Blackburn to Manchester Upgrade

[Lankyline]

For info, Its been announced that the Blackburn Bolton line is to be doubled as part of a £20m upgrade investment agreed on Wed as part of the Preston City deal.

It means frequencies will now be every 30mins instead of hourly, below is a link for more details

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.u...chester_link_set_to_get_massive_improvements/

 

[anti-pacer]

For info, Its been announced that the Blackburn Bolton line is to be doubled as part of a £20m upgrade investment agreed on Wed as part of the Preston City deal.

It means frequencies will now be every 30mins instead of hourly, below is a link for more details

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.u...chester_link_set_to_get_massive_improvements/

Would it be possible to extend one of these services to Colne, or will that be blown out of the water with the introduction of the Blackburn-Todmorden-Man Vic service?

 

[spongsdad]

Would it be possible to extend one of these services to Colne, or will that be blown out of the water with the introduction of the Blackburn-Todmorden-Man Vic service?

With the doubling of this section, perhaps it would be possible ultimately to run circular Blackburn to Blackburn services via Todmorden, Rochdale, Manchester & Bolton. There may, of course be capacity problems elsewhere on the route.
So far as onward trains to Colne are concerned, there is of course an existing capacity problem as the line from Gannow Junction to Colne is these days nothing more than an extended siding with absolutely no provision for trains to pass.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I do not want to appear greedy, but ---- If Preston-Colne was electrified then electrification of Blackburn-Bolton gives an electrified diversionary route for Blackpool-Manchesters- of course being super greedy - Wigan-Lostock Junction would do this too.

 

[Lampshade]

Would it be possible to extend one of these services to Colne, or will that be blown out of the water with the introduction of the Blackburn-Todmorden-Man Vic service?

It'd be easier to have the Colne branch service as a standalone shuttle, maybe with a PPM to connect with through services at Rose Grove. That way the Manchester services can run as an all-shacks circular service and possibly stop peak time York services at Rose Grove for connections.

 

[L&Y Robert]

It'd be easier to have the Colne branch service as a standalone shuttle, maybe with a PPM to connect with through services at Rose Grove. That way the Manchester services can run as an all-shacks circular service and possibly stop peak time York services at Rose Grove for connections.

SELRAP - where are you? Get in here! Stand alone shuttle? Elongated siding? Electrify to Colne? It's only another 11 miles to already electric Skipton. Re-build that bit, double track, electric from Preston to Skipton. How will that fit in to these plans?

 

[anti-pacer]

As a Yorkshireman who spent my school years over in darkest Colne, there's a reason that bit of line is missing!

Probably the same reason that NYCC didn't want an extension of the M65 coming over to god's own country!

 

[PhilipW]

For info, Its been announced that the Blackburn Bolton line is to be doubled as part of a £20m upgrade investment agreed on Wed as part of the Preston City deal.

Well, this has come out of the blue. I know it has been talked about for ages for I wasn't expecting anything to happen any time soon.

Anyway it is excellent news. I wait to hear the formal announcement next week, or whenever. I do hope it is for redoubling the whole track and not just parts of it. In hindsight, it should never have been singled in the first place.

I hope (and presume) that the work will allow for easy future 25kv electrification. I know that is not in any plans at the moment, but with electrification extending all over the country, its time will come.

 

[Lankyline]

As a Yorkshireman who spent my school years over in darkest Colne, there's a reason that bit of line is missing!

Probably the same reason that NYCC didn't want an extension of the M65 coming over to god's own country!

God's welcome to it ! seriously if SELRAP don't jump on this bandwagon then it will show them up for the talking shop they really are, imo

 

[telstarbox]

SELRAP won't happen. There won't be a business case for it.

 

[edwin_m]

A circular Blackburn-Bolton-Manchester-Todmorden-Blackburn service would be very awkward operationally. The round trip would have to be a bit less than an whole number of hours for an hourly service, whereas I'd guess it would be around 2h in fact. Even if the times worked out the timetable would need to allow some standing time on the circuit to ensure operational reliability, preferably somewhere that doesn't extend people's journeys too much. The only real candidate for this is Victoria, , as lots of people will want to stay on the train through Bolton, Blackburn etc, but the platform occupancy will mean that trains using the through platforms will only make short stops.

 

[tbtc]

SELRAP is a waste of time; this redoubling between Blackburn and Bolton is much more practical than worrying about fantasy branchlines.

Only problem is that this will require extra DMUs at a time when people are wanting to scrap all Pacers.

 

[WatcherZero]

One of the supposed selling points of Northern Hub was direct trains from Rochdale to the Airport so how about a near figure of 8. Stalybridge or Rochdale, Victoria, Bolton, Blackburn, Todmorden, Rochdale, Victoria, Piccadilly, Manchester Airport.

