Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[childwallblues]

Note I specifically said 'northern trans-Pennine' route. I assume you mean the Woodhead route (which is usually regarded as a southern trans-Pennine route).

That was electrified specifically for hauling coal across the Pennines (there were only 7 passenger EM2s built, versus 58 freight EM1s) due to the difficulties of using steam power for the heavy coal traffic. It was a 1930s scheme delayed by WW2 - by the time it was resumed in the late 1940s they probably could have more efficiently dieselised the traffic so as much as possible flowed directly from mines to destinations, without all the costly intermediate marshalling and traction changes that electrification introduced. It's a classic illustration of the issues with 'discontinuous' electrification - it becomes an incentive not to use it (or abandon it when the equipment becomes life-expired).

Yes there were only seven EM2s built but the last batch of EM1s (fro 26046 onwards) were fitted with train heating for operating passenger trains.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

There has been no final decision made regarding the TP Electrification; there are however the proposals from TfL that will need to be considered to find the optimum, affordable, way forward.

I guess you meant TfN?
Though I wouldn't put it past TfL to have a view on NPR ("Do Crossrail 2 instead").

 

[DarloRich]

Personally I've never really understood why at least one of the northern trans-Pennine rail routes wasn't electrified years ago. And as for 'discontinuous' electrification of a route with a very high frequency train service - I despair, it makes me feel embarrassed as an engineer that it's even being considered. It's not 'smart' it's just weasel-word penny-pinching.

This. Especially the last sentence.

Was Grayling expressing some kind of ministerial brainwave or actual government policy in his recent speech?

 

[AndrewE]

Someone mentioned speed and capacity constraints (sorry, can't spot the post now) and someone else that NR is engineering-led and wants to gold-plate everything.

speed and capacity could be separated out to give immediate relief at a modest price if the railway was operated smarter!

the current overcrowding shows that speed isn't critical, so capacity could be addressed almost instantly by putting longer trains on the fast services. 6- or 8-coach trains retired from London services (twice an hour?) Liverpool to Newcastle would fit in the platforms at the major stations, just as was done in Switzerland 20 years ago! (Except that they were 10 and 12-coach formations)

More power is needed so top-and-tailed with both locos under power.

The DMUs released could be used to strengthen the rest.

Higher speed needs much more power and better alignments, and for this lots of investment cannot be avoided. Electrification is the key, but unfortunately super-power diesels will make Standedge tunnel too polluted to be safe in the short term!

 

[Mollman]

Electrification is the key, but unfortunately super-power diesels will make Standedge tunnel too polluted to be safe in the short term!

My fear is that Standedge is one of the 'too difficult to electrify' sections, however it does need doing as on a 185 you tend to be smelling the fumes through the air con by the time you get to the other end.

 

[AndrewE]

My fear is that Standedge is one of the 'too difficult to electrify' sections, however it does need doing as on a 185 you tend to be smelling the fumes through the air con by the time you get to the other end.

and if you have got asthma triggered by acid gases (NO2 or SO2) your chest is starting to close up. A couple of weeks ago I wondered about getting my inhaler out - or taking a respirator next time!

Could Standedge be wired economically by singling the existing double tunnel and using one of the "spare" ones for the other direction? They felt quite big when I was in them about 15 yrs ago - ironically to measure pollution by diesel exhaust!

 

[muddythefish]

Chris Grayling, MP for Epsom and Ewell that will benefit from a significant capacity enhancement to cross London rail improvements, otherwise known as Crossrail 2. North South divide continues.

 

[Bantamzen]

My fear is that Standedge is one of the 'too difficult to electrify' sections, however it does need doing as on a 185 you tend to be smelling the fumes through the air con by the time you get to the other end.

Reading between the lines, if Standedge is deemed "too difficult" to wire, then I suspect that Stalybridge - Huddersfield will remain unwired too. In fact Stalybridge - Leeds might fall by the wayside.

This is becoming all too depressingly familiar, promise jam but end up giving just a slice of stale bread. Bit by bit the many improvements originally planned are falling away, and this latest gem is just a bit more confirmation that instead of providing the full solution to the North TP problem, it'll be a bit of a bodge job that will arrive even later than the wires were originally due to go up. So unit capacity will go up with the new stock TPE have ordered, but they'll still end up trundling along the route, forming orderly queues outside of Manchester / Leeds / York as they often do now. The subsequent delays will be enough to convince many to keep to the M62 and bring that to a standstill whenever there is any roadworks / accidents / snow / light drizzle…..

