Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[matacaster]

As a concerned (live in Huddersfield) person, would it not make sense during 4-tracking of Mirfield to Thornhill junction to disconnect the tracks to Wakefield at Ravensthorpe and have two plain tracks (ie with no pointwork) from Ravensthorpe, both using the dive under the main L&YR main line (which would also need to be severed), rather than just one track one-way at present. This ought to be a simple first step which would allow trains from Manchester to Leeds to continue via Huddersfield for a fair proportion of the blockade. It might be sub-optimal as its always easier with a complete blockade, but I can't help but think it represents a means of reducing the disruption to the poor residents of Huddersfield, many of whom rely on the trains to get to Huddersfield and Manchester for their daily commute. Using coaches to get to Manchester and Leeds is no substitute - the M62 is seriously disrupted several times a week by accidents and the A62 is truly awful. Thoughts please!

 

[Class 170101]

Using coaches to get to Manchester and Leeds is no substitute - the M62 is seriously disrupted several times a week by accidents and the A62 is truly awful. Thoughts please!

Using Coaches to reach either Manchester or Leeds would be unwise. The City congestion would lead to severely increased journey times nevermind the risks of accidents on the main cross Pennine route (M62). The weather up there leaves a lot to be desired particularly in the winter months as the project has already noted for the rail route.

 

[Kieran1990]

When are expecting a formal announcement from the DaFT?

Also when it is announced could we see any work starting?

 

[yorksrob]

As a concerned (live in Huddersfield) person, would it not make sense during 4-tracking of Mirfield to Thornhill junction to disconnect the tracks to Wakefield at Ravensthorpe and have two plain tracks (ie with no pointwork) from Ravensthorpe, both using the dive under the main L&YR main line (which would also need to be severed), rather than just one track one-way at present. This ought to be a simple first step which would allow trains from Manchester to Leeds to continue via Huddersfield for a fair proportion of the blockade. It might be sub-optimal as its always easier with a complete blockade, but I can't help but think it represents a means of reducing the disruption to the poor residents of Huddersfield, many of whom rely on the trains to get to Huddersfield and Manchester for their daily commute. Using coaches to get to Manchester and Leeds is no substitute - the M62 is seriously disrupted several times a week by accidents and the A62 is truly awful. Thoughts please!

I can remember during previous engineering works getting a Leeds - Manchester service which went to Huddersfield, then reversed out via Brighouse and the Calder valley, which took a long time, but was preferable to bustitution.

Personally I see no reason why we can't have single line working with electrification work on the other line if the Europeans can manage it.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Presumably this is the team that have been sticking wires up in Scotland for the last eightish years? The advantage of having a team and supply chain that's got a continuing work stream I guess! My biggest fear at the moment as that we'll get to the end of the current run of wiring and not keep a single team in England meaning that we'll lose all the skills and logistics that have been rebuilt so painfully over the last five years.

The Scottish "team" consisted of at least 2 independent contractors - Carillion Powerlines and ABC (Alstom Babcock Costain), both JVs of their component owners.
It's not obvious how to keep several different contractors going - there are more working on other UK electrification projects (Amey, Balfour and others).
HS2 will generate plenty of work for the consortium winners - but not yet, and using only one high-speed new-build design.

 

[bbrez]

I can remember during previous engineering works getting a Leeds - Manchester service which went to Huddersfield, then reversed out via Brighouse and the Calder valley, which took a long time, but was preferable to bustitution.

Personally I see no reason why we can't have single line working with electrification work on the other line if the Europeans can manage it.

I remember this, was back around 2010. I used to come home from University for the football on a weekend and getting back was a bit of a mare as most people all piled on an hourly Sunday service to Manchester.

I think an issue with this was and still is the platforms at Huddersfield. With a Leeds stopper, Wakey/Bradford train, the TPE usually ended up on 6, meaning it could only run as 3 cars.

 

[yorksrob]

I remember this, was back around 2010. I used to come home from University for the football on a weekend and getting back was a bit of a mare as most people all piled on an hourly Sunday service to Manchester.

I think an issue with this was and still is the platforms at Huddersfield. With a Leeds stopper, Wakey/Bradford train, the TPE usually ended up on 6, meaning it could only run as 3 cars.

