Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[sjpowermac]

All depends on what piles the structures being installed here are for. 'Open Route' ones will probably come more quickly, while those at overlaps & crossovers will likely take longer.

Again, many thanks indeed.

 

[59CosG95]

This came up on the LinkedIn profile for Adey Steel, who are (I believe) the biggest supplier of OLE steelwork in the UK. 400 structures will be erected between York & Church Fenton.

#electrification #railinfrastructure #steelfabrication #engineering | Adey Steel Group

Adey Steel Group are very pleased to be supporting TRU East and Network Rail on Phase 1 of the TransPennine Route Upgrade by providing OLE structures between York and Church Fenton. The 400 OLE structures, whose raw material is sourced predominantly from UK steel mills will shortly begin...

www.linkedin.com

 

[WAO]

Perhaps an advantage of a modest but economic project; UK producers can compete. I imagine that an order for 50 route miles of the stuff would be beyond any UK's firm's capacity and would go abroad, further impoverishing the Regions that such schemes are meant to help...

WAO

 

[Bald Rick]

Perhaps an advantage of a modest but economic project; UK producers can compete. I imagine that an order for 50 route miles of the stuff would be beyond any UK's firm's capacity and would go abroad, further impoverishing the Regions that such schemes are meant to help...

WAO

I doubt it. It’s not like they are all going to be installed at the same time. If they can produce x masts for installation over y months, they can produce 3x masts for installation over 3y months, and so on.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Most OLE steelwork contracts seem to go to works based in the UK, but the specialist and fiddly parts are often sourced abroad, often Italy.
All the steel majors are global companies and will source production wherever is best for them.
NR's subcontractors will also have their preferred suppliers when they bid for the electrification work.

 

[WAO]

It's not that simple. Commercial considerations such as access to capital, risk, prolonged exposure to a single large (unstable!) customer etc often mean that the enquiry would be marked "decline to tender".

WAO

 

[greyman42]

This came up on the LinkedIn profile for Adey Steel, who are (I believe) the biggest supplier of OLE steelwork in the UK. 400 structures will be erected between York & Church Fenton.

#electrification #railinfrastructure #steelfabrication #engineering | Adey Steel Group

Adey Steel Group are very pleased to be supporting TRU East and Network Rail on Phase 1 of the TransPennine Route Upgrade by providing OLE structures between York and Church Fenton. The 400 OLE structures, whose raw material is sourced predominantly from UK steel mills will shortly begin...

www.linkedin.com

Should that be between Colton Jc. and Church Fenton?

 

[59CosG95]

Should that be between Colton Jc. and Church Fenton?

I've looked into it a bit, and your suggestion certainly seems more likely. SICAT (the specific cantilever type earmarked for TPE) has a max. span length of 74m, so I assumed the structures would be more spread out.

Based on the distances between Church F & York (8.77km Church Fenton to Colton Jn; 8.87km Colton Jn to York), the total distance is about 17.64km. Dividing that by 74m gives 238.4 structures over the entire length, assuming all structures are portals; they may well be a mix of portals, TTCs and single track cantilevers so you're probably right.

 

[Grumpy]

I've looked into it a bit, and your suggestion certainly seems more likely. SICAT (the specific cantilever type earmarked for TPE) has a max. span length of 74m, so I assumed the structures would be more spread out.

Based on the distances between Church F & York (8.77km Church Fenton to Colton Jn; 8.87km Colton Jn to York), the total distance is about 17.64km. Dividing that by 74m gives 238.4 structures over the entire length, assuming all structures are portals; they may well be a mix of portals, TTCs and single track cantilevers so you're probably right.

Isn't the point that York to Colton is already electrified?
Are they doing all 4 tracks? Seems a lot of structures for2

 

[Bald Rick]

Isn't the point that York to Colton is already electrified?
Are they doing all 4 tracks? Seems a lot of structures for2

It will surely be all 4 to Church Fenton North Jn.

I’m sorry if I haven’t been paying attention upthread, but where exactly is the wiring finishing at Church Fenton?

 

[59CosG95]

It will surely be all 4 to Church Fenton North Jn.

I’m sorry if I haven’t been paying attention upthread, but where exactly is the wiring finishing at Church Fenton?

At a guess, the Church Fenton South Jn area. That seems to be where the new TSC is going so would make sense to get the sectioning arrangement up now to save modification later.

 

[Chris NS]

I'm also guessing you'd want to get Church Fenton junction out of the way the same time as you do the work to Colton. Colton - Church Fenton is going to be a pain no matter what, with diversions difficult or impossible. But finish work at the junction, and when the time comes for the rest pg the route to Leeds (which will presumably need more work), you can send trains on the relatively easy Castleford route.

 

[59CosG95]

I'm also guessing you'd want to get Church Fenton junction out of the way the same time as you do the work to Colton. Colton - Church Fenton is going to be a pain no matter what, with diversions difficult or impossible. But finish work at the junction, and when the time comes for the rest pg the route to Leeds (which will presumably need more work), you can send trains on the relatively easy Castleford route.

Like in South Wales, Colton - Church F has the advantage of quadruple track, so if NR & the Transpire Alliance (Siemens/Volker Rail/Murphy IIRC) decide to work ALO, it could be possible to have one pair of lines closed (e.g. the Normanton Lines) while the other pair is open. This would probably only happen at weekends to minimise disruption.
I only raise this as the Mains/Reliefs on the South Wales ML were done in a similar way last year.

 

[unslet]

It would appear the electrification is stopping short of Church Fenton station.

From the Church Fenton Parish Council after having met with Network Rail.

