Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[GRALISTAIR]

So where are we with all this with electrification from Leeds to York? Or has that yet to be signed off and the actual money found?

Dont forget they are salami slicing it.
Colton Jct to Church Fenton has been done.
York to Colton Jct also already electrified.

So bit by bit it is getting done.

 

[matacaster]

Do we have any firm details on the new station at Bradford? Does 'bringing in Bradford and Hull into the NPR scheme' mean full electrification? It all feels a little bit vague!

I'm trying to stay optimistic though because it does genuinely sound like some good improvements.

As I understand it, the new one for Bradford is a through station on a route between huddersfield (Cooper bridge?) and Leeds (via new Pudsey). It is also supposed to give a time between huddersfield and Bradford of 12 minutes. That implies a pretty direct route which whilst wishing to avoid speculation might involve either reinstating pickle bridge route or even a new route.
Assuming the whole route was electrified between Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds, then that would offer an electrified diversionary TPE routing?

 

[quantinghome]

As I understand it, the new one for Bradford is a through station on a route between huddersfield (Cooper bridge?) and Leeds (via new Pudsey). It is also supposed to give a time between huddersfield and Bradford of 12 minutes. That implies a pretty direct route which whilst wishing to avoid speculation might involve either reinstating pickle bridge route or even a new route.
Assuming the whole route was electrified between Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds, then that would offer an electrified diversionary TPE routing?

The Pickle Bridge route would not be suitable. It has three very tight curves which would probably be limited to 30mph, and connects into low-speed lines. Judging by the current journey via Greetland Jn you'd be looking at a 25 minute journey. Getting from Huddersfield to Bradford in 12 minutes would require an average end-to-end speed of 60mph, so you'd need a minimum 90-100mph alignment i.e. a new build.

Given the press release talks about money saved by cancelling HS2, I'd take anything it says with a bucketload of salt.

 

[deltic08]

Dont forget they are salami slicing it.
Colton Jct to Church Fenton has been done.
York to Colton Jct also already electrified.

So bit by bit it is getting done.

Very, very thinly I would suggest.
York- Colton Jnc was completed in 1989. 110 miles from Peterborough to York completed in a little over 18 months using all auger placed concrete support foundations which takes longer than driven piles.
Colton Jnc to not even Church Fenton, still not energised 5 years since construction started. As the extension is only 5 miles from Colton Jnc we are talking about One mile/year. Admittedly all quad track.
Can it be anymore thinly sliced?

 

[matacaster]

The Pickle Bridge route would not be suitable. It has three very tight curves which would probably be limited to 30mph, and connects into low-speed lines. Judging by the current journey via Greetland Jn you'd be looking at a 25 minute journey. Getting from Huddersfield to Bradford in 12 minutes would require an average end-to-end speed of 60mph, so you'd need a minimum 90-100mph alignment i.e. a new build.

Given the press release talks about money saved by cancelling HS2, I'd take anything it says with a bucketload of salt.

Ah, interesting! Looking at an old map it seemed shorter than via Halifax, but the two sharp curves would clearly mess things up, notwithstanding the partially demolished viaduct.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

The Pickle Bridge line closed because of mining subsidence - I guess any new line would be up the Spen Valley, possibly putting Cleckheaton and Liversedge back on the rail map. No idea of how much of the L & Y line formation remains however. Interestingly, the Midland Railway proposed a new line up the valley as part of its 'Bradford New Line' just before WW1, with a long tunnel to reach Bradford Market St. (Forster Sq.).

 

[Class 170101]

Look North today's 18:30 bulletin

Look North (Yorkshire) - Evening News: 04/12/2023

The latest news, sport and weather for Yorkshire.

www.bbc.co.uk

and
BBC North West Tonight 18:30 Bulletin

North West Tonight - Evening News: 04/12/2023

The latest news, sport and weather for the North West of England.

www.bbc.co.uk

Both expire tomorrow afternoon and both talk about TRU though slightly different perspectives.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Very, very thinly I would suggest.
York- Colton Jnc was completed in 1989. 110 miles from Peterborough to York completed in a little over 18 months using all auger placed concrete support foundations which takes longer than driven piles.
Colton Jnc to not even Church Fenton, still not energised 5 years since construction started. As the extension is only 5 miles from Colton Jnc we are talking about One mile/year. Admittedly all quad track.
Can it be anymore thinly sliced?

