Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[Watershed]

But it would still mean a much slower stopping service, and a fantastically complex timetable with little room for failure and recovery.

I mean, that's pretty much what the current timetable involves. Eastbound the Huddersfield-Leeds stopper sits at Dewsbury waiting for the Scarborough service to overtake it, westbound it uses the slow lines between Mirfield East Jn-Heaton Lodge Jn and sits at Heaton Lodge Jn, again waiting for the Scarborough to pass.

The margin for 'pass to depart' is actually less than 3 minutes in each case - it's 1½' at Dewsbury and 2' at Heaton Lodge Jn - but it still results in a timetable highly liable to delay.

 

[Spartacus]

I think there's about 1km of possible loop at Batley, which while not ideal could be mitigated by having the next express behind it call at Dewsbury, I can't remember the details. I remember doing some basic modelling years ago which suggested Batley would be a decent spot for a loop if needed, in fact probably the only possible spot between there and Leeds to put one.

 

[quantinghome]

I think there's about 1km of possible loop at Batley, which while not ideal could be mitigated by having the next express behind it call at Dewsbury, I can't remember the details.

Not sure that would mitigate it. Wouldn't you want the next express behind it to overtake as quickly as possible? Or do you mean the next-but-one express i.e. the one the stopper comes out in front of after being overtaken?

I remember doing some basic modelling years ago which suggested Batley would be a decent spot for a loop if needed, in fact probably the only possible spot between there and Leeds to put one.

I suspect it's the latter rather than the former.

 

[edwin_m]

I think in the proposal by @Bald Rick a page or two back (edit: actually much further at #4936), the fact that the stopper can use slow lines between Huddersfield and Westtown means it doesn't have to wait at Batley. There may be some flighting of fast trains, but at 8TPH does it really matter if some of the gaps between them are a bit longer?

 

[quantinghome]

I think in the proposal by @Bald Rick a page or two back (edit: actually much further at #4936), the fact that the stopper can use slow lines between Huddersfield and Westtown means it doesn't have to wait at Batley. There may be some flighting of fast trains, but at 8TPH does it really matter if some of the gaps between them are a bit longer?

As @Bald Rick pointed out, each stopper would take up 4 fast paths, so you'd have a 15 minute gap. Not a show stopper obviously, but not ideal.

My main concern though is that short of building additional tracks there's no way we can increase local services, unless you flight them as well. But that's really defeating the object of a regular metro service.

 

[Bald Rick]

As @Bald Rick pointed out, each stopper would take up 4 fast paths, so you'd have a 15 minute gap. Not a show stopper obviously, but not ideal.

My main concern though is that short of building additional tracks there's no way we can increase local services, unless you flight them as well. But that's really defeating the object of a regular metro service.

12 minute gap, as the stopper is one of the 4 paths it uses.

The objective of TRU is to provide quicker services Manchester -Leeds -York, and not to increase local services.

 

[quantinghome]

12 minute gap, as the stopper is one of the 4 paths it uses.

I meant a 15 minute gap between the fast services before and after the stopper.

The objective of TRU is to provide quicker services Manchester -Leeds -York, and not to increase local services.

True. But at some point someone is going to have to decide whether West Yorkshire should have a proper metro-frequency rail service for local stations. The possibility of such a thing doesn't even appear to have occurred to those developing the IRP.

 

[Bald Rick]

I meant a 15 minute gap between the fast services before and after the stopper.

Ah, I see, yes that’s right (albeit it’s 14 minutes, on my back of fag packet assumptions). If the service following the stopper has a Dewsbury call, then the gap becomes 12 minutes departing Leeds.

The possibility of such a thing doesn't even appear to have occurred to those developing the IRP.

There’s a difference between TRU objectives and IRP objectives. Nevertheless, one presumes such a thing was considered, but it was decided against.

 

[Glenn1969]

Ah, I see, yes that’s right (albeit it’s 14 minutes, on my back of fag packet assumptions). If the service following the stopper has a Dewsbury call, then the gap becomes 12 minutes departing Leeds.



There’s a difference between TRU objectives and IRP objectives. Nevertheless, one presumes such a thing was considered, but it was decided against.