I was never convinced that a high speed line would ever emerge as suggested by talk of HS3, but I at least hoped that the TP electrification would make it through, even if it were delayed. But it really is starting to sound like the government is lining up the excuses. What a sorry state of affairs this country is getting into when wiring a tunnel or other sections of line becomes “too difficult”. No wonder we have to rely more and more on overseas engineer and finances to get anything done. The UK is too busy wanting to be middle managers & number pushers to have the time to do anything meaningful. ArK ‘B’ anyone…..? (Let’s see who gets that reference)

 

[MarkRedon]

...ArK ‘B’ anyone…..? (Let’s see who gets that reference)

Missed it. I must have been in the bath.

 

[DarloRich]

. No wonder we have to rely more and more on overseas engineer and finances to get anything done. The UK is too busy wanting to be middle managers & number pushers to have the time to do anything meaningful. ArK ‘B’ anyone…..? (Let’s see who gets that reference)

This is the kind of sillyness these type of announcements push out. We have plenty of engineers ready and able to do the required work. What we don't have is a government prepared to pay for it.

Part of the mess is of their creation. They came up with the most cack handed and fragmented priviatisation possible and wonder why the costs are so large overlooking the continual under investment in the railway infrastructure over many years.

 

[Bantamzen]

This is the kind of sillyness these type of announcements push out. We have plenty of engineers ready and able to do the required work. What we don't have is a government prepared to pay for it.

Part of the mess is of their creation. They came up with the most cack handed and fragmented priviatisation possible and wonder why the costs are so large overlooking the continual under investment in the railway infrastructure over many years.

Is it silliness though? Something like 78% of UK GDP is in the service sector, which is growing year on year. We have lost a huge amount of out engineering sector work, and some of what is left is really only finishing off the work of overseas engineers. Is there really an excess of engineers waiting in the wings, or have they chosen different career paths or left for countries with bigger engineering needs? Is there even a culture left to encourage enough engineers for the future? Frankly as a layman it doesn't seem that way, many young people these days seem to aspire towards management based careers rather than engineering, or indeed other skills.

I'm afraid as we watch project after project be placed carefully back on the shelf as others fall behind schedule and budgets, its increasingly hard to believe that the problem lies purely with government, no matter how bad they have been or are.

 

[muddythefish]

So a southern Tory MP awards London another £15bn of public money to fund its infrastructure, in addition to the tens of billions it's had over recent years, while the same southern Tory MP cuts back or cancels northern schemes.

Time for another election and get this lot out of Downing Street.

 

[DarloRich]

So a southern Tory MP awards London another £15bn of public money to fund its infrastructure, in addition to the tens of billions it's had over recent years, while the same southern Tory MP cuts back or cancels northern schemes.

Time for another election and get this lot out of Downing Street.

more sillyness.

 

[plcd1]

more sillyness.

Indeed. No money has been awarded to anyone. In fact TfL and the Mayor have been told to go back to the drawing board so far as their funding plan is concerned. TfL had intended to borrow the money and pay it back later.

Mr Grayling is now demanding money *up front* which can only mean (a) the Mayor being forced to abandon the fares freeze (b) the Mayor being required to raise the TfL precept hugely (c) the Mayor being required to levy new or increase existing charges against Londoners and / or London businesses. In short I see this as a rather nasty political attack by Mr Grayling to undermine some of the Mayor's key policies. It remains to be seen whether a remotely viable funding plan can be put together given the Mayor's current plans already vastly increase TfL's borrowings and run down its reserves. Grayling knows all this so has set a particularly difficult objective for the Mayor and TfL to meet.

People seem to be leaping up and down saying "woo Mr Grayling supports CR2" and also "Boo! Boo! - look at London stealing money that should be spent in Wales or the North or the Midlands". Unfortunately Mr Grayling has set no money aside for London nor has he given any sort of go ahead. In my view he's actually reduced the likelihood of CR2 proceeding in the form TfL would like. If a funding plan emerges it will be for a descoped CR2 with fewer stations and probably fewer branches - note the remark in the joint statement about "clarifying the route for CR2 and removing uncertainty".

