects, paving the way for a greener, faster and more reliable railway.

Despite difficult weather conditions, dedicated engineers worked around the clock throughout the festive season between Manchester, Huddersfield, Leeds and York to:

Replace track points just outside of York, allowing trains to move between different railway lines
Replace and upgrade the track through Mirfield
Decommission platform 2 at Mirfield Station
Install a new under-track crossing at Huddersfield Station

While the above took place, extensive piling and electrification work was completed across various sections of the route, alongside signalling and telecommunication equipment testing.

The Hope Valley Railway Upgrade, which relieves historic bottlenecks between Manchester and Sheffield, also witnessed substantial upgrades notably the replacement of a bridge just north of Dore & Totley Station.

Neil Holm, Managing Director for Transpennine Route Upgrade said:

“Some fantastic work has taken place over the festive period in very tough weather conditions. I’m really proud of everyone who played their part to get the jobs over the line. These achievements allow us to continue with a number of major upgrades this year, continuing TRU's progress and bringing us closer to fast, greener and more reliable electric trains running between Manchester and York”.

The Transpennine Route Upgrade (TRU) is a major, multi-billion-pound programme of railway improvements which will bring better journeys to passengers travelling across the Pennines between Manchester, Huddersfield, Leeds and York.

Notes to Editors

General Key Facts on TRU

We’re transforming journeys across the North, better connecting towns and cities through
more frequent, faster trains, running on a cleaner, greener and more reliable railway.

TRU will bring passengers:

• More trains to choose from and more seats. Our improvements will enable more
trains to run between Manchester, Huddersfield, Leeds and York with up to six fast
services every hour between Leeds and Manchester and up to two stopping
services for local connectivity.
• Faster journeys so you can travel to your favourite towns and cities more quickly.
Our fastest journey times are forecast to be 63-66 minutes between Manchester
and York and 41-42 minutes between Manchester and Leeds.
• More reliable journeys with trains that run on-time
• Better stations across the Transpennine route, bringing passengers a better travel
experience through improved, more accessible stations
• Greener travel, reducing our carbon footprint and improving air quality. Our plans
aim to save up to 87,000 tonnes of carbon emissions each year – supporting the
government’s Net Zero objectives. We’re also developing a proposal to move more
goods by rail (up to 15 more freight trains each day.)
• Together, these freight trains are expected to remove over 1,000 lorries off the road each day.


TRU will bring local communities:

• Jobs for local people. Our workforce will be local, with 80% employment from
within a 40-mile radius of the route, and 60% employment from within a 25-mile
radius. With a current workforce of around 2000 people, we estimate that could
double over the course of the programme. We’ll employ an apprentice for every
£4million spent.
• Improved natural environments near the railway through 10% biodiversity net
gain across the route. This will create or enhance habitats for wildlife.
The multi-billion-pound Transpennine Route Upgrade (TRU) will bring this line into the
21st century with 70-miles of fully electric, digital railway. Our plans include:
• Electrifying the whole route between Manchester and York via Huddersfield and
Leeds
• Installing a new digital signalling system along the Transpennine route

• Doubling the number of tracks from two to four between Huddersfield and
Westtown in Dewsbury.
• Station improvements along the route to enhance customer experience, comfort
and accessibility
• Improving the railway on diversionary routes to allow more trains to run, to help
keep passengers and freight moving while the core Transpennine route is closed to
deliver essential upgrades. This will provide capacity and reliability improvements
for future too.

 

[chazi898]

Crossing over at the bottom of the incline (Huddersfield) means the freight can't take a run at the incline and will probably be slower all the way up. Doing so at Marsden, it will decelerate rapidly as it is still climbing, and after crossing over it will soon enter the level section through Standege tunnel where it can pick up speed relatively soon. So I'd say Huddersfield is the larger problem.

Agreed - seems to me it's not been fully thought through. It's also fairly steep ascending most of the way from Mirfield to Huddersfield where the freight would be trying to use the "fast" line. The ideal situation would be a fast crossover just west of Huddersfield station and speeds to allow freight to get through the station and join the two-track section with the minimum of braking. But there are probably all sorts of reasons that won't work.

It might even be cheaper to buy a batch of electric locos and hand them over to freight operators on the condition they use them for all trains on this route.