So what you're saying is NPR services will effectively replace current services not operate alongside them? Not sure how that will go down with local stakeholders. My assumption is pre Covid levels of ridership will have returned by 2024. The pre Covid timetable on the core route didn't provide enough capacity which led to severe overcrowding which I think means there is substantial suppressed demand. There is also no scope for more tnan 1tph stopping Leeds- Huddersfield because of the capacity issues that won't be addressed given that Leeds- Westtown will still be a 2 track railway.

 

[edwin_m]

So what you're saying is NPR services will effectively replace current services not operate alongside them? Not sure how that will go down with local stakeholders. My assumption is pre Covid levels of ridership will have returned by 2024. The pre Covid timetable on the core route didn't provide enough capacity which led to severe overcrowding which I think means there is substantial suppressed demand. There is also no scope for more tnan 1tph stopping Leeds- Huddersfield because of the capacity issues that won't be addressed given that Leeds- Westtown will still be a 2 track railway.

I think we've established there will be 2TPH of stoppers. The fasts could leave Leeds and Huddersfield at alternating 15 and 5min intervals, with the second one ones calling at Dewsbury in such a way as to even out the intervals a bit as mentioned. That would replicate the existing 4TPH fasts and add 4TPH of NPR extra-fasts - and in theory it would allow 4TPH of stoppers too, though some other constraint may prevent that.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I think we've established there will be 2TPH of stoppers. The fasts could leave Leeds and Huddersfield at alternating 15 and 5min intervals, with the second one ones calling at Dewsbury in such a way as to even out the intervals a bit as mentioned. That would replicate the existing 4TPH fasts and add 4TPH of NPR extra-fasts - and in theory it would allow 4TPH of stoppers too, though some other constraint may prevent that.

The plan is for two stoppers per hour, but only one of them will go to Huddersfield- the other will branch off at Heaton Lodge for Brighouse and the Calder Valley (and may omit some stations, as it does today).

Back before the line through Brighouse reopened to regular passenger services, there was intermittently a second Leeds to Huddersfield stopper in some hours, which omitted Ravensthorpe.

 

[Bald Rick]

So what you're saying is NPR services will effectively replace current services not operate alongside them? Not sure how that will go down with local stakeholders.

No, I’m not saying that.

This is a TRU thread.

 

[LittleAH]

The plan is for two stoppers per hour, but only one of them will go to Huddersfield- the other will branch off at Heaton Lodge for Brighouse and the Calder Valley (and may omit some stations, as it does today).

Back before the line through Brighouse reopened to regular passenger services, there was intermittently a second Leeds to Huddersfield stopper in some hours, which omitted Ravensthorpe.

The problem with the CV services is the role of ETCS and having a diesel under wires which is a massive performance risk assuming similar rolling stock is still used.

Potentially, with ETCS 3 stoppers per hour could run, but until more news around ETCS and post TRU timetables comes out, it's up in the air.

 

[IanXC]

The problem with the CV services is the role of ETCS and having a diesel under wires which is a massive performance risk assuming similar rolling stock is still used.

Potentially, with ETCS 3 stoppers per hour could run, but until more news around ETCS and post TRU timetables comes out, it's up in the air.

The Calder Valley service could, given the new track layout, and the diesel under the wires question, relatively easily be diverted via Wakefield Kirkgate to Leeds.

That would mean that the stoppers on the Dewsbury corridor would both be electric Leeds - Huddersfield services.

 

[Roast Veg]

That would mean that the stoppers on the Dewsbury corridor would both be electric Leeds - Huddersfield services.

Would you have to put any extra calls in at Mirfield so that passengers from Dewsbury can continue to access the CV?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The Calder Valley service could, given the new track layout, and the diesel under the wires question, relatively easily be diverted via Wakefield Kirkgate to Leeds.

That would mean that the stoppers on the Dewsbury corridor would both be electric Leeds - Huddersfield services.

Providing that there's capacity on the Woodlesford route (and that a solution to the Leeds platform 17 conundrum is found), this would possibly be the best way to run the Leeds-Brighouse-CV services after the upgrade. You would lose the direct Dewsbury/Batley link to the upper Calder Valley, but that's probably less of a loss than having capacity via Morley swallowed up by a relatively slow diesel service. It also gives Wakefield a Manchester link back, though AIUI there is also the plan to extend the Manchester to Huddersfield stopper to Kirkgate.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Dec 2021 ==

Would you have to put any extra calls in at Mirfield so that passengers from Dewsbury can continue to access the CV?

