Would it be possible to widen the 33 chains of 4-track between Farington Curve and Skew Bridge junctions to 6 tracks and thus give the East and West Lancs lines a segregated approach to Preston using the present goods lines on the western side of the formation? It looks as if a formidable retaining wall would be needed, as well as rearrangement at Preston and reinstatement of (one face of) the former western island for passenger use. Anyone know if it's been looked at and ruled out already?
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Wigan - Preston Upgrade?
- Thread starter Mathew S
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
GRALISTAIR
Established Member
Not sure that would have a good BCR personally.
You would need to rebuild two road bridges and a gas main (I think) as well as replace cuttings slopes with retaining walls. The Goods Lines will need upgrading too as they only have 25mph speed limit.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
That section includes the bridge over the Ribble. The Goods lines appear to be a separate structure from the other four, and I wouldn't be surprised if it needed some work to allow higher speeds.
At Wigan North Western it looks like there is space for a new island on the west side (need extra bridge deck to south). Then the down island could be demolished to enable non-platform fast tracks down the centre. While you are at it build a west side entrance and car park which would be much easier traffic wise.
From google it looks like some of the bridges to the north have abutments for quadrupling, but not all of them - was there an aborted plan? I reckon you could get quadrupling through but it would be disruptive like through Tamworth etc.
Squeezing six into Preston doesn’t look insurmountable- relatively easy sloped cuttings. Might be useful for separating WCML services from local and Calder Valley services.
Is there any way of grade separating Euxton?! Buckshaw new housing has taken away ramp options and the A49 and M6 are really awkward.
Best I can guess is to turn the Chorley line tighter to run parallel for a bit whilst the fast lines duck down under the Chorleys crossing over to the slows, then the fasts have to get back up (via a new M6 bridge) and slew back over before the next bridge north. Not convinced the alignments will fit!
From google it looks like some of the bridges to the north have abutments for quadrupling, but not all of them - was there an aborted plan? I reckon you could get quadrupling through but it would be disruptive like through Tamworth etc.
Squeezing six into Preston doesn’t look insurmountable- relatively easy sloped cuttings. Might be useful for separating WCML services from local and Calder Valley services.
Is there any way of grade separating Euxton?! Buckshaw new housing has taken away ramp options and the A49 and M6 are really awkward.
Best I can guess is to turn the Chorley line tighter to run parallel for a bit whilst the fast lines duck down under the Chorleys crossing over to the slows, then the fasts have to get back up (via a new M6 bridge) and slew back over before the next bridge north. Not convinced the alignments will fit!
WatcherZero
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 10,272
This should explain the extra abutments:
http://www.railmaponline.com/UKIEMap.php
Pretty much 19th century there was more miles of track in Wigan than there was in London.
http://www.railmaponline.com/UKIEMap.php
Pretty much 19th century there was more miles of track in Wigan than there was in London.
Are there any plans for more trains coming from Chorley??
Surely Chorley is limited by capacity issues at Victoria & through Castlefield, neither of which are likely to be remedied in our lifetimes.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
There were plans under WCRM to reinstate a 3rd track on the Standish-Balshaw Lane section, on the west side of the current 2-track railway.
This should have been done at the same time the approach to Wigan NW from Liverpool was doubled, as part of area capacity improvements.
It would have been a reversible line and used by freight as well as the Liverpool-Blackpool service.
While some OHLE masts would have had to be moved, much of the route is outside the current line of masts on the existing solum, so would not have been vastly expensive to build.
It was also part of local aims to reopen Coppull station (along with Golborne further south).
But the project was canned during a late WCRM review, although the Balshaw Lane turnout has been improved to 50mph.
I guess there are higher priorities now.
Preston (and Carlisle) station areas have been largely untouched since electrification and resignalling in 1974.
They are showing their age.
What's the future for the western bridge span over the Ribble at Preston, along with the spacious but disused westerly island platform?
It looks like useful capacity largely being left to rot at the moment, while the narrow P1/2 and P5/6 are under severe pressure and have next to no facilities.
This should have been done at the same time the approach to Wigan NW from Liverpool was doubled, as part of area capacity improvements.
It would have been a reversible line and used by freight as well as the Liverpool-Blackpool service.
While some OHLE masts would have had to be moved, much of the route is outside the current line of masts on the existing solum, so would not have been vastly expensive to build.
It was also part of local aims to reopen Coppull station (along with Golborne further south).
But the project was canned during a late WCRM review, although the Balshaw Lane turnout has been improved to 50mph.
I guess there are higher priorities now.
Preston (and Carlisle) station areas have been largely untouched since electrification and resignalling in 1974.
They are showing their age.
What's the future for the western bridge span over the Ribble at Preston, along with the spacious but disused westerly island platform?
It looks like useful capacity largely being left to rot at the moment, while the narrow P1/2 and P5/6 are under severe pressure and have next to no facilities.