Wafer thin perhaps. Church Fenton to Colton is taken along time but i believe the OLE has only been under construction over the last couple of years so a much more respectable 2.5 miles/annum

 

[fishwomp]

[..] any new line would be up the Spen Valley, possibly putting Cleckheaton and Liversedge back on the rail map.

Using the line from near Ravensthorpe on the Wakefield line (passing underneath Dewsbury line) It wouldn't be far to reopen and the formation to Low Moor is unobstructed, largely, so far as I can see. Alas the line would be creating a fairly slow route from Bradford to Wakefield, and that's not really needed - the Wortley Curve would do that cheaper and faster. Cleckheaton could do with good links though. I don't see a Huddersfield-Bradford fast route being realistic.

 

[CapabilityB]

Worth flagging a new trains procurement for TPE to deliver the benefits of TRU was also launched today.

Currently covered in a speculative thread: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/29-new-trains-for-transpennine-express.258762/

 

[deltic08]

Wafer thin perhaps. Church Fenton to Colton is taken along time but i believe the OLE has only been under construction over the last couple of years so a much more respectable 2.5 miles/annum

Not correct. Piling started in October 2019, 3.25 years and still counting as the wires are not energised yet, but the overbridges at Bolton Percy and Colton Lane were started in the summer of 2017 and completed in the summer of 2018. I make that nearly 6.5 years. Less than one mile/annum! Disgusting progress. Good job MML is progressing faster.

 

[a_c_skinner]

New alignments are pie in the electoral sky aren't they? No one really sets much store by politicians' announcements of whatever colour do they?

 

[Bantamzen]

Do we have any firm details on the new station at Bradford? Does 'bringing in Bradford and Hull into the NPR scheme' mean full electrification? It all feels a little bit vague!

I'm trying to stay optimistic though because it does genuinely sound like some good improvements.

As I understand it, the new one for Bradford is a through station on a route between huddersfield (Cooper bridge?) and Leeds (via new Pudsey). It is also supposed to give a time between huddersfield and Bradford of 12 minutes. That implies a pretty direct route which whilst wishing to avoid speculation might involve either reinstating pickle bridge route or even a new route.
Assuming the whole route was electrified between Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds, then that would offer an electrified diversionary TPE routing?

A new "gateway" station has been proposed by Bradford Council to sit between Bradford Interchange & New Pudsey on the climb out of Bradford at around Hammerton Street at this location, although the initial plan was to have a NPR station slightly to the west that alignment on the current site of St James Market. However it was never very clear just how the NPR would would reach it, or even why that site was preferred aside from the council's desire to re-generate that area of Bradford.

There's plenty more discussion over on the dedicated thread for this subject, but the long and short of it is the current possible site would serve absolutely no purpose to anyone as it is mainly light industrial, further away from the city centre than the Interchange, uphill and on the wrong side of a very busy dual carriageway. In other words its a white elephant, that will hopefully have no more money wasted on it than this vague announcement.

 

[rower40]

My 2p:
There's no traffic pressure to get Colton Jn to Church Fenton wired. All it will do is increase the "diesel-under-wires" mileage travelled by Voyagers, local DMUs and freight.
If the project had been York-Micklefield-Leeds, with a planned cascade of even a small sub-fleet of Northern DMUs needed elsewhere, then there'd be some impetus to get the job done. But that has to wait on the remodelling of the Neville Hill junctions, before wires can be put up.

 

[Killingworth]

My 2p:
There's no traffic pressure to get Colton Jn to Church Fenton wired. All it will do is increase the "diesel-under-wires" mileage travelled by Voyagers, local DMUs and freight.
If the project had been York-Micklefield-Leeds, with a planned cascade of even a small sub-fleet of Northern DMUs needed elsewhere, then there'd be some impetus to get the job done. But that has to wait on the remodelling of the Neville Hill junctions, before wires can be put up.

That last sentence is critical. That and the implications for wiring through Leeds City station and beyond.

It's easy for government to announce big electrification programmes. We've seen how difficult it became to reach Swansea and Bristol. Leicester is a difficulty and Sheffield will be too. Pennine tunnels are tricky. All of these are possible but cost and time consuming.

