Further Electrification in the North West - Details announced

[Aictos]

What's all this talk of "Platform Extensions to Poulton"? Long trains existed before DMU's you know! With around 14 or 15 carriages (and a Locomotive! Shock horror! ). The platform at Poulton is about 400m long I reckon, making it one of the longest in the country (Top 20?). OK it would need tidying up at the 'Southern Reaches' but it's plenty long enough for Pendolinos.

I can remember travelling though Accrington in the late 80s and early 90s to visit my grandparents or going to Blackpool that the platform lengths were longer then they are now, I don't know when the platforms got shortened but they are now,

On my line, although it doesn't really matter any more there are stations which can take longer trains but are overgrown ie, Palmers Green and Bowes Park are the two obvious ones.

 

[boing_uk]

What's all this talk of "Platform Extensions to Poulton"?

Bearing in mind that the majority of the platform is out of use, the platform would technically have to be extended as the infrastructure in place in delapidated and would therefore have to be rebuilt - thus "platform extension".

I pass those platforms every day... your estimate is about near enough though... about 370m in length from the aerial photos.

 

[Pumbaa]

Any idea how feasable it is to run OHLE through Farnworth tunnels?

Given that the 319's are dual voltage could 3rd rail be an option between Manchester and Bolton?

No - 3rd rail is not permitted to be installed. The only exception is if it's an extension to an already existing network. Electrification is OLE or nowt.

 

[Aictos]

No - 3rd rail is not permitted to be installed. The only exception is if it's an extension to an already existing network. Electrification is OLE or nowt.

Right so if that's the case then why can't the Basingstoke to Exeter route be electrified as 3rd rail to displace the 159s to other areas and use EMUs instead?

Instead NR is talking about OHLE being used which means having to use dual voltage trains instead of just using existing 3rd rail capable trains.

I mean the route to Basingstoke is already electrified at 3rd rail anyway and although the 442s are being used on Southern services if this route was already electrified then just maybe the 442s could have been used on the services with the 159s replacing the EMT 158s on the Liverpool to Norwich services which in turn would go to Northern which would then in turn enable some of the oldest DMUs (Pacers) to be retired.

 

[Lampshade]

There are a few very low bridges/tunnels along the Manchester - Preston line, I'm not sure OHLE will clear some of them :???:

 

[ukrob]

There are a few very low bridges/tunnels along the Manchester - Preston line, I'm not sure OHLE will clear some of them :???:

The track can be lowered - as it will have to be for short sections on the Chat Moss route.

 

[Aictos]

The track can be lowered - as it will have to be for short sections on the Chat Moss route.

Which was the case of what happened on the Hertford Loop when that line got electrified back in the 1970s.

 

[furryfeet]

I can remember travelling though Accrington in the late 80s and early 90s to visit my grandparents or going to Blackpool that the platform lengths were longer then they are now, I don't know when the platforms got shortened but they are now.

They were shortened when the 158 class units were introduced - from dim memory the late 1990's.
Indeed the platform coping stones at Accrington had be crudely cut back to allow those trains to get past. At Blackburn they were prohibited from using the station at first - the 158's had to stop at the local stations either side of Blackburn, with bus connections laid on.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

The track can be lowered - as it will have to be for short sections on the Chat Moss route.

Which was the case of what happened on the Hertford Loop when that line got electrified back in the 1970s.

And is done routinely, not just to allow for OLE, but also to increase lateral clearances for higher gauge operation. It was exactly this operation of scraping out the floor of the Penmanshiel Tunnel (ECML 1979) that triggered its collapse (with 2 men unable to escape and never seeing their homes again)

 

[Old Timer]

Platform 7 and 8 are not permitted to have Mk3 or Mk4 coaching stock - although oddly, a Class 180 IS permitted in either platform. .

Surely a 180 is shorter ???

And is done routinely, not just to allow for OLE, but also to increase lateral clearances for higher gauge operation. It was exactly this operation of scraping out the floor of the Penmanshiel Tunnel (ECML 1979) that triggered its collapse (with 2 men unable to escape and never seeing their homes again)

Track lowering is fine but it is the station platforms and underline bridges that cause the problems.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Re track lowering.

Track lowering is fine but it is the station platforms and underline bridges that cause the problems.

Hmmmm. But "you don't get one without the other".
My examp. was an unfortunate lowering in a tunnel.
And my point is, that track formations don't exist in isolation from their environment - stations, bridges, tunnels etc etc.
You probably know better than I, that each site presents its own unique circumstances and challenges. Its the ability to work with the built and natural environment that sets the engineer apart from the desk-bound planner (or enthusiast!) who propses suggestions based only on achieving outcomes.

 

[Old Timer]

The problem with lowering the track through stations is that the platformis a fixed reference point against which a variety of minimum/maximum dimensions must be achieved.

Lowering also has the impact of potentially undermining the foundations.

Now whilst it is obviously easy to ramp up and then ramp down again, stations either have a bridge or a subway which can cause a problem there as well.

 

[ukrob]

You make it sound like it is such a big deal that it isn't worth bothering with and screw electrification

 

[Old Timer]

You make it sound like it is such a big deal that it isn't worth bothering with and screw electrification

Simply pointing out what no-one wants to think about in detail. Its quite easy for people to say "do this, do that" but if it was that simple it would have been already done.

