Guide Bridge Problems 21/12

[M60lad]

What was the actual problem tonight at Guide Bridge, was it just a normal signal/points failure or was it something more serious, I know some Northern services were caped tonight due to this and Platform 1 & 2 were unusually full of trains going nowhere in a hurry and it seems TPX were diverted from/to Stalybridge via Ashton-Undey-Lyne, Manchester Vicoria and Salford Crescent

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Looking at the time when the proposed high service level Manchester Piccadilly to Leeds services will be running via Guide Bridge, in addition to all the others that currently pass through Guide Bridge, it does appear to be a pinch-point on the network.

 

[Des Iroman]

Blown fuses in signalling kit, causing multiple track circuit failure indications and blank signals - bit of a job stopper.

 

[Moonshot]

Back to normal today. Guide Bridge is a bit of a pinch point, however the section between Guide Bridge and Stalybridge is due to be electrified in the not too distant future. Also, once the Ordsall Chord is built , there should be plenty of capacity for the high output services between Manchester and Leeds, they wont all go through Guide Bridge anyway.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Also, once the Ordsall Chord is built , there should be plenty of capacity for the high output services between Manchester and Leeds, they won't all go through Guide Bridge anyway.

There have been postings on various threads on this website in the past stating that the Leeds to Manchester Piccadilly high frequency services that are proposed, will in fact pass through Guide Bridge, as they will commence from the terminal platforms at Manchester Piccadilly. Are you saying that there has been an official change of mind recently regarding that matter ?

 

[Moonshot]

There have been postings on various threads on this website in the past stating that the Leeds to Manchester Piccadilly high frequency services that are proposed, will in fact pass through Guide Bridge, as they will commence from the terminal platforms at Manchester Piccadilly. Are you saying that there has been an official change of mind recently regarding that matter ?

The way I ve read it is that the core route will be getting six trains per hour, which includes all services starting at the likes of Liverpool or Manchester Airport. Isnt that what all the investment in the likes of Ordsall Chord, Victoria Redevelopment and TP electrification is designed to achieve???

I ve not seen anything that states 6 trains per hour starting from terminal platforms at Piccadilly

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I ve not seen anything that states 6 trains per hour starting from terminal platforms at Piccadilly

It was a figure of 4 (not 6) trains per hour starting from the terminal platforms at Manchester Piccadilly that I had seen. I suppose that the other two services will be possibly from Manchester Airport.

Can someone clarify this particular matter, please.

 

[Moonshot]

It was a figure of 4 (not 6) trains per hour starting from the terminal platforms at Manchester Piccadilly that I had seen. I suppose that the other two services will be possibly from Manchester Airport.

Can someone clarify this particular matter, please.

This is the way I ve read it Paul....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Hub

 

[lancastrian]

What was the actual problem tonight at Guide Bridge, was it just a normal signal/points failure or was it something more serious, I know some Northern services were caped tonight due to this and Platform 1 & 2 were unusually full of trains going nowhere in a hurry and it seems TPX were diverted from/to Stalybridge via Ashton-Under-Lyne, Manchester Victoria and Salford Crescent

One of the major problems with not only Guide Bridge and the route to Piccadilly, is the basic shortsightedness of the de-quadrafying of the route. I remember in the early 1970's that there were FOUR lines from Ashbury's through Guide Bridge as far as Hyde North. It seemed to me that these lines always seemed to be busy. Although I will accept that the Woodhead route has since been closed BUT all the freight over Woodhead didn't go through Guide Bridge, but left the route at Godley Junction to head off through Stockport Tiviot Dale and on to Widnes.

If the four lines were reinstated, along with the closed platforms at Guide Bridge, then the route would have more capacity. All these problems are caused by the desire of then BR, not only to close as many lines as they felt they could get away with, BUT to remove all what they thought was 'redundant' track and facilities. Many of which we are now having to replace at much greater cost than if we had kept them in the first place. I very doubt that the supposed savings that were to come for all this reduction ever amounted to much at all.