As I always say this is not me supporting CR2 over any other scheme. I don't like CR2 as currently put together and I think the recent decisions on electrification schemes and more bi-mode trains are ridiculous and wrong headed. Still what do we expect from a "do nothing" DfT run by the current Secretary of State?

 

[muddythefish]

more sillyness.

Silly response

 

[muddythefish]

How on earth could electrification of Oxenholme-Windermere, or even Cardiff-Swansea come to that, be considered 'big projects'? And how does the passenger benefit from more expensive, less efficient 'bi-mode' trains?

What's the betting that in reality the 40+ year old HSTs will continue to labour on for yet more years?

I would be interested to know how much will be 'saved' by not proceeding with the Windermere and Swansea plans compared with how many millions are currently being spent on 'upgrading' a few miles of the M3 into a 'smart motorway' - but of course that benefits Tory voting car drivers in the south east

 

[muddythefish]

And another thing.

Since I stopped globetrotting I have done a lot of UK train travel: some of the lines are below developing world standard - for example, Sheffield to Rotherham, which is a hard benched single entry (yes, single entry!) and exit, rattling along in a packed carriage you feel sick, and many probably are.

People commute on this train every day. Southern rail travellers have absolutely nothing to complain about. I wonder if any of these DfT wonks have ever left London or the south east.

Someone said it's a disgrace... I think it's worse... this type of policy making is part of the reason 70% of our population have seen flat or declining earnings over the past 20 years.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

So a southern Tory MP awards London another £15bn of public money to fund its infrastructure, in addition to the tens of billions it's had over recent years, while the same southern Tory MP cuts back or cancels northern schemes.
Time for another election and get this lot out of Downing Street.

I doubt the other lot would be much different.
Their record on rail over 1997-2010 was not exactly stellar.
"Not a priority" was their starting position, until Andrew Adonis arrived.

Over that time the (Labour-controlled) SRA prioritised London/South East investment, because it delivered more benefits than anywhere else.
Also upgrading Milton Keynes and Reading delivered benefits to the north and west, despite being spent in the "south east".

And a Labour Treasury is usually under even more under pressure than Tory ones, so great is the feeding frenzy.
You also have to find a means of getting Network Rail to deliver approximately to specification, time and cost.

 

[DarloRich]

Is it silliness though? Something like 78% of UK GDP is in the service sector, which is growing year on year. We have lost a huge amount of out engineering sector work, and some of what is left is really only finishing off the work of overseas engineers. Is there really an excess of engineers waiting in the wings, or have they chosen different career paths or left for countries with bigger engineering needs? Is there even a culture left to encourage enough engineers for the future? Frankly as a layman it doesn't seem that way, many young people these days seem to aspire towards management based careers rather than engineering, or indeed other skills.

While I agree the "engineering" sector has declined a great deal in my lifetime in what areas has that fall occurred? I would suggest old style heavy engineering ( ship building, bridge building etc) rather than in railway engineering. has the engineering base, while reduced, not simply changed to more a high tech/aeronautical/mechanical base?

I'm afraid as we watch project after project be placed carefully back on the shelf as others fall behind schedule and budgets, its increasingly hard to believe that the problem lies purely with government, no matter how bad they have been or are.

The fault isnt purely with the government. It rests with many bodies. However they are ultimately responsible and accountable for delivery & for many of the problems.

And a Labour Treasury is usually under even more under pressure than Tory ones, so great is the feeding frenzy.
You also have to find a means of getting Network Rail to deliver approximately to specification, time and cost.

It would help if the government would agree and seal off a detailed & costed specification at an early date

And another thing.

Since I stopped globetrotting I have done a lot of UK train travel: some of the lines are below developing world standard - for example, Sheffield to Rotherham, which is a hard benched single entry (yes, single entry!) and exit, rattling along in a packed carriage you feel sick, and many probably are.

People commute on this train every day. Southern rail travellers have absolutely nothing to complain about. I wonder if any of these DfT wonks have ever left London or the south east.

Someone said it's a disgrace... I think it's worse... this type of policy making is part of the reason 70% of our population have seen flat or declining earnings over the past 20 years.

Emotive sillyness barely worthy of a response. There are 7 trains an hour through Rotherham which, even if they are delivered by horrible pacers, is hardly a third world service.

