Could the old Harecastle tunnel ever be reopened?

[Philip]

I've noticed that the original route between Tunstall and Kidsgrove through the mile-long Harecastle tunnel seems to still be fairly intact. No idea about the state of the tunnel, except for the portals and approach cuttings looking sound enough. Are there any plans afoot to reopen the tunnel and whether or not is there scope to do so?

I know the reason it was closed was because it wasn't big enough to hold the wires, but if not much work is needed to reopen, would it provide useful additional capacity as a loop to divert the diesels (goods and passenger services) through it and potentially allow the electrics to overtake and free up another path?

 

[yorksrob]

I read somewhere that it required a lot of engineering work just to keep it open in pre-electrification days with lengthy closures, so would probably be a bit of a liability even without electrification.

 

[Senex]

I read somewhere that it required a lot of engineering work just to keep it open in pre-electrification days with lengthy closures, so would probably be a bit of a liability even without electrification.

Its condition was the reason given at the time for its replacement by the deviation. If there were any chance of getting it back, which I very much doubt, it would be good, as it is a far better alignment than the line that replaced, which was engineered only for the low 85 mph decided on for the Stoke Loop, and then authorised for 75 mpoh only, and which for very many years had a 50 mph TSR on it for mining subsidence reasons. Given that it had been decided to make it the principal Manchester line, the NS job was very much done on the cheap at the end of the EML scheme.

 

[yorksrob]

Its condition was the reason given at the time for its replacement by the deviation. If there were any chance of getting it back, which I very much doubt, it would be good, as it is a far better alignment than the line that replaced, which was engineered only for the low 85 mph decided on for the Stoke Loop, and then authorised for 75 mpoh only, and which for very many years had a 50 mph TSR on it for mining subsidence reasons. Given that it had been decided to make it the principal Manchester line, the NS job was very much done on the cheap at the end of the EML scheme.

The route certainly looks straighter on the map than the current one. Perhaps a single section, as with the Hastings line, might be possible.

 

[Llanigraham]

Considering that the original canal tunnel has sunk and the new one also to some extent, I suspect the railway tunnel has suffered the same.

 

[thenorthern]

The old Harecastle tunnel was abandoned because it wasn't feasible to electrify the tunnel, electrification was completed in 1967 but the current route dates from 1965.

 

[AndrewE]

The route certainly looks straighter on the map than the current one. Perhaps a single section, as with the Hastings line, might be possible.

On a double track main line, carrying (in both directions) "expresses" of 2 franchises, electric local trains to Manchester, plus Emus and DMUs to Crewe?
Best stick with what we have now. It's not as though it is a very high speed line anyway...

 

[GRALISTAIR]

No point even doing a Farnworth either. Imho

 

[yorksrob]

On a double track main line, carrying (in both directions) "expresses" of 2 franchises, electric local trains to Manchester, plus Emus and DMUs to Crewe?
Best stick with what we have now. It's not as though it is a very high speed line anyway...

I was just idly speculating.

As I mentioned in my earlier post, I have read that the tunnel required a lot of maintenance necessitating long closures even when it was open, so I suspect it would be a liability.

Nevertheless, they do manage to fit nine trains through the single track section in Somerhill Tunnel between Tunbridge Wells and Tonbridge in the hour from 7:39 onwards, so its perhaps not that far fetched.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

O S Nock in his book 'Britain's New Railway' (1965) says that because of mining subsidence and poor ground conditions 'the arch was under severe pressure, and constant renewals of the brickwork and masonry were necessary. In addition however, the main tunnel was very wet in two places and all three tunnels were reaching the stage when extensive repairs were necessary, requiring an engineers' possesion on average 40 weekends in every year. Five distinct propsals were considered 1) open out entirely.. 2) enlarge the bores by relining..3) new tunnels alongside..4) single track.. 5) avoiding line..'

I suspect that by now there have been collapses within the old tunnels - certainly the parallel canal tunnel has had extensive work over the years to keep it in alignment due to land-heave.

 

[AndrewE]

I suspect that by now there have been collapses within the old tunnels - certainly the parallel canal tunnel has had extensive work over the years to keep it in alignment due to land-heave.

... and I believe that the parallel original canal tunnel is now impassable even to a canoe, as the roof is under water!