Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[Tomnick]

If the primary limit on capacity is the difference in running times between different tiers of service at the desired frequencies and even intervals, then ETCS, even at a notional level 3, can make little difference to throughput. A little more closing up potential at stations perhaps, but nothing major. No signalling system on Earth can make faster trains pass through slower ones!

...and that really seems to be the root of the problems on the Hope Valley. The sections are all relatively short between Totley Tunnel and Cowburn Tunnel, with IB sections in both directions between Grindleford and Earles, and between Earles and Edale. There's no point having shorter sections if it just means that you're only going to get a bit closer to a train that you can't overtake anyway. At the east end, the stop signals either side of Totley Tunnel in each direction are already pretty much as close as they could hope to be, with Totley Tunnel East having a tail lamp camera too to speed things up whilst a long freight train (clear of the clearing point but with the rear not past the box) waits for a path. At the west end, Edale to Chinley is a fairly long section and probably one of the most problematic for a fast train (Manchester bound) catching up with a stopper, but the Chinley stop and multiple-aspect signalling from there to New Mills South means that you'll still not be all that far behind it by the time it finally gets out of the way.

So no, I don't think resignalling on its own will make much difference at all!

 

[furnessvale]

Multiple aspect or ERTMS would make some difference but the long tunnels this would still a constraint on train separation as they wouldn't want to put a stop signal (or the ERTMS equivalent) in a tunnel. So the Edale-Chinley block, which tends to be where the EMT catches up with a freight in my experience, could only be shortened a little by putting a "signal" at the tunnel entrance and another one a train length beyond the exit.

How does the Channel Tunnel manage?

 

[edwin_m]

How does the Channel Tunnel manage?

The Channel Tunnel has separate bores, fire suppression, continuous side walkway, lighting, ventilation, a third service tunnel linked by frequent cross-passages with smoke doors to make it a place of safety. A stranded train in Totley or Cowburn would mean having to get down onto the oily ballast in total darkness and walk the best part of a mile to a portal in a remote area with no vehicle access.

 

[Killingworth]

The Channel Tunnel has separate bores, fire suppression, continuous side walkway, lighting, ventilation, a third service tunnel linked by frequent cross-passages with smoke doors to make it a place of safety. A stranded train in Totley or Cowburn would mean having to get down onto the oily ballast in total darkness and walk the best part of a mile to a portal in a remote area with no vehicle access.

From the Grindleford portal to Totley Tunnel East box is roughly 4 miles, 3.5 in the tunnel with the rest in a deep cutting. There needs to be 6 minutes separation between trains to allow only one at a time to be in the tunnel and clear. If the tunnel were blocked reversing the way it had come in would be the evacuation preference.

In the middle of Totley tunnel, below the offset air shaft, is quite a large brick lined chamber that could provide a degree of very wet refuge.

 

[Killingworth]

Incidentally, some planning has already been done to electrify the Hope Valley route and the Capacity Scheme was/is more expensive as it has to be electrification compatible.

The current Transpennine electrification plans will be disruptive. Hope Valley electrification would probably require an even longer total blockade which would rule it out, let alone cost.

 

[furnessvale]

The Channel Tunnel has separate bores, fire suppression, continuous side walkway, lighting, ventilation, a third service tunnel linked by frequent cross-passages with smoke doors to make it a place of safety. A stranded train in Totley or Cowburn would mean having to get down onto the oily ballast in total darkness and walk the best part of a mile to a portal in a remote area with no vehicle access.

OK, lets try the Alpine tunnels. I don't think the Gotthard operates "one engine in steam".

The point I am making is that things are possible, if there is a will to do it.

By the way, a stranded train in Totley or Cowburn would still have to do all the things you mentioned whether or not the line was subdivuded by IBs.

 

[edwin_m]

OK, lets try the Alpine tunnels. I don't think the Gotthard operates "one engine in steam".

The point I am making is that things are possible, if there is a will to do it.

By the way, a stranded train in Totley or Cowburn would still have to do all the things you mentioned whether or not the line was subdivuded by IBs.