BTW I have used pacers since they were introduced: number of times sick: 0 Number of times felt sick: 0. I agree they are horrible and urgently need replacing but that has nothing to do with TPE electrification.

Indeed. No money has been awarded to anyone. In fact TfL and the Mayor have been told to go back to the drawing board so far as their funding plan is concerned. TfL had intended to borrow the money and pay it back later.

Mr Grayling is now demanding money *up front* which can only mean (a) the Mayor being forced to abandon the fares freeze (b) the Mayor being required to raise the TfL precept hugely (c) the Mayor being required to levy new or increase existing charges against Londoners and / or London businesses. In short I see this as a rather nasty political attack by Mr Grayling to undermine some of the Mayor's key policies. It remains to be seen whether a remotely viable funding plan can be put together given the Mayor's current plans already vastly increase TfL's borrowings and run down its reserves. Grayling knows all this so has set a particularly difficult objective for the Mayor and TfL to meet.

People seem to be leaping up and down saying "woo Mr Grayling supports CR2" and also "Boo! Boo! - look at London stealing money that should be spent in Wales or the North or the Midlands". Unfortunately Mr Grayling has set no money aside for London nor has he given any sort of go ahead. In my view he's actually reduced the likelihood of CR2 proceeding in the form TfL would like. If a funding plan emerges it will be for a descoped CR2 with fewer stations and probably fewer branches - note the remark in the joint statement about "clarifying the route for CR2 and removing uncertainty".

As I always say this is not me supporting CR2 over any other scheme. I don't like CR2 as currently put together and I think the recent decisions on electrification schemes and more bi-mode trains are ridiculous and wrong headed. Still what do we expect from a "do nothing" DfT run by the current Secretary of State?

That is a much better post than I am prepared to add. I commend it to the house!

 

[DarloRich]

as an addition Rail Engineer state TPE electrification is still going ahead and has not been cancelled.

 

[Chester1]

as an addition Rail Engineer state TPE electrification is still going ahead and has not been cancelled.

I also hear that Pacers will be scrapped in the next 2 and a half years..... It is unacceptable! People will lose excuses to call the system third world and demand another general election!

I reckon Grayling has the same strategy for Crossrail 2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail - try to force the local government groups to pay for part or all of the projects.

Scrapping of Pacers, Liverpool to Wigan/Manchester electrification, Manchester-Bolton-Preston-Blackpool electrification and the new stock will mean a much bigger improvement to rail travel in the North West 2010-2020 compared with 2000-2010, when apart from WCML and VT service upgrades (too London!), not much improved.

 

[Olaf]

The government has created another elephant trap for itself with HS3. They've built up an expectation that it will be a high speed line right across the North, so when inevitably it turns out to be something less than that then lots of people will feel let down - even if that is actually the right thing to do in railway terms.

Has there been any reference to HS3 by either this or the previous Government? I am not sure if there has been any reference by the current Minister but I could be wrong. I thought that had been allowed to die in early 2016, though others may not be up to date.

 

[Olaf]

My point was simply that this £1.5bn project that has barely begun goes ahead without even being de-specked, whereas equally necessary improvements to railways in more northern areas of the country get cut back or cancelled — and much as I'm a supporter of the MML, it's more the appallingly overcrowded and low-quality route between Manchester and Leeds that I'm thinking of.

The justification for electrification of the Windermere branch was based on cost savings in the fleet operation costs; there is no proposed cut-back to service that I am aware of.

MML - There will be reduced journey times and enhanced capacity.

Neither of the above is a cut-back to services, and I can not think of any other deliberate cuts to services. Do you have something else in mind?

What has the north-east had?

About GBP 600 Million put into the local metro, and benefits to service improvements on the ECML.

There are also all the investments made in motorways and main roads n the region that came much later in the south; if anything, parts of London come off a very sorry second to some parts of the provinces.

The imbalance in transport investment of all sorts, not just rail, is enormous.

There are claims that it is, but some of those are based on selective manipulation of the data. There might be a case for a re-balancing investment but I have not seen a solid case for it other than to win the next election.

The investments have to be prioritised to go where it is needed most; what's leftover can go to the unicorn projects.

 

[Olaf]

I guess you meant TfN?
Though I wouldn't put it past TfL to have a view on NPR ("Do Crossrail 2 instead").

Yes you are right. Thanks.