The WCML and ECML schemes seemed to move a lot faster but they didn't seem to have so many complications. Or did they when looked at before and during construction?

 

[quantinghome]

That last sentence is critical. That and the implications for wiring through Leeds City station and beyond.

It's easy for government to announce big electrification programmes. We've seen how difficult it became to reach Swansea and Bristol. Leicester is a difficulty and Sheffield will be too. Pennine tunnels are tricky. All of these are possible but cost and time consuming.

The WCML and ECML schemes seemed to move a lot faster but they didn't seem to have so many complications. Or did they when looked at before and during construction?

Yes, there were some significant complications. Classic example - the Harecastle tunnels on the WCML were unsuitable for electrification so a 2 mile stretch of line was built on a new alignment.

As far as I can see the perceived "difficulties" we have with electrification are nothing worse than stuff we've successfully tackled previously, or that other countries have dealt with. We seem to have got into this mindset that any engineering problem we face is just far too hard, resulting in endless prevarication rather than applying ourselves and coming up with a pragmatic engineering solution. As if we've never electrified a line in a tunnel before, or a complex station throat. Is electrifying Leicester or Sheffield really that difficult, compared to say Birmingham New Street or Edinburgh Waverley?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Not correct. Piling started in October 2019, 3.25 years and still counting as the wires are not energised yet, but the overbridges at Bolton Percy and Colton Lane were started in the summer of 2017 and completed in the summer of 2018. I make that nearly 6.5 years. Less than one mile/annum! Disgusting progress. Good job MML is progressing faster.

We're on the same page the rate of progress is pathetic although i believe the delivery of the majority of the physical OLE works was delivered last year so when contractors are given access they can get on with it.

 

[YorkshireBear]

My 2p:
There's no traffic pressure to get Colton Jn to Church Fenton wired. All it will do is increase the "diesel-under-wires" mileage travelled by Voyagers, local DMUs and freight.
If the project had been York-Micklefield-Leeds, with a planned cascade of even a small sub-fleet of Northern DMUs needed elsewhere, then there'd be some impetus to get the job done. But that has to wait on the remodelling of the Neville Hill junctions, before wires can be put up.

The only slight comment is that the TPE bi modes will change on the move to the north or church Fenton allowing the slightest of increases in electric running for them to put in their press release.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

My 2p:
There's no traffic pressure to get Colton Jn to Church Fenton wired. All it will do is increase the "diesel-under-wires" mileage travelled by Voyagers, local DMUs and freight.
If the project had been York-Micklefield-Leeds, with a planned cascade of even a small sub-fleet of Northern DMUs needed elsewhere, then there'd be some impetus to get the job done. But that has to wait on the remodelling of the Neville Hill junctions, before wires can be put up.

There maybe no electric traffic pressure here but projects that drag on just attract overheads which is wasteful. The teams should have been put to work marching on towards Leeds although this section looks like its in another phase of the works which isn't funded yet.

 

[AndrewE]

Yes, there were some significant complications. Classic example - the Harecastle tunnels on the WCML were unsuitable for electrification so a 2 mile stretch of line was built on a new alignment.

As far as I can see the perceived "difficulties" we have with electrification are nothing worse than stuff we've successfully tackled previously, or that other countries have dealt with. We seem to have got into this mindset that any engineering problem we face is just far too hard, resulting in endless prevarication rather than applying ourselves and coming up with a pragmatic engineering solution. As if we've never electrified a line in a tunnel before, or a complex station throat. Is electrifying Leicester or Sheffield really that difficult, compared to say Birmingham New Street or Edinburgh Waverley?

I don't think we can't do it nowadays, it's just that a certain part of the London establishment is dead set against rail improvements and will postpone expenditure on any pretext, although they like the good publicity from announcing things (think Piccadilly playtforms 15 and 16)
Admittedly the railway supply chain has played into their hands with the GWML debacle...

 

[greyman42]

There's no traffic pressure to get Colton Jn to Church Fenton wired. All it will do is increase the "diesel-under-wires" mileage travelled by Voyagers, local DMUs and freight.