"The electrification does not go through Church Fenton, again it appears to stop on the track roughly opposite the airbase. This suggests bi-mode trains".

 

[Bald Rick]

This suggests bi-mode trains".

Well, it wasn’t going to be electric trains just to Church Fenton.

 

[Halish Railway]

It would appear the electrification is stopping short of Church Fenton station.

From the Church Fenton Parish Council after having met with Network Rail.

"The electrification does not go through Church Fenton, again it appears to stop on the track roughly opposite the airbase. This suggests bi-mode trains".

This is probably due to the quagmire of having low wires underneath the Common Lane bridge being shortly followed by high wires at the Rose Lane level crossing.

Better to kick the problem into the long grass.

 

[WAO]

It may also be avoiding the pointwork of the ladder North of the station, depending on which airbase track they mean.

WAO

 

[Philip Phlopp]

It would appear the electrification is stopping short of Church Fenton station.

From the Church Fenton Parish Council after having met with Network Rail.

"The electrification does not go through Church Fenton, again it appears to stop on the track roughly opposite the airbase. This suggests bi-mode trains".

It was always going to stop there - there is (or was, or will be, or might be, or could be) the issue of the HS2 connection to contend with.

As Bald Rick says, it was never going to be electric trains just to Church Fenton - it is, at present, a nice little project to allow all bi-mode stock to arrive or depart from York on electric power, improving air quality in the area, and it deals with one of the major problems on the TRU - connecting the whole lot into the ECML.

 

[Ploughman]

How big will the gap be between Neville Hill and Church Fenton?
Will the wires be extended from NH any distance at all? Maybe to Micklefield?

 

[Bald Rick]

How big will the gap be between Neville Hill and Church Fenton?
Will the wires be extended from NH any distance at all? Maybe to Micklefield?

About 15 miles.

Wiring the gap may depend on options chosen for Northern Powerhouse Rail, as this section could well be one of the first parts of that project to be delivered.

 

[WAO]

I think that the "gap" is a bigger issue than just wires. The two-track railway East of Leeds has to host XC, TPE, serious stopping services and freight. There is a four track formation from just East of Marsh Lane in Leeds to beyond Cross Gates but the prospect of trying to widen a busy route even if the existing bridges are wide is daunting. The HS2/3 route basically eases the Church Fenton - Micklefield curve then heads straight West until it follows the M1. Extra tracks on this route with a curve over the M1 into the Cross Gates line mostly in open country, may be a consideration.

Electrification is not just about wires but about a better all round railway; hence the difficulties with TRU.

Greetings

WAO

 

[quantinghome]

Isn't the point of electrifying to Church Fenton to keep the pipeline of work going, sorting out a section unlikely to be affected by major upgrades/ realignments?

 

[fgwrich]

This is probably due to the quagmire of having low wires underneath the Common Lane bridge being shortly followed by high wires at the Rose Lane level crossing.

Better to kick the problem into the long grass.

Can't be too much of an issue given that similar exists at Steventon on the GWML, albeit admittedly without the complexity of a junction fairly close by.

 

[edwin_m]

I think that the "gap" is a bigger issue than just wires. The two-track railway East of Leeds has to host XC, TPE, serious stopping services and freight. There is a four track formation from just East of Marsh Lane in Leeds to beyond Cross Gates but the prospect of trying to widen a busy route even if the existing bridges are wide is daunting. The HS2/3 route basically eases the Church Fenton - Micklefield curve then heads straight West until it follows the M1. Extra tracks on this route with a curve over the M1 into the Cross Gates line mostly in open country, may be a consideration.

Electrification is not just about wires but about a better all round railway; hence the difficulties with TRU.

Greetings

WAO

In fact the proposed junction of HS2 is north of Church Fenton and appears to extend nearly to Ulleskelf (according to the HS Interactive Map). This presumably involves some kind of grade separation - but won't that render a big chunk of this scheme abortive?

 

[59CosG95]

In fact the proposed junction of HS2 is north of Church Fenton and appears to extend nearly to Ulleskelf (according to the HS Interactive Map). This presumably involves some kind of grade separation - but won't that render a big chunk of this scheme abortive?

There is an indicative layout of the Phase 2b connection here: https://assets.publishing.service.g...ta/file/629106/C321-MMD-RT-DPP-130-591706.pdf
This is sadly about as much detail as we currently have on the connection - if it even goes ahead according to the latest doom-monger mill.

 

[WAO]

- but won't that render a big chunk of this scheme abortive?

Not if it ends North of Church Fenton as indicated. Pan up/down has to be North of the ladder. It must surely now be a NR "no regrets" scheme!

A new track layout may also indicate thinking towards capacity increases.

Greetings

WAO

 

[BantamMenace]

Do we know if the two road bridges and two footbridges (one at each station) in Garforth are ready for wires or do they require rebuilding?

 

[YorksLad12]

In fact the proposed junction of HS2 is north of Church Fenton and appears to extend nearly to Ulleskelf (according to the HS Interactive Map). This presumably involves some kind of grade separation - but won't that render a big chunk of this scheme abortive?

Not for another 20 years (at current rate of progress), no!

 

[IanXC]

Do we know if the two road bridges and two footbridges (one at each station) in Garforth are ready for wires or do they require rebuilding?

Garforth footbridge in particular seems highly unlikely, the road bridge I'd say probably not ready. East Garforth bridges might just be modification rather than replacement.

 

[Class 170101]

Can we be sure where HS2 2B will actually join the existing line there and in that way anyway? A document released by the NIC and being discussed elsewhere on this board has various options within it how can we be sure that these options will link at Church Fenton like that if at all? (Some say its 20 years away).