Wires to Windermere announced

[Manchester77]

Yes, I do. Should have checked the 'spolling preperly'.

Also you could be right about the Crewe to Holyhead & Llandudno route. That one slipped my mind. It's happening far to often these days.

Aha it's fine easily done!

Indeed NWCL would certainly free up a fair few DMUs - 221s, 175s to mention a couple

 

[HowardGWR]

Yes, I do. Should have checked the 'spolling preperly'.

Also you could be right about the Crewe to Holyhead & Llandudno route. That one slipped my mind. It's happening far to often these days.

I can't see these potential announcements being made to save seats. UK elections are geographically based in constituencies of about 80000 or so. Even with all the announcements you envisage, only a small number of constituencies are affected. Most people will not be impressed about promises to disfigure their neighbourhood with 'knitting' anyway.

 

[Eagle]

Indeed NWCL would certainly free up a fair few DMUs - 221s, 175s to mention a couple

I don't see how it would free up any 175s, unless you also wire Chester to Warrington (or Chester to Newport :P).

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I can't see these potential announcements being made to save seats. UK elections are geographically based in constituencies of about 80000 or so. Even with all the announcements you envisage, only a small number of constituencies are affected. Most people will not be impressed about promises to disfigure their neighbourhood with 'knitting' anyway.

No but "We are investing in capital infrastructure projects to benefit future generations" and create jobs will be the arguments used as a General Elction approaches.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I can't see these potential announcements being made to save seats. UK elections are geographically based in constituencies of about 80000 or so. Even with all the announcements you envisage, only a small number of constituencies are affected.

To emphasize the point: The Windermere branch is entirely contained in the Westmorland and Lonsdale constituency. It's currently one of the safest LibDem seats in the country, so it seems very unlikely that local electoral calculations would have been a factor in the decision to electrify it.

 

[Tobbes]

True, and the Westmoreland and Lonsdale MP (Tim Farron) is a leading contender to replace Clegg when the time comes. Having "knitting" erected is going to do Tim no harm at all, locally.

Tobbes

 

[Boysteve]

Just wait until someone suggests tourist specials between Euston and Windermere in the summer.

Unlikely as I am sure the overhead power will not be adequate to support a Pendolino. East Coast have to send an HST to Skipton for the same reason that the power supplies on the Aire Valley cannot support the demands of a 91+MK4

 

[ainsworth74]

East Coast have to send an HST to Skipton for the same reason that the power supplies on the Aire Valley cannot support the demands of a 91+MK4

The power supplies have now been straightened enabling the use of 91s+Mk4s on that service.

 

[PhilipW]

I would imagine that TPE (or its successor franchise) will be quite pleased that the Windermere branch is to be wired. One often reads that the Manchester-Scotland services are very heavily loaded at the southern end with Bolton and Preston passengers. To help resolve this, one could now see all services being double formed leaving Manchester and then either continue so to Scotland or split at Lancaster for Windermere.

The only problem with this, as we all know, is that there will not be enough new Class 350s to achieve this. Could we be seeing the order increased, I wonder ?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I wont take that bet about the Selby to Hull line, as a fully paid up cynic, I not only expect to hear about a steady release of new electrification projects being announced between now and election day in 2015, but I also fully expect that they will end with a major announcement just before the election is called.

I would expect to see, the following lines being announced:

• Selby to Hull
• Northallerton to Middlesborough
• Sheffield to Doncaster
• Swinton (Yorks) to South Kirkby & Church Fenton

Ending with possibly either the Chilton Route or Derby to Bristol being announced just before the election.

There may be more, less or even non of these, but I expect the shorter ones to happen in the next 3 years.

Just my view. Sits back and awaits comments.

Network Rail already has more work than it can manage for CP5 (2014-19).
Any new announcements would not be deliverable before 2020.

There are still no proper plans for some of the recently committed schemes (eg East-West and electric spine, which comes complete with instant DC-AC conversion south of Basingstoke).

You haven't mentioned Newbury-Westbury-Bath which is already on the political agenda for early approval.

I would sooner the DfT made decisions on franchise remapping and devolution, and confirmed rolling stock plans for the already-announced electric lines, before announcing any more wiring.
Otherwise there are just too many missing pieces of the jig-saw.

 

[The Planner]

Unlikely as I am sure the overhead power will not be adequate to support a Pendolino.

Considering it is likely to be fed off the same supply as the mainline, why wouldn't it?

 

[Manchester77]

I don't see how it would free up any 175s, unless you also wire Chester to Warrington (or Chester to Newport :P).

I don't know why I thought that was wired

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I would imagine that TPE (or its successor franchise) will be quite pleased that the Windermere branch is to be wired. One often reads that the Manchester-Scotland services are very heavily loaded at the southern end with Bolton and Preston passengers. To help resolve this, one could now see all services being double formed leaving Manchester and then either continue so to Scotland or split at Lancaster for Windermere.