I don't know what the exit speeds are for Huddersfield station, but the way I'd do it is have a medium-fast crossover of 50mph or even 60mph on the viaduct just east of Huddersfield station. Yes it duplicates the exits at the west end of the platforms, but means stoppers can be looped in the platforms, to let the freight fly through; although that's a problem if the limit through the station is already low. I'm also assuming the crawler lane would be on the south side given that's where platform 3 is at Marsden.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I don't know what the exit speeds are for Huddersfield station, but the way I'd do it is have a medium-fast crossover of 50mph or even 60mph on the viaduct just east of Huddersfield station. Yes it duplicates the exits at the west end of the platforms, but means stoppers can be looped in the platforms, to let the freight fly through; although that's a problem if the limit through the station is already low. I'm also assuming the crawler lane would be on the south side given that's where platform 3 is at Marsden.

If the "crawler lane" (not a term I'm fond of tbh) is bidirectional, it ought to be in the middle as this will reduce conflicts at either end of the three-track section. If the three-tracking goes ahead I'd expect that both Slaithwaite and Marsden stations will be completely rebuilt, not least because the "flatpack" platforms are barely fit for purpose and the two older platforms at Marsden are not accessible.

 

[chazi898]

If the "crawler lane" (not a term I'm fond of tbh) is bidirectional, it ought to be in the middle as this will reduce conflicts at either end of the three-track section. If the three-tracking goes ahead I'd expect that both Slaithwaite and Marsden stations will be completely rebuilt, not least because the "flatpack" platforms are barely fit for purpose and the two older platforms at Marsden are not accessible.

Yes I'm also guessing Slaithwaite and Marsden will be rebuilt somehow, and yes that would reduce conflicts, but I was under the assumption that you wouldn't need a separate track going downhill, since you wouldn't be crawling; I'd expect a freight can easily get up to linespeed and rattle through Huddersfield on to the slows however fast those divergencies may be. As we know Marsden to Huddersfield is currently one of the few places over the pennines where trains can go above 75, so I wouldn't see it as a huge detriment, especially if electric intermodal is sped up in the future.

 

[thealexweb]

I don't think Northern have any trains that can do automatic power changeover. Their only bimodes are the 769s which i'm pretty sure are manual changeover only.

In Porterbrook's initial PR documents power change over on the move was a promised feature of the 769. Guess it didn't work lol.

 

[Halish Railway]

I'd expect a freight can easily get up to linespeed and rattle through Huddersfield on to the slows however fast those divergencies may be.

The alternative would be to switch from the fast lines to the slow lines and vice versa between Mirfield and Ravensthorpe where a ladder is expected to be installed. I'd expect the divergencies there to be much faster than those around Huddersfield station as there is more room to play with.

 

[chazi898]

The alternative would be to switch from the fast lines to the slow lines and vice versa between Mirfield and Ravensthorpe where a ladder is expected to be installed. I'd expect the divergencies there to be much faster than those around Huddersfield station as there is more room to play with.

See the issue I'm seeing is putting the crossovers between Mirfield and Ravensthorpe means the freight using the fast lines for another 4-5 miles, which defeats the point of letting the express train overtake. I thought by putting it just before Huddersfield station, the express would've already overtaken it, hence the freight gets a good run, plus the express gets a good run.

 

[Jozhua]

If NPR isn't going to happen, then at least TRU needs to be done properly.

I find a lot of these reports really heavily focus on journey times, forgetting that they are also going to need to accommodate more passengers if the journey becomes more convenient by rail...

Upgrading the existing network is no easy feat, but projects should really aim to be increasing both capacity and speed where possible. TRU seems to be doing a good job of this, providing it isn't overly fiddled with...

 

[Mr Mean]

That was my thinking too- though the current car park and platform 3 is on the wrong side of station road from the island, so any new access will require a pedestrian walkway to the new bridge. This disused bridge under discussion would provide that. The drawings suggest as much.

Must say I'm not in favour of infilling the current stairwell, although there have been problems with subsidence on the island platform over the years particularly near the top of those stairs. One advantage of the stairs is the convenient access they provide to Mirfield village, the Lidl, and the Navigation Inn. Having to go "round the houses" to enter or exit the station will be a bit of a pain in the proverbial.