You're not seriously comparing a modern tunnel built with extensive safety and evacuation measures with a Victorian one that has none of the above?

If a train is stranded (or even stopped for a longish period) on a line with a reasonably frequent service there may be two or three more trains stacking up at the signals behind before somebody decides to hold them at places where they can readily be evacuated if it comes to that. If the stranded train is somewhere in the section beyond the tunnel then at least one of the following trains will be stopped inside the tunnel, and it may be some time before the trains behind can be reversed out to allow it to escape. This isn't a knee-jerk reaction to recent stranding incidents, it's longstanding practice to avoid stopping trains in tunnels (also viaducts etc) if possible.

 

[Killingworth]

Curiously, there is largely abandoned and disconnected overgrown track on both sides of the current running lines just west of Grindleford station, and between Cowburn tunnel and Edale station that could hold normal length passenger trains off the main lines. Last week I noticed there was a new point assembly awaiting installation at Edale.

The sidings on the south sides at both Grindleford and Edale are used for tunnel and line maintenance, but it surely wouldn't be too difficult to make loops for fast passenger services to overtake the stoppers, thereby adding more flexibility. The trackbed is still there, but the old tracks would only be suitable for heritage sidings or scrap. At Edale the track is straight, so no special pointwork likely to be needed.

During recent north Pennine blockages a small number of TPE services to Newcastle took a south Pennine path through the Hope Valley to Sheffield before heading north, the south Pennine service for Cleethorpes being truncated to meet it at Doncaster, I think. Given the way splitting works elsewhere, maybe capacity could be improved by combining the north and south services as far as Sheffield or Doncaster? Maybe even 3 x 3 car 185s could work together?

 

[The_Engineer]

This isn't a knee-jerk reaction to recent stranding incidents, it's longstanding practice to avoid stopping trains in tunnels (also viaducts etc) if possible.

Indeed, most trains I have designed or modified have an over-ride pushbutton for a non-driver emergency brake precisely so the driver can hold off brake long enough to clear viaducts and tunnels.

 

[MarkyT]

The old Gotthard tunnel has intermediate signals, even some crossovers inside. It is also fully bidirectional and there are comprehensive siding facilities at either end.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kecko/22720285757

Gotthard Railway - Göschenen
The old signal box Domino 55 at the station Göschenen. It shows only the northern half of the tunnel. The tunnel begins at the bottom right. A fine vertical line which is slightly bent at the ends marks the portal. The sequel is at the left end of the two tracks on the top. In the middle there are the turnouts Gotthard North. The depicted tracks end on the right in the middle of the tunnel. Switzerland, Nov 18, 2015.

I found the following image on Streetview at Airolo.

Looks like a tunnel fire and emergency train to me, which implies they have significant facilities and backup plans for evacuation etc, probably tunnel lighting and even perhaps reserve traction available to always be able to haul a crippled train out. Having additional blocks within old Victorian tunnels can be done given sufficient need, will, and expense clearly, but the Gotthard before the new base tunnel was on a whole different scale of European wide importance than anything in our North East and note that the UK's longest main line tunnel still has only one block section per track under the River Severn. There are or were emergency stop signals at the mid positions that can be set to red, but there can only ever be one train in the tunnel on each line at a time in normal operations. That significantly reduces the risk of a train becoming stranded inside the tunnel, and makes it easier and quicker to get and keep tracks clear for evacuation if that ever becomes necessary. Keeping signals clear of tunnels and viaducts is a basic 'signalling the layout' principle learned by every young signal engineer. While that is the default on main lines, obviously many railways do need signals in tunnels, particularly underground metros, but appropriate mitigations must be designed and budgeted into the system.

 

[edwin_m]

Curiously, there is largely abandoned and disconnected overgrown track on both sides of the current running lines just west of Grindleford station, and between Cowburn tunnel and Edale station that could hold normal length passenger trains off the main lines. Last week I noticed there was a new point assembly awaiting installation at Edale.

