Speculation hindsight - electrification of the Northwest

[GRALISTAIR]

OK we know things have not gone/going to plan on Euxton Jct to Manchester electrification. I did not want to clog up that thread by going off topic and speculating what should have been done with hindsight (hence this new thread) - but here is the order I would have done things to allow for extended blockades, concentrating resources, cascades etc and doing things in sections at a time (incidentally the approach I would take with MML electrification) to allow for diversionary routes.

1. Wigan to Bootle Branch Junction
   
2. NLW Jct and Lowton Jct to Ordsall Lane Jct and Castlefield Jct
   
3. Huyton Jct to Earlestown East and South Jct
   
4. Preston Fylde Jct to Blackpool North
   
5. Ordsall Lane Jct to Manchester Victoria
   
6. Manchester Victoria to Stalybridge National Grid Feeder
   
7. Ordsall Lane Jct to Windsor Bridge Nth Jct and overlap Atherton Line
   
8. Windsor Bridge North Jct to Crows Nest Jct and Wigan Station Jct
   
9. Crows Nest Jct to Bolton
   
10. Euxton Jct to Lostock Jct
    
11. Bolton to Windsor Bridge North Jct.
    
12. Philips Park West Jct and Baguley Fold to Ashburys
    
13. Guide Bridge to Stalybridge.

Yes I know I am gods gift to crayonistas !!!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Well as you know Preston-Blackpool was originally supposed to come ahead of Manchester-Euxton, but got put back because of the "complexity" of the upgrade (resignalling really).
But despite leapfrogging up the list, the Bolton route seems to have suffered several bouts of unforeseen problems (contracts, design, ground conditions etc).
I'm sympathetic with NR about the technical issues, but not about the contracts.
It seems they never got to grips with TP electrification, its difficult to know where all that time went since it was authorised in 2011.

 

[DarloRich]

I'm sympathetic with NR about the technical issues, but not about the contracts.

Is that the contract with Balfour Beatty?

 

[themiller]

Isn't there a piling train down south doing not very much? Could this not be usefully employed in the north if the piles are suitable?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Isn't there a piling train down south doing not very much? Could this not be usefully employed in the north if the piles are suitable?

I think with the problems they are encountering a lot of bespoke solutions for piling are necessary and thus the piling train as such is not quite as suitable.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Is that the contract with Balfour Beatty?

Yes, they "walked off the project", but came back in some guise, and also had huge resources on the GW electrification out to Maidenhead (part of Crossrail).
It's possible NR at the top level told them to concentrate on GW at the expense of NW, but the initial 1-year delay was never explained .

 

[DarloRich]

Yes, they "walked off the project", but came back in some guise, and also had huge resources on the GW electrification out to Maidenhead (part of Crossrail).
It's possible NR at the top level told them to concentrate on GW at the expense of NW, but the initial 1-year delay was never explained .

have a look at the position Balfour Beatty were in at the time.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

have a look at the position Balfour Beatty were in at the time.

Are Carillion involved on any part? That crisis is looming imminently too.

 

[Viscount702]

Are Carillion involved on any part? That crisis is looming imminently too.

I believe they are on Manchester Preston and their problems are well known although I thought the rail side were OK .

 

[Elecman]

People thought that about Jarvis/Fastline too but the construction side took them down

 

[GRALISTAIR]

BTW I bet there are mining area issues with Lostock to Wigan too.

 

[snowball]

Anyone know if old mines were a problem with the original WCML electrification?

(I have Nock's book on Weaver to Glasgow but haven't looked at it for decades. Must try to find it.)

 

[twpsaesneg]

Anyone know if old mines were a problem with the original WCML electrification?

(I have Nock's book on Weaver to Glasgow but haven't looked at it for decades. Must try to find it.)

Some of the structures around Stoke were designed to be able to lift the booms in the event of mining subsidence.

It's not so much that there's more of a mining problem now, as much as there are less people with the knowledge required to give a big thumbs up to smashing foundations in. Mining Engineers are thin on the ground, and the National Coal Board is effectively no more. Plus that the preferred option is piling which is generally a big no-no in shallow mining areas. The other issue is that foundations are deeper now in general partly because of more onerous design standards and partly because of the Network Rail requirement for an 80 or 120 year design life.

 

[twpsaesneg]

BTW I bet there are mining area issues with Lostock to Wigan too.

Yes.

About 1/2 the route is over abandoned workings.

 

[WatcherZero]

Anyone know if old mines were a problem with the original WCML electrification?

(I have Nock's book on Weaver to Glasgow but haven't looked at it for decades. Must try to find it.)

Line predates most of the mining so effectively runs a gauntlet between later mining sites.

 

[Elecman]

BTW I bet there are mining area issues with Lostock to Wigan too.