Just another example of cost cutting, that actually costs more than we ever saved.

 

[HowardGWR]

One of the major problems with not only Guide Bridge and the route to Piccadilly, is the basic shortsightedness of the de-quadrafying of the route. I remember in the early 1970's that there were FOUR lines from Ashbury's through Guide Bridge as far as Hyde North. It seemed to me that these lines always seemed to be busy. Although I will accept that the Woodhead route has since been closed BUT all the freight over Woodhead didn't go through Guide Bridge, but left the route at Godley Junction to head off through Stockport Tiviot Dale and on to Widnes.

If the four lines were reinstated, along with the closed platforms at Guide Bridge, then the route would have more capacity. All these problems are caused by the desire of then BR, not only to close as many lines as they felt they could get away with, BUT to remove all what they thought was 'redundant' track and facilities. Many of which we are now having to replace at much greater cost than if we had kept them in the first place. I very doubt that the supposed savings that were to come for all this reduction ever amounted to much at all.

Just another example of cost cutting, that actually costs more than we ever saved.

As far as I can see, the formation is intact, even with the M60, enough of a 'platform' under it was constructed, to allow reinstatement? Perhaps with your local knowledge you could confirm that?

 

[Moonshot]

I actually live there....

The trackbed still exists, and in fact the building work at Guide Bridge currently ( a new ticket office ) revealed the original platforms which had been filled in to accomadate Park and Ride.

The trackbed for Guide Bridge sidings has survived as well, currently Network Rail store some track fittings and the like on it, but my understanding is that it is future proofed for rail use anyway.

Just another example of cost cutting, that actually costs more than we ever saved.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing......nobody in the late 70s was predicting record levels of passenger numbers in 2013.

 

[The Planner]

BUT to remove all what they thought was 'redundant' track and facilities.

Nothing has changed, there is a massive UK wide S&C Optimisation programme to remove infrastructure that is perceived as having no use going on now. It is all very well saying "no lets keep it, we might need to use it in 5, 10, 15 or 30 years time" but in the meantime that infrastructure needs to be maintained and funded to be maintained with the engineering blocks associated with it. If the railway needs to cut costs and economise then this will always be one that is top of the list of considerations.

 

[edwin_m]

The trackbed still exists, and in fact the building work at Guide Bridge currently ( a new ticket office ) revealed the original platforms which had been filled in to accomadate Park and Ride.

I think the ramps of the footbridge at one of the stations block the path of the other two tracks. There is an equipment room on one of the platforms that may also be a problem. Sorry can't remember which of Gorton or Fairfield either of these apply to!

 

[dewsnapsliding]

I think the ramps of the footbridge at one of the stations block the path of the other two tracks. There is an equipment room on one of the platforms that may also be a problem. Sorry can't remember which of Gorton or Fairfield either of these apply to!

Believe it's Gorton.

There's nothing insurmountable about reinstatement of 4 track through to Hyde North - by doing it that way you could segregate services for TPE (via Hudd) from TPE South (Hope Valley, and removed Woodhead :cry.

The only fly in the ointment would be the crossing required from Stockport line towards Stalybridge - if only the East curve hadn't been built over at Ashton Moss junction, it would have been grade separated :mad::mad::mad::mad

Or the complete reinstatement of the old other line from Guide Bridge to Stalybridge requiring complete removal of the Ashton dual carriageway and reinstatement of the station at the excellent Station Hotel in Ashton Under Lyne!

As you can tell by my user name, local railways around there, something of an interest!

Just reinstate Ashton-Oldham-Greenfield or old 'other' Tame Valley route which diverged after Stalybridge for extra East-side TPE capacity!

 

[Bevan Price]

Nothing has changed, there is a massive UK wide S&C Optimisation programme to remove infrastructure that is perceived as having no use going on now. It is all very well saying "no lets keep it, we might need to use it in 5, 10, 15 or 30 years time" but in the meantime that infrastructure needs to be maintained and funded to be maintained with the engineering blocks associated with it. If the railway needs to cut costs and economise then this will always be one that is top of the list of considerations.