 

[Olaf]

Chris Grayling, MP for Epsom and Ewell that will benefit from a significant capacity enhancement to cross London rail improvements, otherwise known as Crossrail 2. North South divide continues.

Liverpool and Manchester Mayors both spouting rubbish in attempts to make themselves relevant and to position themselves for future Labour Party leadership election.

 

[Olaf]

So a southern Tory MP awards London another £15bn of public money to fund its infrastructure, in addition to the tens of billions it's had over recent years, while the same southern Tory MP cuts back or cancels northern schemes.

Time for another election and get this lot out of Downing Street.

Well, it is by and large southern money that pays for all of these schemes; so have your election but wait and see how many would actual vote for someone whom makes promises without accurate costings for their own promises.

 

[AndrewE]

That really would be adding insult to injury — multi-billions for London's HS2 (and no doubt for Crossrail 2 before too long)

Crossrail 2 confirmed, and highlighted on BBC NW tonight just now, to contrast London's ongoing investment with the cancellation of TP electrification!

 

[Olaf]

Indeed. No money has been awarded to anyone. In fact TfL and the Mayor have been told to go back to the drawing board so far as their funding plan is concerned. TfL had intended to borrow the money and pay it back later.

Mr Grayling is now demanding money *up front* which can only mean (a) the Mayor being forced to abandon the fares freeze (b) the Mayor being required to raise the TfL precept hugely (c) the Mayor being required to levy new or increase existing charges against Londoners and / or London businesses. In short I see this as a rather nasty political attack by Mr Grayling to undermine some of the Mayor's key policies. It remains to be seen whether a remotely viable funding plan can be put together given the Mayor's current plans already vastly increase TfL's borrowings and run down its reserves. Grayling knows all this so has set a particularly difficult objective for the Mayor and TfL to meet.

People seem to be leaping up and down saying "woo Mr Grayling supports CR2" and also "Boo! Boo! - look at London stealing money that should be spent in Wales or the North or the Midlands". Unfortunately Mr Grayling has set no money aside for London nor has he given any sort of go ahead. In my view he's actually reduced the likelihood of CR2 proceeding in the form TfL would like. If a funding plan emerges it will be for a descoped CR2 with fewer stations and probably fewer branches - note the remark in the joint statement about "clarifying the route for CR2 and removing uncertainty".

As I always say this is not me supporting CR2 over any other scheme. I don't like CR2 as currently put together and I think the recent decisions on electrification schemes and more bi-mode trains are ridiculous and wrong headed. Still what do we expect from a "do nothing" DfT run by the current Secretary of State?

Keep in mind that it was Khan that committed to fare cap knowing it would damage TfL's finances and it's ability to deliver it program of upgrades.

Government has been financing the early stages of the CR2 would, but until the proposals are finalise there is nothing else to commit to.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Newsnight on BBC2 has just had a piece on the Northern Hub/Powerhouse situation, pointing out the positive DfT noises about Crossrail 2 and the negative ones about capacity expansion in Manchester and the TP electrification.
The gist was that Theresa May's ex-advisers were blamed for watering down the priority in the north, to discredit George Osborne's support for it.
But then they denied any such thing, just that they wanted more UK cities to benefit.
Andy Burnham was on as northern spokesman, and talked about "uproar" if northern transport projects were cut while Crossrail 2 got a green light.

The trouble is, nothing definite has been announced, other than endless "reviews" and delays to the projects in hand.
The projects have neither been canned or not canned, but we definitely have a planning vacuum at the moment.
One technical comment by an ex-Treasury man (in George Osborne's Treasury) was that "it's not about electrification, it's about the straightness of the line".
Presumably that means the work to quadruple/realign the route is as significant as the wiring of it.

 

[Chester1]

Liverpool and Manchester Mayors both spouting rubbish in attempts to make themselves relevant and to position themselves for future Labour Party leadership election.

Definitely posturing because TP electrification has not actually been scaled back. Just vague and incoherent comments from Grayling.

Crossrail 2 confirmed, and highlighted on BBC NW tonight just now, to contrast London's ongoing investment with the cancellation of TP electrification!

Source for cancellation? Source for Crossrail 2 funding agreed? None for either! No new plan as of yet and no funding agreement for Crossrail 2. Let's see what the final TfN report on NPR proposes for the long term infrastructure project.