Undoubtably as Wigan was very much the centre of the South Lancashire coalfield and the area around Westhoughton was heavily mined and incidently location of the second worst English Mining disaster at Pretoria pit.

The M6 through the area hit multiple unknown workings when it was constructed through the South Lancs coalfield so it would be even less of a surprise in the Wigan Bolton route

 

[jfollows]

Anyone know if old mines were a problem with the original WCML electrification?

The original WCML electrification had severe problems with subsidence from former salt mines between Sydney Bridge Junction and Sandbach, requiring innovative techniques enabling subsequent adjustment of the embankment and the supports for the overhead wires. From memory, the fast lines were restricted to 40mph and the slow lines to 20mph. The problem has clearly eased over time, with 90mph now allowed on the main/Wilmslow (formerly fast) lines and 50mph on the independent (formerly slow) lines.

 

[snowball]

The M6 through the area hit multiple unknown workings when it was constructed through the South Lancs coalfield

However when you're building a new motorway you have a wide swathe of land for access and you can investigate old workings properly, and deal with them properly. When electrifying an existing railway, the need to keep it open must be an obstacle.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

However when you're building a new motorway you have a wide swathe of land for access and you can investigate old workings properly, and deal with them properly. When electrifying an existing railway, the need to keep it open must be an obstacle.

Exactly - that is one reason I started this thread - a lessons learned and what order would have been better to minimize line closures or at least have diversionary routes.

 

[snowball]

The original WCML electrification had severe problems with subsidence from former salt mines between Sydney Bridge Junction and Sandbach, requiring innovative techniques enabling subsequent adjustment of the embankment and the supports for the overhead wires. From memory, the fast lines were restricted to 40mph and the slow lines to 20mph. The problem has clearly eased over time, with 90mph now allowed on the main/Wilmslow (formerly fast) lines and 50mph on the independent (formerly slow) lines.

You can see from one of the minor roads in the area (or at least, it was once possible to see, I haven't tried in recent years) that the track sits on an embankment of large diameter concrete pipes running transversely to the track. When it sank they could put extra pipes in.

 

[AndrewE]

The original WCML electrification had severe problems with subsidence from former salt mines between Sydney Bridge Junction and Sandbach, requiring innovative techniques enabling subsequent adjustment of the embankment and the supports for the overhead wires. From memory, the fast lines were restricted to 40mph and the slow lines to 20mph. The problem has clearly eased over time, with 90mph now allowed on the main/Wilmslow (formerly fast) lines and 50mph on the independent (formerly slow) lines.

You can see from one of the minor roads in the area (or at least, it was once possible to see, I haven't tried in recent years) that the track sits on an embankment of large diameter concrete pipes running transversely to the track. When it sank they could put extra pipes in.

The structures were designed to be easily adjusted, the top horizontals could be slid up in a big "housing" and when that ran out the bases were designed to take an extra concrete pour under the jacked-up structure.
After the area had stopped subsiding one of the bridges at the Sandbach end was taken out all together and replaced by expanded polystyrene slabs which were buried inside the embankment afterwards.

I was disappointed that the railway didn't have the initiative to claim on the Brine Pumping Compensation Scheme (or whatever it is officially called) to maintain track and electrification gangs to keep the line dead straight and level. It would have ensured a decent line speed and provided extra skilled staff for weekend work at no cost to the railway!

 

[furnessvale]

I was disappointed that the railway didn't have the initiative to claim on the Brine Pumping Compensation Scheme (or whatever it is officially called) to maintain track and electrification gangs to keep the line dead straight and level. It would have ensured a decent line speed and provided extra skilled staff for weekend work at no cost to the railway!

In those days the railways were nationalised. It could well be that BR was ordered not to claim by the government, an order that would of course be denied if challenged.

 

[D365]

In those days the railways were nationalised. It could well be that BR was ordered not to claim by the government, an order that would of course be denied if challenged.

Sounds about right, the railways not being allowed anything that would benefit them

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The original WCML electrification had severe problems with subsidence from former salt mines between Sydney Bridge Junction and Sandbach, requiring innovative techniques enabling subsequent adjustment of the embankment and the supports for the overhead wires. From memory, the fast lines were restricted to 40mph and the slow lines to 20mph. The problem has clearly eased over time, with 90mph now allowed on the main/Wilmslow (formerly fast) lines and 50mph on the independent (formerly slow) lines.

It might be apocryphal, but it was said at the time that the electrification of the North Staffs line in the 1960s WCML scheme was prompted by the Sandbach route problems.
Macclesfield and Stoke on Trent had a poor service to London before then, but it became the primary Manchester-London (and Manchester-Birmingham) route from 1967.
Prior to that, nearly everything ran via Crewe and Wilmslow.
This despite the North Staffs route having its own problems and being intrinsically slower than the Crewe route, if fractionally shorter.
The Harecastle tunnel at Kidsgrove also had to be replaced.