There is the current 0929 Manchester Airport service to both Windermere and Blackpool, formed of 2 x Class 185 sets, which splits at Preston and I suggest that Preston, rather than Lancaster, would be a far better operational station to split the service that you make mention of at the end of your posting quote shown above.

 

[WatcherZero]

Looking at the history seems to have been intended as a tourist line with services to London right from it being first proposed in 1844, recieved Parliamentary consent in 1845 and it opened in 1847 (they dont build railways that fast nowadays!), in 1902 business class clubman coachs began operating for those living in the Lake District and working in Manchester. There was a lot of opposition to it spoiling the natural environment led by Wordsworth.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Morecambe is an even shorter branch than Windermere. Are there any services from Morecambe or Heysham to places like Preston, Liverpool, Manchester or Carlisle, or do they all go to Leeds or Bradford?

If they did electrify that short branch to Morecambe, the contination line to Heysham Port would also have to be part of such a scheme, as would the northern facing chord which allows through running from Bare Lane railway station to the junction with the WCML for any direct services to the Carnforth area.

Whilst on the subject of branch lines from Lancaster, I now await news of the projected demand from the boating fraternity concerning the reopening and electrification of the line from Lancaster to Glasson Dock to serve the marina there....

 

[PhilipW]

There is the current 0929 Manchester Airport service to both Windermere and Blackpool, formed of 2 x Class 185 sets, which splits at Preston and I suggest that Preston, rather than Lancaster, would be a far better operational station to split the service that you make mention of at the end of your posting quote shown above.

If the increased Manchester to Windermere through trains are created by splitting existing services so as not to create the need for extra paths south of Preston, I appreciate that they could detached from either Blackpool services (at Preston) or Scotland services (at Lancaster or Preston) -- or even a combination of both.

What I can see as a benefit is that all Manchester to Scotland services are double formed leaving Manchester so as to reduce the often reported overcrowding as far as Preston. The service then carries on as is to Scotland or is split for Windermere. Depending on demand and the time of day, it may well be the case that Windermere services could be split from both Scotland or Blackpool services.

I know all current splitting is done at Preston, but given the layout of Lanacaster I see no reason why splitting and joining could not be done there if required.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

If the increased Manchester to Windermere through trains are created by splitting existing services so as not to create the need for extra paths south of Preston, I appreciate that they could detached from either Blackpool services (at Preston) or Scotland services (at Lancaster or Preston) -- or even a combination of both.

What I can see as a benefit is that all Manchester to Scotland services are double formed leaving Manchester so as to reduce the often reported overcrowding as far as Preston. The service then carries on as is to Scotland or is split for Windermere. Depending on demand and the time of day, it may well be the case that Windermere services could be split from both Scotland or Blackpool services.

I know all current splitting is done at Preston, but given the layout of Lanacaster I see no reason why splitting and joining could not be done there if required.

From December the Scotlands will run via Golborne Jn independent of the Blackpools, and will not have the capacity to double up (not enough 350s).
In due course Blackpool/Windermere 319s might split at Preston.

 

[snail]

What I can see as a benefit is that all Manchester to Scotland services are double formed leaving Manchester so as to reduce the often reported overcrowding as far as Preston. The service then carries on as is to Scotland or is split for Windermere. Depending on demand and the time of day, it may well be the case that Windermere services could be split from both Scotland or Blackpool services.

I know all current splitting is done at Preston, but given the layout of Lanacaster I see no reason why splitting and joining could not be done there if required.

Crew allocation will be the reason for using Preston. It is also the changeover point for the catering service. The trolley service usually serves Manchester-Preston and Preston-Scotland with nothing to Windermere.

The Windermere sections of services that currently split are not at capacity with 3-car units, there are plenty of seats on the 1704 and 1808 services ex Preston M-F so it would be a waste of a 4-car unit IMHO.

One other thing you overlook is that the Bolton overcrowding will not be an issue for the Manchester-Scotland services by the time this is done as they will be routed via Wigan.

 

[edwin_m]

From December the Scotlands will run via Golborne Jn independent of the Blackpools, and will not have the capacity to double up (not enough 350s).
In due course Blackpool/Windermere 319s might split at Preston.

Agreed there are only enough 350s for the Scotland services. There will have to be a new (or possibly cascaded) EMU fleet for the Manchester-Leeds electrification and these could also include some for Windermere services. They could also displace the 350s (which London Midland could probably use to cover growth) so that all the former Transpennine electric services had a common fleet.

 

[WatcherZero]

You could also throw into the mix splitting Blackpool/Windermere services from Liverpool. Keeps the same protection of paths from short trains and just as easy to change if your coming from London.