They recently did ECML diversions via Leeds and were restricted on what trains they could use due to the lack of OHLE.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

They recently did ECML diversions via Leeds and were restricted on what trains they could use due to the lack of OHLE.

5 miles down to Church Fenton wont change that anytime soon

 

[fishwomp]

5 miles down to Church Fenton wont change that anytime soon

Well it certainly wouldn't change _without_ that 5 miles.

I make it another 13 miles to the wires at Neville Hill. It's coming.

 

[Bald Rick]

The WCML and ECML schemes seemed to move a lot faster but they didn't seem to have so many complications. Or did they when looked at before and during construction?

There were complications, some significant, but what they didn‘t have was

a) an intensive train service in the way
b) current health and safety rules

For a) remember that for the WCML the London Manchester service was largely diverted via the MML, London West Midlands via the Western, and the rest of the long distance passenegr traffic was a couple of handfuls of trains a day.

For b) I have told before the stories told to me first hand by a (now retired) colleague who was one of the ECML electrifcation installers - being up ladders stringing up headspans with HSTs passing below.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

There were complications, some significant, but what they didn‘t have was

a) an intensive train service in the way

Yes but there was also significant night traffic then and a lot more freight so possession access was no more favourable

b) current health and safety rules

for sure but there was only one significant accident when a linesman fell from a wiring coach and was seriously injured and that changed the method of working for future schemes. There was drive to deliver the scheme and those arrangements wouldn't be tolerated today but safety wasn't ignored.

For a) remember that for the WCML the London Manchester service was largely diverted via the MML, London West Midlands via the Western, and the rest of the long distance passenegr traffic was a couple of handfuls of trains a day.

For b) I have told before the stories told to me first hand by a (now retired) colleague who was one of the ECML electrifcation installers - being up ladders stringing up headspans with HSTs passing below.

Indeed and pulling the headspan across all four lines was done with the assistance of operating department supervisors who used to liaise with the local signallers to give them a window to get it up out the way. They were all pre-prepared for each mast location. However, we had very much less powered access equipment which is available to todays installers.

 

[Geogregor]

I don't think we can't do it nowadays, it's just that a certain part of the London establishment is dead set against rail improvements and will postpone expenditure on any pretext, although they like the good publicity from announcing things (think Piccadilly playtforms 15 and 16)

It is not "London establishment" which is blocking railway investment but certain party which from what I recall has much larger support outside London than in London.

We do have anti-railway government, government pandering to its often rural support.

 

[59CosG95]

It is not "London establishment" which is blocking railway investment but certain party which from what I recall has much larger support outside London than in London.

We do have anti-railway government, government pandering to its often rural support.

And the seat of government just so happens to be in London - but as you say, it's a very shire-based establishment!

 

[AndrewE]

It is not "London establishment" which is blocking railway investment but certain party which from what I recall has much larger support outside London than in London.

We do have anti-railway government, government pandering to its often rural support.

The reason I said "establishment" is to take in Whitehall as well as Westminster. The civil service who are supposed to be non-partisan seem to be equally opposed to rail development. One retired rail mininister - or maybe even a civil servant - said the Ministry of Transport was effectively the Ministry of Roads, and its agenda was really that of the Road Haulage Association (RHA)

 

[Meerkat]

There were complications, some significant, but what they didn‘t have was

a) an intensive train service in the way
b) current health and safety rules

For a) remember that for the WCML the London Manchester service was largely diverted via the MML, London West Midlands via the Western, and the rest of the long distance passenegr traffic was a couple of handfuls of trains a day.

For b) I have told before the stories told to me first hand by a (now retired) colleague who was one of the ECML electrifcation installers - being up ladders stringing up headspans with HSTs passing below.

It is cheaper if you have H&S as per the northern WCML wiring seen in the BTF film ”Wires over the Border”
https://player.bfi.org.uk/free/film/watch-wires-over-the-border-1974-online
See from 6nmins on…
Hooking a ladder over the wires near horizontally from the roof of a wiring train.
Men doing fiddly hanger connections while walking along the snow covered roof of a moving wiring train, with no guardrails and a howling wind.
Thankfully we look after workers a bit better now, but it makes schemes like TRU cost more.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I still think lack of clarity in workbanks, bad project management and political interference cause far more ballooning of costs than H&S does.