If the Huddersfield to Leeds stoppers were running every 30mins, there would likely be a reasonable connection at Mirfield without adding extra Mirfield calls to the fasts/semi-fasts.

 

[Roast Veg]

If the Huddersfield to Leeds stoppers were running every 30mins, there would likely be a reasonable connection at Mirfield without adding extra Mirfield calls to the fasts/semi-fasts.

That depends on the timetabling, surely. If the CV service runs immediately ahead of the Huddersfield stopper heading West (or v.v.) then it could be a very long connection time.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

That depends on the timetabling, surely. If the CV service runs immediately ahead of the Huddersfield stopper heading West (or v.v.) then it could be a very long connection time.

25-27 minutes at Mirfield in that case... just enough time for a swift pint in the Navvy!

(Edit: non-drinkers will have the option of changing at Ravensthorpe instead... though in that case being already drunk would probably help!)

 

[Roast Veg]

25-27 minutes at Mirfield in that case... just enough time for a swift pint in the Navvy!

Catch me in the west riding just up the line instead!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Catch me in the west riding just up the line instead!

Agree it's a nicer pub... just not much use in this scenario!

 

[IanXC]

That depends on the timetabling, surely. If the CV service runs immediately ahead of the Huddersfield stopper heading West (or v.v.) then it could be a very long connection time.

The Calder Valley and via Dewsbury services would be on entirely different routes, theres no reason to think either would 'follow' the other.

 

[Roast Veg]

The Calder Valley and via Dewsbury services would be on entirely different routes, theres no reason to think either would 'follow' the other.

I'm aware, I mean "immediately ahead of" in physical space rather that paths along the same sections.

 

[IanXC]

I'm aware, I mean "immediately ahead of" in physical space rather that paths along the same sections.

Which of course makes timetabling on the slows and through Healey Mills much easier.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The Calder Valley and via Dewsbury services would be on entirely different routes, theres no reason to think either would 'follow' the other.

They'd both (the Hudds stopper, and our hypothetical Calder Valley via Wakefield service) use the same slow lines between Ravensthorpe and Heaton Lodge.

 

[IanXC]

They'd both (the Hudds stopper, and our hypothetical Calder Valley via Wakefield service) use the same slow lines between Ravensthorpe and Heaton Lodge.

Which is only a short section, and which could easily accommodate 8tph

 

[Halish Railway]

Surely having the Leeds to Wigan via Dewsbury service non-stop between Leeds & Dewsbury in addition to a 2tph all stations EMU wouldn’t eat into capacity much. I would have imagined that post-electrification & linespeed increases a 15x load would only by 1-2 minutes slower than an EMU load between the two stations.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Which is only a short section, and which could easily accommodate 8tph

I agree capacity on that section shouldn't be a problem. If this hypothetical re-routing of the via Brighouse service was to happen, the pinch-points would be at either end rather than somewhere in the middle such as Mirfield.
The issue at Mirfield would really be which connections are prioritised. If we assume a 2tph Huddersfield to Leeds electric stopper, plus an hourly Huddersfield to Casvegas/York and an hourly Calder via Wakefield, then the optimum would be for those four trains per hour to run at 15-minute intervals on the shared section. This would mean either a 15min or 45min wait at Mirfield/Ravensthorpe for the journey described by @Roast Veg .

 

[Harvey10]

Sorry if this is in the wrong thread just wondering does anyone have any update regarding TPE extending the stopping service to Wakefield Kirkgate please?

 

[matacaster]

25-27 minutes at Mirfield in that case... just enough time for a swift pint in the Navvy!

(Edit: non-drinkers will have the option of changing at Ravensthorpe instead... though in that case being already drunk would probably help!)

Ravensthorpe has a wide variety of zero-rated takeaways. It is also best avoided during the day and certainly at night

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Sorry if this is in the wrong thread just wondering does anyone have any update regarding TPE extending the stopping service to Wakefield Kirkgate please?

My understanding is that it was initially proposed as a way of making 6-car workings possible- with running to Wakefield Kirkgate in order to avoid blocking up the whole of platform 4 at Huddersfield. IIRC the plan was to run there ECS, not in service- but I believe that's changed.

However the plans seem to change with the weather at the moment, so who knows what will end up happening. The Wakefield plan certainly seems to be less of a performance risk than the 2018 merged stoppers.