 

[Whistler40145]

Will the necessary work be carried out to reinstate double track through Sough Tunnel?

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Absolutely pointless to redouble all of it. Get rid of Turton and you could have half hourly on what's there already for a lot less than £20m! If they are hell bent on spending that much money on rail around East Lancs, build a crossing loop at Burnley Central and reinstate one of the east facing bays at Rose Grove and do an hourly shuttle in addition to the existing service (hopefully connecting decently enough with the Toddy Curve trains ex-BBN. EDIT - or from Manchester via Rochfail).

 

[Kettledrum]

SELRAP is a waste of time; this redoubling between Blackburn and Bolton is much more practical than worrying about fantasy branchlines.

Only problem is that this will require extra DMUs at a time when people are wanting to scrap all Pacers.

surely with the electrification schemes elsewhere, there will be loads of DMUs freed up and therefore available - or are there going to be clearance problems with this route?

 

[tbtc]

surely with the electrification schemes elsewhere, there will be loads of DMUs freed up and therefore available - or are there going to be clearance problems with this route?

There'll be plenty of DMUs freed up by electrification, but there's a lot of units that are going to be costly to upgrade to accessibility standards by 2020 (esp those with only a limited lifespan after that date), hence the threads here about Pacer withdrawal. Plenty other existing lines could do with longer trains too (without re-opening/ re-doubling etc).

I'm all for Blackburn having a half hourly service to Bolton and Manchester, but there's not a bottomless well of spare DMUs which is why I'm usually sceptical of some of these ideas.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Only problem is that this will require extra DMUs at a time when people are wanting to scrap all Pacers.

Does it have to be Pacer operated ?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Absolutely pointless to redouble all of it. Get rid of Turton and you could have half hourly on what's there already for a lot less than £20m! If they are hell bent on spending that much money on rail around East Lancs, build a crossing loop at Burnley Central and reinstate one of the east facing bays at Rose Grove and do an hourly shuttle in addition to the existing service (hopefully connecting decently enough with the Toddy Curve trains ex-BBN. EDIT - or from Manchester via Rochfail).

If the finance has specifically been budgeted to address the Blackburn to Bolton line doubling, why should the matter of a crossing loop at Burnley Central and a bay reinstatement at Rose Grove suddenly enter into the equation.

Let separate finance be raised for that other project to which you have alluded.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

If the finance has specifically been budgeted to address the Blackburn to Bolton line doubling, why should the matter of a crossing loop at Burnley Central and a bay reinstatement at Rose Grove suddenly enter into the equation.

Let separate finance be raised for that other project to which you have alluded.

Because it would be a better allocation of money. £20m to redouble the whole of Blackburn-Bolton is a hideous waste of money and I was just demonstrating that it could be better split and benefit a lot more people than wasting it away on projects where it's not needed. It is nonsensical to redouble the entire thing.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I'll actually go one further and say this almost seems out of spite to me - sort of an ego soothing exercise. NR have quite rightly always suggested longer loops and partial redoubling would suffice, much to the council's ire. Now that the councils have a heap of cash to spend it's almost as if they are spending it to stick two finders up to Network Rail and saying 'Hah, look what we can do now'. I'm just sad to see money being wasted in such a way.

 

[WatcherZero]

I think the proposal was that it would be all doubled except the tunnel, precise details are thin though. This is really Blackburn and Lancashire pushing for full redoubling, NR thinks passing loops would be enough.

 

[Starmill]

Perhaps they know something we don't? Or have big ideas about the future? Or would it make a difference to speed or reliability?

Doubling it all gives the project a more 'finished' feel to it surely? Better than coming a back to it 10 years down the line and having to spend even more finishing it off.

However I agree it seems like a very odd thing indeed to want to 'future proof' - are they just lacking the imagination? I concur that this doesn't sound like the best use of money. Couple of things to remember though, since when does the public sector in the UK make anything close to the best use of money? And don't turn your nose up at it when it comes your way

 

[Darren R]

If the finance has specifically been budgeted to address the Blackburn to Bolton line doubling, why should the matter of a crossing loop at Burnley Central and a bay reinstatement at Rose Grove suddenly enter into the equation.

Let separate finance be raised for that other project to which you have alluded.

Sorry Paul, but MattE2010 is spot-on with this. The various councils along the line have been pushing for years to have the whole line re-doubled, and have taken great exception several times at being knocked-back. It is absolutely unneccessary. The NetworkRail plan to lengthen the Darwen Loop from a point just north of South Tunnel to the M65 bridge is quite sufficient for a robust half-hourly timetable. Extending the loop northwards from Bromley Cross to just beyond the site of Turton & Edgworth station adds extra capacity too - enough to be able to run 3tph in each direction in fact. Everything else is just overkill, and is effectively money wasted that could otherwise be spent on improvements elsewhere. It's not a bottomless pit of resources. NR's plan was going to cost around £8.5 million. This has now gone up to as much as £20 million.