The sidings on the south sides at both Grindleford and Edale are used for tunnel and line maintenance, but it surely wouldn't be too difficult to make loops for fast passenger services to overtake the stoppers, thereby adding more flexibility. The trackbed is still there, but the old tracks would only be suitable for heritage sidings or scrap. At Edale the track is straight, so no special pointwork likely to be needed.

The loops would be for freight trains to be overtaken, and therefore need to be much longer. They would also probably need 200m or so extra length as signalling overlap, to allow the signal for the train behind to be cleared immediately the looped train is "inside".

 

[Killingworth]

The loops would be for freight trains to be overtaken, and therefore need to be much longer. They would also probably need 200m or so extra length as signalling overlap, to allow the signal for the train behind to be cleared immediately the looped train is "inside".

The loops at Bamford and Dore are for freight trains, although I see no reason why the Bamford loop couldn't be used for an eastbound stopper to be overtaken (as currently planned it would only be possible for an overtaking move at Dore by bi-directional working through the station, something that's not planned either).

There are about 100 passenger movements through the Hope Valley each day, 3 tph in each direction from about 06.00 - 24.00. Freights don't use more than half the 70-80 paths allocated. There may be 25-30 trains actually run, of which about 5 will be at night when no passenger services are in their way.

Rebuilding the sidings as loops at Edale and Grindleford would allow fast services to overtake the short stoppers which are more numerous than the freights. At present stoppers can be held for a late fast, then can be caught up by the next fast, so all end up blaming each other!

But eliminating the bottleneck through Dore & Totley station is urgently needed with it being so close to the bottleneck of the tunnel, and separated from it by track where freights can be held to go south on the Midland mainline, a third bottleneck at Dore West.

 

[MarkyT]

Emergency lighting in the old Gotthard tunnel. They don't use these for normal inspection and repairs as it dazzles drivers and interferes with maintenance staff perception of oncoming traffic, only in an emergency, or for more major engineering work when all traffic is stopped.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kecko/22531730410/in/photostream/

 

[bengley]

Balcombe, Clayton and Quarry tunnels on the Brighton Main Line all have stop signals inside. I don't recall any serious issues occurring as a result.

As long as a clear and well planned procedure is in place for rescuing passengers from a stranded train quickly using another train stopped on the adjacent line I can't see why it's not possible to have similar signalling inside Standedge and other long transpennine tunnels.

 

[Ploughman]

There are signals (or there were) inside Standedge tunnel.
Seem to recall one is very close to a cross passage from the Single track bore.

 

[driver_m]

Kilsby, Watford and Primrose Hill tunnels on the WCML all have mid section signals. And I've been stopped at every single one of them. Never been a problem.

 

[Eccles1983]

There are two distant signals in standedge.

One up one down.

 

[dilbertphil]

There are signals (or there were) inside Standedge tunnel.
Seem to recall one is very close to a cross passage from the Single track bore.

There is a distant signal in each direction in the tunnel.

 

[hwl]

Balcombe, Clayton and Quarry tunnels on the Brighton Main Line all have stop signals inside. I don't recall any serious issues occurring as a result.

As long as a clear and well planned procedure is in place for rescuing passengers from a stranded train quickly using another train stopped on the adjacent line I can't see why it's not possible to have similar signalling inside Standedge and other long transpennine tunnels.

And the Crystal Palace Tunnel* (690m) now does too without the previous double blocks in the tunnel (needed to make Thameslink diversions 2014-2018 work) so it can be done. I suspect electric only traction helps.

*Deep cuttings with poor access at either end except on foot

 

[bengley]

And the Crystal Palace Tunnel* (690m) now does too without the previous double blocks in the tunnel (needed to make Thameslink diversions 2014-2018 work) so it can be done. I suspect electric only traction helps.

*Deep cuttings with poor access at either end except on foot

I got double blocked at the tunnel entrance on the down plenty of times when I was at TL

 

[bengley]

Also, I know this is not totally related to the upgrade, but I've heard about a service change which should improve reliability from December - the MAN - LDS stopper will be split into two at Huddersfield with two separate trains running the service and the MAN - HUD service will stop additionally at Slaithwaite, with the Hull services no longer stopping there.