I found this image online for Mirfield. It looks like there will be a staircase and lift from station road to platform level, albeit from the other side of the road.

Upgrade works to start at Mirfield Station - Rail UK

Upgrade works to start at Mirfield Station - Stations

railuk.com

 

[stibz]

Why do the Fall Lane houses need to go?

That is what workmen told me that are working down Fall Lane, how it works I don't know yet, not seen plans for there.

Which "freight" is being discussed here? At the moment barely any freight uses the lines through Huddersfield, as almost all of it runs via Brighouse and the Calder Valley anyway.

Yes and very very rare that anything loaded (freight) goes through Huddersfield.

 

[cuemaster]

I found this image online for Mirfield. It looks like there will be a staircase and lift from station road to platform level, albeit from the other side of the road.

Upgrade works to start at Mirfield Station - Rail UK

Upgrade works to start at Mirfield Station - Stations

railuk.com

Maybe they will they gate off the current access at road level to platforms 1/2 and just make a feature of the station's former entrance/exit at platform level...

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Maybe they will they gate off the current access at road level to platforms 1/2 and just make a feature of the station's former entrance/exit at platform level...

I would hope that the island platform will be completely ripped up and started again. Over the years there have been multiple cases of subsidence due to corners being cut when the station was downgraded in the post-WW2 period. I wouldn't be averse to the current stairwell becoming a flowerbed, as long as it's built to last and won't start sinking within ten years.

 

[snowball]

I found this image online for Mirfield. It looks like there will be a staircase and lift from station road to platform level, albeit from the other side of the road.

Indeed it's in the press release linked in #7315.

 

[stibz]

Just updated my photos of Mirfield station, and the new track alignment done over the new year. On my flickr, Drone images today.

 

[AL1875]

Which parts of the scheme are under works now or have plans drawn up?

As far as I can tell:

Victoria to Stalybridge is pretty much complete, bar electric services running.

Stalybridge to Huddersfield nothing has been done, either plans or any work.

Huddersfield to Dewsbury plans are in place and funded, work to start soon.

Dewsbury to Leeds - some minor changes at Batley and Morley, anything else planned?

Leeds to Church Fenton - nothing done and no plans published

Church Fenton to York - Pretty much done?

I would be grateful if the far better informed would update me/let me know if the above is in any way inaccurate.

 

[coxxy]

Which parts of the scheme are under works now or have plans drawn up?

As far as I can tell:

Victoria to Stalybridge is pretty much complete, bar electric services running.

Stalybridge to Huddersfield nothing has been done, either plans or any work.

Huddersfield to Dewsbury plans are in place and funded, work to start soon.

Dewsbury to Leeds - some minor changes at Batley and Morley, anything else planned?

Leeds to Church Fenton - nothing done and no plans published

Church Fenton to York - Pretty much done?

I would be grateful if the far better informed would update me/let me know if the above is in any way inaccurate.

Staly to Huddersfield - looks to be quite a bit ot ground works happening between diggle and Huddersfield. Can pretty much tell where they will be putting new signals etc. Believe it relates to diggle signal box being removed.

 

[Halish Railway]

Leeds to Church Fenton - nothing done and no plans published

I think all of the largest interventions have had plans published, such as foot crossing closures and the closure and replacement of the Rose Lane level crossing at Church Fenton.

Works have advanced - Piling for electrification between Church Fenton and Micklefield, the replacement of the footbridge at Garforth and clearing taking place around Neville Hill to realign the running lines.

 

[cuemaster]

I would hope that the island platform will be completely ripped up and started again. Over the years there have been multiple cases of subsidence due to corners being cut when the station was downgraded in the post-WW2 period. I wouldn't be averse to the current stairwell becoming a flowerbed, as long as it's built to last and won't start sinking within ten years.

Subsidence tends to settle down over time so maybe its a historic issue....Regarding the platforms, one hopes they would completely renew everything rather than skimp now and then have some issues in 5/10 years time....!!

 

[1D53]

Works have advanced - Piling for electrification between Church Fenton and Micklefield, the replacement of the footbridge at Garforth and clearing taking place around Neville Hill to realign the running lines.

Apologies for the pedantry but the Garforth work isn't TRU, it's a long funded Access for All scheme