On this occasion, it was definitely a double 185, and it reversed in the middle through platform at Huddersfield. It was hourly though.

 

[superkev]

Re diverting via Halifax and Bradford ford. If they restored the track to the unused tracked between Bowling Junc and Lasterdyke trains could avoid reversal at Bradford speeding things up somewhat.
K

 

[Spartacus]

Re diverting via Halifax and Bradford ford. If they restored the track to the unused tracked between Bowling Junc and Lasterdyke trains could avoid reversal at Bradford speeding things up somewhat.
K

They'd have to demolish new buildings, relocate a rail served scrapyard, rebuild a couple of bridges and reinstate a level crossing. All for something that would rarely be used apart from when Mirfield was blocked.

 

[furnessvale]

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?

No, I am seriously comparing a Victorian Gotthard Tunnel with Victorian Totley, Cowburn or Disley Tunnels.

 

[superkev]

They'd have to demolish new buildings, relocate a rail served scrapyard, rebuild a couple of bridges and reinstate a level crossing. All for something that would rarely be used apart from when Mirfield was blocked.

I thought the trackbed was still mostly intact.
K

 

[Halifaxlad]

Either way, it looks like its going to be reinstated as part of the diversionary route.

I don't think it would be possible to divert freight via Bradford without it!

 

[bbrez]

On this occasion, it was definitely a double 185, and it reversed in the middle through platform at Huddersfield. It was hourly though.

Must've just been my luck then, although I always went back on a Sunday morning so that could've been something to do with it.

 

[yorksrob]

Must've just been my luck then, although I always went back on a Sunday morning so that could've been something to do with it.

Mine was on Saturday which might explain it.

 

[Greybeard33]

Either way, it looks like its going to be reinstated as part of the diversionary route.

I don't think it would be possible to divert freight via Bradford without it!

Old maps show that there used to be a short south to east chord at Mill Lane Jn, making it a triangular junction. Might that be easier to restore than the Bowling to Laisterdyke line? From satellite images there do not appear to be any buildings on the alignment, only the access road to the CK Foods warehouse.

 

[deltic08]

They'd have to demolish new buildings, relocate a rail served scrapyard, rebuild a couple of bridges and reinstate a level crossing. All for something that would rarely be used apart from when Mirfield was blocked.

Which idiot allowed encroachment onto the Bradford cut off trackbed? You just never know when old railway routes will be needed again. Look what happened to the Waverley. They had to demolish a dozen houses.
Reinstating the triangle at Mill Lane would be difficult for freight dropping down at 1 in 60 on severe curves and then up again at 1 in 50. I have seen PWay trains stall on the 1 in 50 to the tunnel.

 

[matacaster]

Which idiot allowed encroachment onto the Bradford cut off trackbed? You just never know when old railway routes will be needed again. Look what happened to the Waverley. They had to demolish a dozen houses.
Reinstating the triangle at Mill Lane would be difficult for freight dropping down at 1 in 60 on severe curves and then up again at 1 in 50. I have seen PWay trains stall on the 1 in 50 to the tunnel.

What would the radius of that reinstated curve be? Can modern stock successfully negotiate it? -its been a very long time since it was last in use. The very short tunnel is bricked up, although this could easily be removed.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Old maps show that there used to be a short south to east chord at Mill Lane Jn, making it a triangular junction. Might that be easier to restore than the Bowling to Laisterdyke line? From satellite images there do not appear to be any buildings on the alignment, only the access road to the CK Foods warehouse.

Even if it is feasible considering the points mentioned above, the line will cut off access to the entire 'CK Foods'. In other words all of it will have to be acquired and demolished in comparison to the line via Bowling where it would only cut off part of the industrial building home to 'Powell' that has been built partially on the track-bed.

Another benefit that I keep forgetting to mention is that reopening the 'Avoiding Line' would allow a new station to be constructed. With the A652 'Wakefield Road' crossing under this line in the middle, it would certainly have good road links.

 

[Greybeard33]

Even if it is feasible considering the points mentioned above, the line will cut off access to the entire 'CK Foods'. In other words all of it will have to be acquired and demolished in comparison to the line via Bowling where it would only cut off part of the industrial building home to 'Powell' that has been built partially on the track-bed.