 

[Eccles1983]

Also, I know this is not totally related to the upgrade, but I've heard about a service change which should improve reliability from December - the MAN - LDS stopper will be split into two at Huddersfield with two separate trains running the service and the MAN - HUD service will stop additionally at Slaithwaite, with the Hull services no longer stopping there.

So they are doing what northern did successfully for years.

Talk about reinventing the wheel.

TPE are a joke of a TOC, albeit with good PR.

 

[Chester1]

Also, I know this is not totally related to the upgrade, but I've heard about a service change which should improve reliability from December - the MAN - LDS stopper will be split into two at Huddersfield with two separate trains running the service and the MAN - HUD service will stop additionally at Slaithwaite, with the Hull services no longer stopping there.

Both still run by TPE? If so thats a good decision. In the long term Northern running with 185s with no first class would be right for the line. The stoppers were too slow with pacers and sprinters.

 

[Spartacus]

So they are doing what northern did successfully for years.

Talk about reinventing the wheel.

TPE are a joke of a TOC, albeit with good PR.

The original change wasn't driven by TPE.

 

[Eccles1983]

The original change wasn't driven by TPE.

Possibly, but I bet they didn't put up much of a fight or even suggest that it wouldn't work.

The thin layer of sparkle has well and truly gone from TPE. They are woeful.

 

[dilbertphil]

Possibly, but I bet they didn't put up much of a fight or even suggest that it wouldn't work.

The thin layer of sparkle has well and truly gone from TPE. They are woeful.

It's clear from most of your posts you have some strange vendetta against TPE, maybe they knocked you back for a job??

Things have been very difficult at TPE and all the staff on the ground do their best in very difficult circumstances. I've worked for both Northern and TPE and I know who I would say are the truly woeful company.

 

[Eccles1983]

It's clear from most of your posts you have some strange vendetta against TPE, maybe they knocked you back for a job??

Things have been very difficult at TPE and all the staff on the ground do their best in very difficult circumstances. I've worked for both Northern and TPE and I know who I would say are the truly woeful company.

Knocked back for a job? You are having a laugh - they employ anyone at the minute.

Is that all you have? It's not a vendetta, it's reality of them clogging up Manchester for the last 5 months and being caught up behind them as they can't do anything wrong, and the absolute gall of some of the staff to blame other TOC's for their own pitiful performance.

On more than a handful of trains I have been pass on I have heard the Conductor blatantly lie to the passengers over the tannoy claiming slow running local services. I pulled one quite loudly about it after he tried to lie to my face not realising I had access to realtime trains.

No, I call a spade a spade. If you think TPE are great then you've a vested interest. PPM and cancellations despite having the pick of the routes don't lie.

 

[dilbertphil]

They employ anybody?? Really?? The fact you would even say that shows you up to be either very deluded or jealous maybe both.
Performance isn't great I'll give you that. But claiming TPE staff are outright lying about reasons for it and you went one a one man crusade with real time to combat it is laughable. You clearly have issues with TPE you only have to look at some of the nonsense you post to see that. We're never going to agree so I'll leave this little thread diversion at that.

 

[Eccles1983]

I think you need to have a wee look at it. The honey and milk you thought you were getting after leaving northern is turning into a pile of brown and smelly stuff. I'm not jealous or deluded. I have got a job at a different TOC so don't see why you would think TPE is hard to get into to.

And it's not a claim. It's a fact that they have been lying. I'm not the only one who has heard it or even pulled them on it. I am fully aware that Northern isn't great - but at least I live in the real world and would never lie to passengers. I can't see how it's a crusade or why it's laughable.

What's laughable is your defence of your colleagues who have been caught out. Walk into Victoria and ask. There's a few people who will verify what's been put.

 

[Greybeard33]

Also, I know this is not totally related to the upgrade, but....

This post has since triggered eight further off-topic posts!

I suggest any further discussion of TPE timetable changes is continued in one of the several more appropriate threads, e.g. https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/transpennine-express-north-route-new-timetable.164702/