Maybe, but let us hope they have the sense to keep the trackbeds intact and unobstructed, in case they is needed at some future time. (Unlike Huyton to Edge Hill, where it is impossible to reinstate 4 tracks for the full distance, due to encroachment onto the old trackbed at Broad Green by roads & bridges, plus a new station at Wavertree Technolgy Park. )

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

As you can tell by my user name, local railways around there, something of an interest! Just reinstate Ashton-Oldham-Greenfield or the old 'other' Tame Valley route which diverged after Stalybridge for extra East-side TPE capacity!

Half the Delph Donkey and the ubiquitous Micklefield Loop Line....hock: ?

 

[table38]

Or the complete reinstatement of the old other line from Guide Bridge to Stalybridge requiring complete removal of the Ashton dual carriageway and reinstatement of the station at the excellent Station Hotel in Ashton Under Lyne!

Point of order the old line was south of the current line, so the lovely Park Parade dual carriageway would survive!

 

[dewsnapsliding]

Half the Delph Donkey and the ubiquitous Micklefield Loop Line....hock: ?

It would solve some of the capacity issues betwixt Stalybridge and Standedge - no need for intermediate stations on the Micklefield Loop, send your expresses that way!

Not sure the great and the good of Greenfield would welcome the reclaiming of Friezland green space area!

 

[lancastrian]

Maybe, but let us hope they have the sense to keep the trackbeds intact and unobstructed, in case they is needed at some future time. (Unlike Huyton to Edge Hill, where it is impossible to reinstate 4 tracks for the full distance, due to encroachment onto the old trackbed at Broad Green by roads & bridges, plus a new station at Wavertree Technolgy Park. )

I agree, any sensible Government (and that does not include any that we have had over the last 50+ years) would have not allowed any former trackbed or station sites to be sold off for at least 50 years, nor allow road bridges to encroach onto track beds, for example replacing double track bridges with single track, or blocking trackbed be not leaving space for ALL unused sections of trackbed to be reused.

The shambles of not only the problem of Edge Hill to Roby 4 track being lost, but of many lines having their capacity drastically reduced by these short term decisions. I just wonder about the cost of sorting our all these wrong choices from the past!

 

[The Planner]

What does 4 tracking Edge Hill to Roby solve though? What extra services would that provide and is there a demand for it that cannot be catered for by whats there now?

 

[lancastrian]

What does 4 tracking Edge Hill to Roby solve though? What extra services would that provide and is there a demand for it that cannot be catered for by whats there now?

Well with the improved and increased electric service that will start in the next year, plus there will be increased freight services from Seaforth Dock. The reason for 4 tracking the Roby to Huyton Junction is to increase the capacity for the new electric services.

I did read somewhere that the reason for restricting to just this section was because not only was the trackbed compromised by the building of Wavertree Technical Park station, as well as near Broad Green part of the former trackbed is blocked by a Motorway access road.

Yet again short term choices are restricting many capacity increases and restricting many improvements that could have been done.

 

[Moonshot]

Point of order the old line was south of the current line, so the lovely Park Parade dual carriageway would survive!

Brilliant map !! My house on that lol !!!

Next to where it says Audenshaw, there is a circle on the line from Ashton Moss Junction to Droylsden...what is that?

 

[The Planner]

Northern Hub timetable works fine with what is being put in though. Huyton to Roby just allows overtaking moves and is adequate for what is proposed. The linespeed increases and minor signalling improvements allow a 3 minute headway. If you four tracked from Edge Hil to Huyton where does the capacity come from east of there?

 

[lancastrian]

Brilliant map !! My house on that lol !!!

Next to where it says Audenshaw, there is a circle on the line from Ashton Moss Junction to Droylsden...what is that?

A short lived station called Audenshaw, that is what the dates refer to.

Opened in 1888, closed 1905.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It would solve some of the capacity issues betwixt Stalybridge and Standedge - no need for intermediate stations on the Micklefield Loop, send your expresses that way!