 

[tbtc]

Just for the record, Carnforth to Barrow is 28 miles?

Always happy to be corrected

Sure, it is not on anybody's priority list for electrification, but as more and more get wired up, its time will come

Could you do Barrow without doing the remainder of the coastal line to Carlisle?

Or cut the current Carlisle DMUs to just Barrow (rather than on to Lancaster), which would chop a few links. Not sure.

I would imagine that TPE (or its successor franchise) will be quite pleased that the Windermere branch is to be wired. One often reads that the Manchester-Scotland services are very heavily loaded at the southern end with Bolton and Preston passengers?

This is an important point - the current TPE crowding is generally confined to the Bolton/ Preston stretch (apart from weekend services, when the Scottish end gets a lot busier).

Take away those "local" passengers (by diverting away from Bolton) and you free up a bit of space.

The only problem with this, as we all know, is that there will not be enough new Class 350s to achieve this. Could we be seeing the order increased, I wonder ?

The 350s are only a shortish term measure - but at least this new announcement has been made before the longer term EMUs for the Manchester - Glasgow/ Edinburgh services have been ordered - giving plenty of scope for additional units to be catered for.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Could you do Barrow without doing the remainder of the coastal line to Carlisle?

I always view the Cumbrian Coast line as two separate routes that meet at Barrow-in-Furness. Are there statistics that will show the daily size of the patronage who would start their journey north of that mid-point and travel to a point south of it...and vice-versa.

 

[HSTEd]

You might also be able to make a case for going as far as Seascale on the coast line.....

 

[PhilipW]

It may well be the case that overcrowding on the southern leg of Manchester - Scotland trains is reduced this December when the route changes and Bolton passengers will not be able to use these services.
However this is a temporary measure and I understand the plan is to revert back to going via Bolton when that line is electrified. So the overcrowding may well return.

So my suggestion of running all trains as double formations from Manchester with then either both sets going forward to Scotland or one set split and sent to Windermere still seems entirely sensible to me.

The flaw is this plan, as we all know, is that there are not enough Class 350s available to achieve it. One can hope that the current order could possibly be extended for more units.

I realise that the 350s are only meant as an interim solution for this route and that at some time a new purpose built fleet may be ordered. Unfortunately I see no sign of that coming about anytime soon, and certainly not by 2016. Then come 2016 with only 10 sets of 350s, overcrowding looks like a big problem just waiting to happen.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I think its a permanent change, they want to remove Bolton corridor commuters from a long distance Cross Country service. Everything i have read suggests permanent.

 

[WatcherZero]

Though there is some interest in a limited amount (couple a day) of OAO/Virgin new long distance services calling at Bolton.

 

[Eagle]

I wouldn't be surprised if post-electrification a couple of Manchester to Scotland services do end up going via Bolton (possibly at odd times of day).

 

[tbtc]

I always view the Cumbrian Coast line as two separate routes that meet at Barrow-in-Furness. Are there statistics that will show the daily size of the patronage who would start their journey north of that mid-point and travel to a point south of it...and vice-versa.

I'm not aware of any stats (just like I'm not aware of stats showing the number of direct journeys made each year from Durham to Manchester Airport), but based on the current frequencies (hourly north of Barrow, hourly west of Barrow) the options post Lancaster - Barrow electrification are:

• Cutting the direct Lancaster service from Workington/ Whitehaven so that they become a self contained hourly DMU from Carlisle to Barrow - keeps things operationally simple, but does mean some places are a little more isolated
• Keeping the existing service pattern (which would mean only one EMU per two hours running on the twenty eight mile section to Barrow - which looks like a waste of resources when you consider what thirtyish miles of electrification could be put to elsewhere - like Bolton to Southport)

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I think its a permanent change, they want to remove Bolton corridor commuters from a long distance Cross Country service. Everything i have read suggests permanent.

Won't re-routing the service simply replace Bolton commuters with Wigan commuters, while depriving Bolton of a regular link to Scotland (something Wigan has in abundance thanks to trains from London and Birmingham), and make other services via Bolton more overcrowded?

 

[WatcherZero]

Thats whats expected, at the moment the issue is that the Bolton commuters are taking up a lot of space on the Scotland services going a short hop while there is relativley enough capacity to absorb them on other Bolton services and a high frequency (more spare capacity than on Atherton services).

There will be Wigan pasengers on the TPE service but they dont expect it to be as overcrowded as with Bolton and it will free space on existing services via Bolton and Atherton.

Boltonians loses direct Scotland services but will still be able to use them and the higher combined frequency if they change in Preston without a serious journey time penalty (even at the moment changing is only 10 minutes slower on a 3hour plus journey than the directs).