Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[deltic08]

STANDEDGE not Stanage please.

locally and in most of West Yorkshire that is how it is pronounced.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

locally and in most of West Yorkshire that is how it is pronounced.

Oh I am sure just like Darwen is pronounced Darren by many.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

locally and in most of West Yorkshire that is how it is pronounced.

Doesn't matter how it's pronounced, it's still spelled Standedge.

 

[Ploughman]

And as for Slawit.

 

[ainsworth74]

Perhaps it's time to move on from the spelling and pronunciation of a tunnel that shall not be named. We all know which tunnel is being talked about

That being said if anyone does have a burning desire to discuss it they are certainly more than welcome to start a new thread to delve into the matter in great detail.

Thanks,
ainsworth74

 

[Chris125]

Electrification will form part of a rolling programme of Transpennine enhancements, according to Grayling's letter to the RIA:

https://www.railwayelectrification.org/blog/transpennine-electrification

 

[Altfish]

Electrification will form part of a rolling programme of Transpennine enhancements, according to Grayling's letter to the RIA:

https://www.railwayelectrification.org/blog/transpennine-electrification

"a rolling programme" !!!
What does that mean? Still rolling in 2075?

 

[Class465fan]

"a rolling programme" !!!
What does that mean? Still rolling in 2075?

 

[deltic08]

And where are the Transpennies located mentioned in the letter? Must be somewhere near Poundland.

 

[Allwinter_Kit]

This still (to me) points towards bi-mode fudge to avoid the supposedly insuperably difficult bits:

'...rolling programme of enhancements including major civil engineering projects and electrification.'

I don't get the impression that is 'fully electrified throughout' or it would have been something like '...of electrification and including major civil engineering projects.'

Might just be me though.

 

[AndrewE]

Agreed, it's avoiding saying "piecemeal patching up" so as not to admit they have abandoned the route upgrade.

 

[Chester1]

Agreed, it's avoiding saying "piecemeal patching up" so as not to admit they have abandoned the route upgrade.

The letter states the intention is a near complete relaying of the line with multiple changes to alignment. I would say that counts as a route upgrade. There has been no back tracking on the budget of £3bn yet either.

 

[Kieran1990]

This still (to me) points towards bi-mode fudge to avoid the supposedly insuperably difficult bits:

'...rolling programme of enhancements including major civil engineering projects and electrification.'

I don't get the impression that is 'fully electrified throughout' or it would have been something like '...of electrification and including major civil engineering projects.'

Might just be me though.

Totally agree- could we see wires from let’s say Victoria to Diggle then from Huddersfield to York?
I’m not that clued up on the difficult bits so coming at this from guess work. Anyone with a more in depth knowledge care to take a punt?

 

[Allwinter_Kit]

The letter states the intention is a near complete relaying of the line with multiple changes to alignment. I would say that counts as a route upgrade. There has been no back tracking on the budget of £3bn yet either.

I agree. And that would provide an excellent opportunity to electrify simultaneously if you're rebuilding the whole thing in the first place.

It maybe that is what they plan - to electrify as they rebuild bits over the Control Period and then fill in the remainders of unaltered trackwork with wires for full electrification - we can but hope!

Yet the way that was worded just makes me wary that such a solution is unlikely....

 

[edwin_m]

It maybe that is what they plan - to electrify as they rebuild bits over the Control Period and then fill in the remainders of unaltered trackwork with wires for full electrification - we can but hope!

That's made a bit tricky by the need to get power to the electrified sections. If electrification isn't continuous from the feeder station then a trackside feeder cable ("extension lead") would be needed to link up any isolated part. Not a big deal if it's just a dead section under a low bridge or two but if (hypothetically) the bit round Mirfield was left unwired pending re-modelling and Standedge was left unwired as too difficult, then anything in the Huddersfield area would need a long feeder cable or its own Grid feeder station (and incidentally the lead time to get a suitable Grid connections is at least five years). Going by the typical distances between existing feeders, a continuous electrification might not need anything more between the new one near Stalybridge and whatever exists around Leeds.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

That's made a bit tricky by the need to get power to the electrified sections. If electrification isn't continuous from the feeder station then a trackside feeder cable ("extension lead") would be needed to link up any isolated part. Not a big deal if it's just a dead section under a low bridge or two but if (hypothetically) the bit round Mirfield was left unwired pending re-modelling and Standedge was left unwired as too difficult, then anything in the Huddersfield area would need a long feeder cable or its own Grid feeder station (and incidentally the lead time to get a suitable Grid connections is at least five years). Going by the typical distances between existing feeders, a continuous electrification might not need anything more between the new one near Stalybridge and whatever exists around Leeds.

To me the logical thing is to wire from Man Vic- Stalybridge Grid Feeder and also Leeds - York/Selby and then do other bits later. I must check where the other grid feeders were supposed to be.

EDIT - at 23.30 approx. says 2 grid feeders in addition to Heyrod - I assume the 5 year lead time does NOT start from official go ahead -otherwise that is crazy delay.