Was there not a large blue engineering brick built viaduct demolished somewhere on the Friezland approaches to Uppermill on the Micklehurst Loop Line that would require rebuilding ?

 

[lancastrian]

Northern Hub timetable works fine with what is being put in though. Huyton to Roby just allows overtaking moves and is adequate for what is proposed. The linespeed increases and minor signalling improvements allow a 3 minute headway. If you four tracked from Edge Hill to Huyton where does the capacity come from east of there?

I don't want to have a major argument, we seem to have differing views on this matter. My personal view is to take every opportunity to increase capacity whenever work is being done on a line, not just a like for like replacement. So that is wont need further line occupation and increased cost to do it. I am a big fan of doing thing right the first time.

For some reason there is not enough money to do it right at first, but they seems to find even more money to get it right later. Plan for future growth and not what we can get away with at this time.

We all on this site want to see our railways improved in every way, even though we may have different views on how it should be done. I respect all members views, even though I may not agree with them.

 

[Moonshot]

A short lived station called Audenshaw, that is what the dates refer to.

Opened in 1888, closed 1905.

Thanks for that , much appreciated.....I d never seen that before .....its about 30 yards from my house and there is no physical eveidence of it as far as I can see nowadays !!

 

[edwin_m]

Was there not a large blue engineering brick built viaduct demolished somewhere on the Friezland approaches to Uppermill on the Micklehurst Loop Line that would require rebuilding ?

There were several, all very much not there any more:

- just beyond Stalybridge New Tunnel (east portal now 30 feet in the air),
- Staley and Millbrook,
- Micklehurst
- Greenfield.

I think there's another one as well but I don't recall where. Plus several very posh houses on the track bed in Uppermill. Having reviewed this a few years back I'm pretty sure anyone who contemplates reopening is whistling in the wind.

Unfortunately the same is true of Oldham to Greenfield - small matter of a housing estate on the line east of Lydgate tunnel, but nearly everything from Grotton in has been landscaped and some of the cuttings are landfilled.

This last is really unfortunate, because if the Oldham line had been separated from the no-hoper Delph Donkey it could have made a really useful loop off the Transpennine. Some trains could have been routed via Oldham providing that town with an outlet to the east and generally increasing Transpennine capacity.

 

[table38]

Next to where it says Audenshaw, there is a circle on the line from Ashton Moss Junction to Droylsden...what is that?

The Cobb map actually has the location of the station wrong, it was south of Manchester Road. One of the buildings is still there:

See this link: https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=audenshaw&hl=en&ll=53.478188,-2.128751&spn=0.000006,0.004324&sll=52.8382,-2.327815&sspn=9.761797,17.709961&t=h&hnear=Audenshaw,+United+Kingdom&z=18&layer=c&cbll=53.478223,-2.128598&panoid=0QDLA_5NDKS1Ec9vZSI7ww&cbp=12,188.48,,0,4.13

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

There were several, all very much not there any more:

- just beyond Stalybridge New Tunnel (east portal now 30 feet in the air),
- Staley and Millbrook,
- Micklehurst
- Greenfield.

I think there's another one as well but I don't recall where.

There was a huge one at Friezland called "Chew Brook Viaduct"

 

[Joseph_Locke]

I don't want to have a major argument, we seem to have differing views on this matter. My personal view is to take every opportunity to increase capacity whenever work is being done on a line, not just a like for like replacement. So that is wont need further line occupation and increased cost to do it. I am a big fan of doing thing right the first time.

For some reason there is not enough money to do it right at first, but they seems to find even more money to get it right later. Plan for future growth and not what we can get away with at this time.

We all on this site want to see our railways improved in every way, even though we may have different views on how it should be done. I respect all members views, even though I may not agree with them.

I'm with Planner - we have more to do than we have money, so spending money on nice-to-haves when there are other schemes which are needed now seems a very odd idea indeed.

At a rough guess, the phase 3 electrification to Blackpool is probably the same value, so lets cancel that and four-track a bit of railway that doesn't need it, and won't for many years to come...