Another benefit that I keep forgetting to mention is that reopening the 'Avoiding Line' would allow a new station to be constructed. With the A652 'Wakefield Road' crossing under this line in the middle, it would certainly have good road links.

Would not a bridge for the access road cost less than a CPO for the entire CK Foods facility? Admittedly the gradients would be problematic for freight. But the transpennine biomass trains negotiate a similar gradient out of Liverpool docks (I believe with the aid of a banker).

As pointed out on the Hope Valley Capacity Scheme thread, that scheme might provide an alternative freight diversionary route at lower cost than reinstating the Bradford avoiding line.

 

[AndrewE]

Would not a bridge for the access road cost less than a CPO for the entire CK Foods facility? Admittedly the gradients would be problematic for freight.

or a bridge on the access road, rather than trying to take the rail line over it? Lorries can cope with a spiral ramp, which would be a lot easier than making the railway line almost unusable...

 

[matacaster]

... of course they could always just build a link between Bradford Interchange and Forster Square stations.

I'll get my coat!!!

 

[AndrewE]

... of course they could always just build a link between Bradford Interchange and Forster Square stations. I'll get my coat!!!

No need to go to the wardrobe, it needed saying. We need to think more widely about the secondary benefits to be gained from other options, even if it was mischievous when first proposed.

 

[matacaster]

Even if it is feasible considering the points mentioned above, the line will cut off access to the entire 'CK Foods'. In other words all of it will have to be acquired and demolished in comparison to the line via Bowling where it would only cut off part of the industrial building home to 'Powell' that has been built partially on the track-bed.

Another benefit that I keep forgetting to mention is that reopening the 'Avoiding Line' would allow a new station to be constructed. With the A652 'Wakefield Road' crossing under this line in the middle, it would certainly have good road links.

If the line via Bowling is the one I'm thinking of (used to be used by some Liverpool trains in BR days), there used to be a level crossing (the rail line was level), but the road crossing it has a very steep drop on one side (Where Bowllng Hall Road morphs into Hall Lane. That road is in a very poor state but still in use and the drop is a good way to remove that low hung exhaust on a sports car. The level crossing is long since gone.

I haven't posted an excellent diagram below as it says it may be copyrighted, but include a link.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?...608047649511506601&selectedIndex=3&ajaxhist=0

 

[Greybeard33]

or a bridge on the access road, rather than trying to take the rail line over it? Lorries can cope with a spiral ramp, which would be a lot easier than making the railway line almost unusable...

Yes, that is what I meant. Rerouting the road up and over or down and under the original rail alignment.

 

[The Lad]

The triangle gave access to the line heading to Great Horton under the Halifax line, not joining it.

 

[matacaster]

The triangle gave access to the line heading to Great Horton under the Halifax line, not joining it.

Yes, you are absolutely correct. This is why I was wondering about the curvature and gradients if a new line completing triangle between halifax line and leeds line.

 

[Ploughman]

Theses photos were taken by me when doing a renewal site survey with all authorisations to be on track.
Photo taken near St Dunstans in 1996.
Mill Lane curve to Leeds on the left.
Proposed reinstallation of the bypass would be behind the buildings on the hill.
Track to Bowling Tunnel and Halifax to right



Taken at Bowling jn in 1996
The bypass line came out on the left

 

[Ploughman]

Photo taken at Bowling Jn 1996 looking back to Bradford.
Former trackbed at right.

 

[Greybeard33]

The triangle gave access to the line heading to Great Horton under the Halifax line, not joining it.

Yes, apologies for my mistake. I was misled by an OS map with a 1973 revision date. At that time the Great Horton line had been lifted and the trackbed was depicted only by a faint dotted line. But the map showed the track still in place from the triangle as far as the bridge under the Halifax line, giving the false impression of a junction.

From Google Earth it appears that the bridge under the Halifax line is still in situ, but backfilled up to the level of the bridge deck.

 

[deltic08]

... of course they could always just build a link between Bradford Interchange and Forster Square stations.

I'll get my coat!!!

No they couldn't. That's the sensible option.