 

[IanXC]

To me the logical thing is to wire from Man Vic- Stalybridge Grid Feeder and also Leeds - York/Selby and then do other bits later. I must check where the other grid feeders were supposed to be.

EDIT - at 23.30 approx. says 2 grid feeders in addition to Heyrod - I assume the 5 year lead time does NOT start from official go ahead -otherwise that is crazy delay.

Agreed.

In the original TP Electrification (which of course leaves us several bridges completed between York at Micklefield), there seemed to be a plan for a grid feeder point at Gascoigne Wood (which was a major Coal pit, and so has suitable supply already). There was also talk that this supply point was required for ECML requirements too - whether this work is ongoing and/or ordered I'm not sure.

 

[59CosG95]

There was also talk that this supply point was required for ECML requirements too - whether this work is ongoing and/or ordered I'm not sure.

That's definitely happening AFAIAA, I've seen a lot more auto-transformer wires on the southern end of the route lately. Must be for the increased power demands of the 80x fleet, and the Desiro City units too. It stands to reason that AT will need to go further northwards to cater for the 80x' demands, so yes - Gascoigne Wood seems to be multi-purpose in that regard.

 

[EIKN]

The letter states the intention is a near complete relaying of the line with multiple changes to alignment. I would say that counts as a route upgrade. There has been no back tracking on the budget of £3bn yet either.

If they are talking of having to relay the line then questions like , The Woodhead route - was it any faster? , If so , surley cheaper to rebuild.
Also then as that would probably mean running the service via Sheffield and Doncaster , how much capacity is there without a third track and fourth track between Doncaster and York to cope with that traffic .
Freeing the existing route for more freight and stopping services.
Its just from.a non expert point of view it sounds like a massive expense .
To dig up as the minister said a winding rail route in its entirety and relay it.
Plus all signalling no doubt .
And all that before you attach masts and wires !.
5 or so years seems optimistic

 

[snowball]

If they are talking of having to relay the line then questions like , The Woodhead route - was it any faster? , If so , surley cheaper to rebuild.

Was the Woodhead route ever an alternative to the Standedge route? I thought one was only ever used for Manchester-Sheffield and the other only ever for Manchester-Leeds.

The Woodhead route would be very indirect from Manchester to anywhere except Barnsley.

 

[edwin_m]

I quite liked the idea of re-opening Woodhead to link to the HS2 route east of Barnsley, until I did the sums and decided Manchester-Leeds by that route would be no quicker than it is today. The re-routeing of HS2 much further east rules that option out anyway.

 

[Ploughman]

Renewing the track before Electrification is a normal practice.
Its easier to do without the wires being there and you have more freedom in realignment work.
Gets expensive or severely limited in the amount of alteration after OHLE Masts are installed.

 

[twpsaesneg]

Renewing the track before Electrification is a normal practice.
Its easier to do without the wires being there and you have more freedom in realignment work.
Gets expensive or severely limited in the amount of alteration after OHLE Masts are installed.

It also makes the OLE Design a lot easier if the track design is firmed up or better still installed before OLE start work. Same for the signalling... when it's all being designed at once things inevitably change in one discipline which has huge knock on effects in others.

 

[B&I]

The letter states the intention is a near complete relaying of the line with multiple changes to alignment. I would say that counts as a route upgrade. There has been no back tracking on the budget of £3bn yet either.

And is this quasi new railway going to be electrified ?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

And is this quasi new railway going to be electrified ?

Allegedly- partially

 

[B&I]

Allegedly- partially

Grayling and his electrophobe acolytes at DfT should be personally surcharged for any additional costs incurred as a result of electrification not being done at the same time as any other improvements.

 

[Elecman]

Andrew Haines has apparently said TP electrification May now not take place in his view of Route Upgrade

 

[AndrewE]

Andrew Haines has apparently said TP electrification May now not take place in his view of Route Upgrade

Time to call him and Grayling out now, then and ask (no, demand to know) why not? No evasions or platitudes will be accepted.

What makes it unlikely? Is any one of the tunnels more difficult than the Severn Tunnel?
Is the number of trains (or passengers) per day insufficient to justify the investment?
How will you reduce (soon) the carbon dioxide and other noxious gas emissions on the route - no bionic duckweed or other non-established technology allowed either. Just equipment currently in use and available in the UK.

No more jam tomorrow!

 

[CdBrux]

The stated aims are capacity improvements (more tph as well as longer trains) and speed. Assuming the, by now 18 month old and very frequently referenced lectures from NR engineers is correct, how will electrification help? Within the 3billion budget (up 5 or 6 fold since first mooted)

What is more risky and more susceptible to cost overruns, civils etc.. or electrification?

 

[superkev]

Grayling probably take the understandable view that network rail and its gravy train can't be trusted with any money so it's best spent elsewhere.
Would anyone here trust them with a penny of there own money.
K