That said - it's going to be fascinating watching it...... from my bedroom window at 4am every night for months! (Just to declare an interest!) I'll definitely be watching it - because I ain't gonna get much sleep!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Everything else is just overkill, and is effectively money wasted that could otherwise be spent on improvements elsewhere. It's not a bottomless pit of resources. NR's plan was going to cost around £8.5 million. This has now gone up to as much as £20 million.

How many of the forum members directly affected by this council-decided financial decision and have approached their local member of the council to put forward their objections to this matter.

Looking at another positive "waste of money" project that I am sure that MattE2010 would have a personal axe to grind should it ever be put forward as it would see his own local station on the route would be the reopening of the Blackburn to Chorley section of the former Lancashire Union Railway.

 

[telstarbox]

If the objective is a half-hourly frequency on the Blackburn-Bolton line, why not achieve it the cheap way rather than the expensive way?

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Looking at another positive "waste of money" project that I am sure that MattE2010 would have a personal axe to grind should it ever be put forward as it would see his own local station on the route would be the reopening of the Blackburn to Chorley section of the former Lancashire Union Railway.

:roll: It is a waste of money. Tell me Paul, £8.5m or £20m, both with identical end results - which is better? And for the record, no, I wouldn't throw my weight behind Blackburn-Chorley reopening either, next to no market and it would be eye-wateringly expensive, especially since they sold off the embankment to residents at the Blackburn end about 7 years ago.

If the objective is a half-hourly frequency on the Blackburn-Bolton line, why not achieve it the cheap way rather than the expensive way?

Because it's not their money to lose, think they care one iota?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Tell me Paul, £8.5m or £20m, both with identical end results - which is better?

Matt, can you let us know the political make up of the council that has taken the specific decision to double-track the Blackburn to Bolton line, as it is those councillors who have considered the £8.5m and the £20m options to which you allude. It is not up to me to speak of my own personal feelings, as I am not a member of the council that took the decision over this matter.

Can you inform us if a vote in the council was held and if so, what was the number of votes cast in favour and against the proposal.

 

[Signal Head]

Sorry Paul, but MattE2010 is spot-on with this. The various councils along the line have been pushing for years to have the whole line re-doubled, and have taken great exception several times at being knocked-back. It is absolutely unneccessary. The NetworkRail plan to lengthen the Darwen Loop from a point just north of South Tunnel to the M65 bridge is quite sufficient for a robust half-hourly timetable. Extending the loop northwards from Bromley Cross to just beyond the site of Turton & Edgworth station adds extra capacity too - enough to be able to run 3tph in each direction in fact. Everything else is just overkill, and is effectively money wasted that could otherwise be spent on improvements elsewhere. It's not a bottomless pit of resources. NR's plan was going to cost around £8.5 million. This has now gone up to as much as £20 million.

Don't worry, a significant chunk of the extra 11.5 mil will probably be wasted on the early GRIP stages, doing feasibility and 'optioneering' different versions, many of which will go in the bin. Some more will go on the last stage (GRIP4) before the contract for detailed design and construction is let, and if other projects are anything to go by, this will be deficient and have to be redone once someone tries to make it work in reality. So out of that 20 mil, there'll probably be just enough to double (say) Blackburn to Darwen.

 

[cle]

Who knows about the future of rail growth?

There could be potential for more than 2tph each direction - either additional slow or express trains. There could be freight use too - so why not allow for some growth?

 

[tbtc]

If the objective is a half-hourly frequency on the Blackburn-Bolton line, why not achieve it the cheap way rather than the expensive way?

Because it's not their money to lose, think they care one iota?

Agreed

Does it have to be Pacer operated ?

What would you realistically run on it?

1. We could use the electrification of lines around Manchester to withdraw some Pacers
2. We could use the electrification of lines around Manchester to take Pacers off some longer services that they currently run on, replace them with better stock and put the spare Pacers on new/additional services to Blackburn
3. We could use the electrification of lines around Manchester to put some spare Pacers on new/additional services to Blackburn (whilst other lines continue to have Pacers on longer distance services)

...which would you prefer?

I think that any new line (or additional demand for stock caused by redoubling, like in this example) should be on the basis that any extra stock comes from the bottom of the "pile" (i.e. 142s). Same goes for Newcastle to Ashington (etc).

 

[The Planner]

Just had a good read of this and the comments already posted, I have to agree it seems massive overkill. Based on the linespeed and postion of the loops it really shouldn't need much doing to shove 4tph or more in total down there. The longest single line section is 7 miles.