Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[GRALISTAIR]

Arguably it's going rather smoothly *because* little fuss is being made.

EXACTLY. If the teams can now just to be left to get on with it quietly and without fuss or interference, great results can be had.

 

[Nottingham59]

EXACTLY. If the teams can now just to be left to get on with it quietly and without fuss or interference, great results can be had.

That depends if they are delivering the cost improvements needed to justify continuing electrification.

The contractors and the customer need continual pressure to get costs down, and to disseminate best practice across the industry. And my limited understanding of the process suggests that isn't really happening.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Oh trust me I agree with you. On time and under budget and continuing cost reductions needed.

 

[John R]

That depends if they are delivering the cost improvements needed to justify continuing electrification.

The contractors and the customer need continual pressure to get costs down, and to disseminate best practice across the industry. And my limited understanding of the process suggests that isn't really happening.

But TRU is a lot more than just electrification. Maybe progress on the MML is a better litmus test for future "vanilla" electrification projects?

 

[Nottingham59]

But TRU is a lot more than just electrification. Maybe progress on the MML is a better litmus test for future "vanilla" electrification projects?

Well it's both. The MML and GWEP projects mentioned were pure electrification. TRU is electrification and upgrade with extra tracks too.

But the cost of TRU was estimated at £2.9bn in 2018, and then jumped to £11.5bn in 2022. (plus an extra £1bn added since then) So TRU has been suffering from the same unconstrained cost explosion that all rail projects seem to have experienced in the past five years. Just letting the rail industry get on with it and paying whatever bill they eventually present to the taxpayer is not getting good value for money,

 

[josh-j]

Well it's both. The MML and GWEP projects mentioned were pure electrification. TRU is electrification and upgrade with extra tracks too.

But the cost of TRU was estimated at £2.9bn in 2018, and then jumped to £11.5bn in 2022. (plus an extra £1bn added since then) So TRU has been suffering from the same unconstrained cost explosion that all rail projects seem to have experienced in the past five years. Just letting the rail industry get on with it and paying whatever bill they eventually present to the taxpayer is not getting good value for money,

I thought the scope of TRU has been increased quite a lot since 2018 though. Generally I think value for money would be much improved by bringing a lot of engineering skill in-house rather than having contractors subcontracting to subcontracting subcontractors - as well as by proper planning without constant chopping and changing of scope.

 

[Class 170101]

It's arguably the section that gives the least benefit, as all it allows is LNER to run out of Leeds via Micklefield on Electric, which they don't do particularly often, and have bi-modes if they do need to do it in an emergency. OLE projects need to be based on a regular operation use-case, which is why I'd prioritise Doncaster-Hull via Selby, to get the benefits of the highest-revenue trains with the biggest economic impact (to/from London) to cover the largest section of costs. Once that's done, Selby-Micklefield is a smaller section of infill to allow local trains to go all-electric and the 4 chords (Sherburn-Gascoigne Wood, both Hambletons, and Selby avoiding) would be essentially part of the overruns anyway.

Possibly, although it's presumably not had any recent investigation or design work so you'd need to jump through PACE 1 and 2 extremely quickly to be able to follow on from the existing project without a break in the workflow.

I don't think Doncaster to Hull has a better business case than Micklefield to Hambleton. 5 to 6 trains daily that could use the wires doesn't look great. I think you need Hull to Leeds with the links between Selby and Doncaster and Selby and York (via both routes) all wired to make it worthwhile.

Oh trust me I agree with you. On time and under budget and continuing cost reductions needed.

In a way I think the East Kilbride wiring will be a better measure of how costs could be reduced simply because its a simple close, construct the scheme and reopen again. My personal view is this is what they should do / have done in chunks between Kettering and Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield.

 

[MatthewHutton]

I don't think Doncaster to Hull has a better business case than Micklefield to Hambleton. 5 to 6 trains daily that could use the wires doesn't look great. I think you need Hull to Leeds with the links between Selby and Doncaster and Selby and York (via both routes) all wired to make it worthwhile.


In a way I think the East Kilbride wiring will be a better measure of how costs could be reduced simply because its a simple close, construct the scheme and reopen again. My personal view is this is what they should do / have done in chunks between Kettering and Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield.

Certainly on sections without lots of rail freight they should look at avoiding bridge changes etc.

 

[Spartacus]

That depends if they are delivering the cost improvements needed to justify continuing electrification.

The contractors and the customer need continual pressure to get costs down, and to disseminate best practice across the industry. And my limited understanding of the process suggests that isn't really happening.

A major problem with such an approach is that it leads to a seemingly constant stop-start process when someone decides this isn't the most effect way here, or that isn't the most effective way there. All you end up with then is the increased costs and overruns you were seeking to avoid; it's a self fulfilling prophesy. The best way of going about it is by customer driven even pressure so that you get a measured response, and that's usually done nice and quietly, at least to those on the outside, not through some media or political driven scrum.

Well it's both. The MML and GWEP projects mentioned were pure electrification. TRU is electrification and upgrade with extra tracks too.

But the cost of TRU was estimated at £2.9bn in 2018, and then jumped to £11.5bn in 2022. (plus an extra £1bn added since then) So TRU has been suffering from the same unconstrained cost explosion that all rail projects seem to have experienced in the past five years. Just letting the rail industry get on with it and paying whatever bill they eventually present to the taxpayer is not getting good value for money,

The last I heard TPU approved funding was £7.2bn but whatever it is, and even putting inflation aside the costs have been growing because the scope has been growing, from electrification to large scale rebuilds and route improvements. Few people were thinking seriously about big rebuilds between Huddersfield and Dewsbury or at Mossley when the program of electrification was launched. When 6tph was first mooted over 10 years ago a colleague and I decided the only way to get it to work reliably would be grade separation at Ravensthorpe, but we never seriously considered it happening!

 

[Mag_seven]

Another reminder that posts in this thread should be confined to Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

thanks

 

[Scotrail88]

Sorry if noted above but are bi modes still changing at York when heading to Leeds?
If so, when will they continue to run on electric to Church Fenton?

 

[Halish Railway]

Sorry if noted above but are bi modes still changing at York when heading to Leeds?
If so, when will they continue to run on electric to Church Fenton?

It’s around Askham Bar, where the park and ride is that the changeover currently happens. I’m not familiar with the timescale that the electrification to Church Fenton will be used.

 

[zwk500]

Sorry if noted above but are bi modes still changing at York when heading to Leeds?
If so, when will they continue to run on electric to Church Fenton?

According to the Network Rail March update (screenshotted in the quoted post), Entry into service for Church Fenton - York electrification is currently programmed for April 2026.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/who-we-are/publications-and-resources/ Is worth keeping an eye on, as at the bottom is the current Enhancement works document. (Latest is March 2025) https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/CP7-EDP_March-2025.pdf

 

[Grumpy]

Meanwhile work proceeds with groundworks for the new traincare depot at Shipley-

 

[Ploughman]

What No tower block of Portacabins?

 

[AndrewE]

What No tower block of Portacabins?

Land must be cheap in yorkshire!