LIke many Infrastructure issues there is much that is hidden that can have a major impact upon costs. Just because it is not apparant to the untrained eye does not mean that it does not exist or that it is not expensive to deal with.

In many cases it just is not possible to lower the track through the platform full stop.

 

[Aictos]

They were shortened when the 158 class units were introduced - from dim memory the late 1990's.
Indeed the platform coping stones at Accrington had be crudely cut back to allow those trains to get past. At Blackburn they were prohibited from using the station at first - the 158's had to stop at the local stations either side of Blackburn, with bus connections laid on.

Ah, thanks for that - went though about 2003, 2004 time and always wondered when it got done.

Out of interest, is that barrow crossing still there at the Leeds end of the platforms by the footbridge? I remember many times having the BR employee help us across it with luggage which was a great help especially when you consider having a buggy and lots of luggage as well to get across.

 

[ukrob]

Simply pointing out what no-one wants to think about in detail. Its quite easy for people to say "do this, do that" but if it was that simple it would have been already done.

LIke many Infrastructure issues there is much that is hidden that can have a major impact upon costs. Just because it is not apparant to the untrained eye does not mean that it does not exist or that it is not expensive to deal with.

In many cases it just is not possible to lower the track through the platform full stop.

It was just a tongue in cheek comment - and you are assuming that nobody knows what they are talking about apart from you.

 

[Old Timer]

It was just a tongue in cheek comment - and you are assuming that nobody knows what they are talking about apart from you.

I actually support electrification, where it is justified. Your comment suggested negativity on my part and I felt it worth clarifying.

 

[ukrob]

I actually support electrification, where it is justified. Your comment suggested negativity on my part and I felt it worth clarifying.

Fair enough- as I said, it was just a tongue in cheek comment

 

[Old Timer]

Fair enough- as I said, it was just a tongue in cheek comment

No worries, no offence taken, long days and short nights, coupled with travelling considerable distances dulls my mind in any case.

 

[ffcphone]

As a Lancastrian it's refreshing to learn of continued investment in infrastructure out of the home counties. Mind you, still can't paper over the years of under or nil investment up here.

As a daily commuter on the Bolton to Preston stretch I have been enjoying that rare sight these last three years, new trains in the shape of fTPE's 185s. Somewhat saddened to learn electric replacements will be cascades. Suppose it would be asking too much for two brand new sets of rolling stock in the same decade or two!

In any event i wonder if anyone with experience of electrification to an existing line can give some indication to the level of disruption I and my fellow passengers are likely to experience once work starts. Will it be a wholesale closure of the line, sections at a time, can I anticipate passenger services to continue running mostly, etc.

Also on the subject of logistics, Network Rail completed some work to the track bed on the northern approach to Chorley Tunnel in Summer 2007/8. Drainage had become a serious problem and a fairly low TSR was put in place for several months. The line was closed for 6 weeks to allow work to be undertaken and I therefore wonder if the track now needs to be lowered to accommodate OHLE in the tunnel itself.

As a secondary issue listed Victorian arch-shaped structures were removed from over the line in this same area although I seem to recall English Heritage saying they had to be replaced within 2-3 years. OHLE may well now prevent their replacement.

F

 

[rl4eng]

Does anyone know how they'll go about electrifying under the bridg arches at Poulton-le-Fylde? this is a massive brick structure with a main road artery (Breck Road) going over it, and the station building forms part of the bridge?

I'd imagine it would be a huge task to raise the arches on hydraulic rams, but I'm no expert in this.
This is the Westbound line towards Chavpool, sorry Blackpool, gives you an idea of the structure.

http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/18363677.jpg

Guessing here, would it be a case of:-

1) Temporarily lower a section of the platform further South
2) Lower the track over week/weekend? Bus replacement service Preston-Blackpool.
3) Trains then use temporarily lowered section.
4) Make rest of platform lower.

But then it'd be awkward and messy with the rest of the platform (waiting room etc) at a higher level!?

Any ideas? 'tis a big Civil Engineering challenge!

 

[Old Timer]

..In any event i wonder if anyone with experience of electrification to an existing line can give some indication to the level of disruption I and my fellow passengers are likely to experience once work starts. Will it be a wholesale closure of the line, sections at a time, can I anticipate passenger services to continue running mostly, etc.

Much of the work can be done within ordinay Possessions, for example foundations can usually be dug out and concreted during a decent Sat/Sun Possession. Piled foundations can be installed in about 30 mins.

The longer duration work is the actaul running of the OHL Catenary and especially the contact wires which require to be droppered or at least tied to the Catenary.

A single wire run could be run and droppered duirng an 8 hour Possession using the train, but using road/railers will take somewhat longer as the Catenary will need to be installed and tensioned first.

Many of the disruptive Possessions are for track work not for OHL work.

When I was involved in the team that planned the Gourock/Wemyss Bay lines, we were looking at completely renewing a tension length (around a 1000-1200m) each week duirng standard short overnight Possessions, again a similar plan was developed for the Cathcart Circle.

A quick glance at the overbridge suggests that twin-contact wire should go through, provided the bridge is not already at a sub-standard height.