Somewhere on another thread it was said that the gantries/headspans were erected for 4 tracks from Standish to Balshaw but the slow lines were removed without ever being wired. There used to be a diveunder at Standish accessing the Whelley loop. Could it be reused to bring the up slow under the down and up fast to rejoin the up main without conflict?
59CosG95
Established Member
That certainly looks doable (from a quick Google Maps fly-over).
GRALISTAIR
Established Member
Yes even Power supply upgrade (autotransformer Euxton - Catteral -Great Stickland and beyond) looks to have been put on hold.
I have thought the same myself for a while. Hopefully that bloody bridge is not listed or something silly. It does not look in good condition though. Definitely unused capacity platform wise at Preston.
59CosG95
Established Member
It'd make sense to me to reopen the disused line west of the Down Goods on the western bridge span (the Down Goods is the right-hand line on the bridge, under the 'roll-bars'.
The platform on the far left, across the Through Lines from Platform 1 is in fact the old Parcel Platform, and it's only got 1 through face; the lines on the western side of it are shunt necks.
They maybe the through lines but more through traffic goes through 3,4 & 6. For some reason.
lancastrian
Member
What is described as the Parcels Platform at Preston, were in fact the old platforms 1 & 2, which were used mainly by the Flyde Line services before Preston was wired in 1974, then they were closed to passengers and converted for Parcels. It would not beyond possibility for them to be reopened for passengers, or even what is now the only through parcels platform as a new platform 1. Also it would be possible for the platform line alongside the current platform 1, could be taken out and the platform widened into the space provided. Also what is now a disused platform (the former platform 9 could also be reopened and become a new platform 7 or 8. This would along with a upgrading of the track layout a station that would be fit for the next 50+ years.
Regarding the former four tracking from Balshaw Lane to Standish Junction, I am totally in favour of it being done, with the added opportunity of new stations at both Coppull and Standish. All the land for both these potential improvements is owned by Network Rail, so apart from the usual inflated costs of doing such work, the only thing stopping it is the political will to do so.
Regarding the former four tracking from Balshaw Lane to Standish Junction, I am totally in favour of it being done, with the added opportunity of new stations at both Coppull and Standish. All the land for both these potential improvements is owned by Network Rail, so apart from the usual inflated costs of doing such work, the only thing stopping it is the political will to do so.
themiller
Member
Wasn't platform 1 used for shuttles to Lytham for golfers a couple of years ago?
GRALISTAIR
Established Member
That was my recollection - yes.
Elecman
Established Member
Was to Ansdell and Fairhaven not Lytham
GRALISTAIR
Established Member
Of course - yes you are correct - I forgot that "minor" detail !
Just goes to show the extent HS2 has already put the brakes on improvements to what’s arguably Britain’s premier mainline & would’ve most probably seen ERTMS & lots of other enhancements started had it not gone ahead
Last edited:
edwin_m
Veteran Member
Considering that HS2 services will use the section between Wigan and Preston, this accusation is groundless.
59CosG95
Established Member
Agreed, there's lots more obstacles getting in the way of ERTMS roll-out on Britain's premier 'classic' mainline. HS2 services using the WCML on this stretch, and the increased power consumption of the new stock which that entails, will almost certainly require auto-transformer feeding as a bare minimum. I suspect that the OLE in the Wigan area might be significantly reconstructed too (e.g. no headspans).
The Planner
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 15,927
Still a fag packet design for it somewhere, it hasnt been binned as an idea.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
No it wouldn't.
After a decade of priority upgrades, mainly south of Weaver Jn, the WCML is at the back of the queue for further upgrading.
The priority now is GWML, ECML and MML upgrades which have had (bar GW electrification) a poor deal until recently.
ERTMS is still vapourware anyway, in terms of general rollout.
The Planner
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 15,927
Utter rubbish. If anything HS2 will accelerate it.
isn’t the accusation that HS2 is holding up improvements for something that may not even happen?
If HS2 wasn’t on the table improvements might already have been made
I would love to see it as I can’t really see how anything other than something very ambitious will fit in!
edwin_m
Veteran Member
If so then it's the lack of a decision on HS2, not HS2 itself, that is causing the problem.
Same thing!
edwin_m
Veteran Member
No it isn't. The original comment was:
Which is essentially the same "money isn't being spent here because it's being spent on HS2" argument that appears on numerous threads.
If/when HS2 unequivocally goes ahead then it will be possible to plan out what is needed for Wigan-Preston. So it's the other way round - HS2 going ahead makes spending in this are more likely. If HS2 doesn't go ahead then money will have to be spent instead on the areas where HS2 would have made most difference - the southern WCML.
So you agree that HS2’s existence has delayed decisions about upgrades. No one will do much before being sure whether HS2 is coming or not.
- Status