Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[absolutelymilk]

On the State of Play in the North timeline, it looks like Marsden to Huddersfield is missing. I didn't think this section had been done already, is it just that the timeline is not yet known?
State of Play for the North

 

[Narrowgauge725]

On the State of Play in the North timeline, it looks like Marsden to Huddersfield is missing. I didn't think this section had been done already, is it just that the timeline is not yet known?
State of Play for the North

Definitely not done yet

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It seems Huddersfield to Marsden is a problem stretch.
It has quite a decent line speed (85 mostly, similar to that in Standedge Tunnel), on its 2-track alignment on the former 4-track solum (it crosses from side to side).
The 45mph at the eastern end of the tunnel is a fixture and not easy to resolve because of the curvature through Marsden.
The plan appeared to be to add a third track to the south for freight/overtaking, but doing that means realigning the existing tracks and maybe reducing the 85mph linespeed.
Then the third track was reduced to "passive provision" for TRU, pending clarification of the NPR plans and possible new line Manchester-Marsden, now very much in the long grass.
So I suspect TRU will just involve wiring the current layout, but that's not been publicised.
The line has already been resignalled into York ROC, as far as Uppermill just west of Diggle.

 

[edwin_m]

The line has already been resignalled into York ROC, as far as Uppermill just west of Diggle.

Diggle has been re-signalled too.

 

[takno]

It seems Huddersfield to Marsden is a problem stretch.
It has quite a decent line speed (85 mostly, similar to that in Standedge Tunnel), on its 2-track alignment on the former 4-track solum (it crosses from side to side).
The 45mph at the eastern end of the tunnel is a fixture and not easy to resolve because of the curvature through Marsden.
The plan appeared to be to add a third track to the south for freight/overtaking, but doing that means realigning the existing tracks and maybe reducing the 85mph linespeed.
Then the third track was reduced to "passive provision" for TRU, pending clarification of the NPR plans and possible new line Manchester-Marsden, now very much in the long grass.
So I suspect TRU will just involve wiring the current layout, but that's not been publicised.
The line has already been resignalled into York ROC, as far as Uppermill just west of Diggle.

As I recall the freight operators quite strongly made the case that any freight which had to slow down or stop to merge at the end of the 3-track section would be more disruptive than if it had just shared the line all the way up. Given that electrification and ETCS should both help to make freight less disruptive, they are probably right.

 

[LittleAH]

It seems Huddersfield to Marsden is a problem stretch.
It has quite a decent line speed (85 mostly, similar to that in Standedge Tunnel), on its 2-track alignment on the former 4-track solum (it crosses from side to side).
The 45mph at the eastern end of the tunnel is a fixture and not easy to resolve because of the curvature through Marsden.
The plan appeared to be to add a third track to the south for freight/overtaking, but doing that means realigning the existing tracks and maybe reducing the 85mph linespeed.
Then the third track was reduced to "passive provision" for TRU, pending clarification of the NPR plans and possible new line Manchester-Marsden, now very much in the long grass.
So I suspect TRU will just involve wiring the current layout, but that's not been publicised.
The line has already been resignalled into York ROC, as far as Uppermill just west of Diggle.

Three track is still the plan

 

[zwk500]

On the State of Play in the North timeline, it looks like Marsden to Huddersfield is missing. I didn't think this section had been done already, is it just that the timeline is not yet known?
State of Play for the North

I notice that chart is published in September 2024, is there an updated version of it?

 

[Grumpy]

Three track is still the plan

For just2-3 trains per day (excl departmental)? More madness

 

[josh-j]

For just2-3 trains per day (excl departmental)? More madness

Isn't part of the TRU about allowing an increased number of freight movements? Not just improving performance of the existing ones.

 

[edwin_m]

As I recall the freight operators quite strongly made the case that any freight which had to slow down or stop to merge at the end of the 3-track section would be more disruptive than if it had just shared the line all the way up. Given that electrification and ETCS should both help to make freight less disruptive, they are probably right.

In the uphill (Up) direction that will presumably be close to the 45mph curve just before Standedge tunnel mentioned above, so turnouts of the same or slightly higher speed would avoid any travel time impact. The transition from 1:105 to level in the same area will hasten the deceleration for Up trains and acceleration for Down ones.

Getting the fastest possible crossovers at the Huddersfield end is more important, as there is continuous 1 in 105 in the area except for a relative flat bit in the station itself. Downhill trains will have extended time decelerating but the acceleration afterwards will compensate, and vice versa for uphill. The ladder should ideally be at least fit for whatever speed will be allowed through Huddersfield on the future Slow lines.

 

[Elecman]

Diggle has been re-signalled too.

Correct as Diggle is East of Uppermill

 

[Grumpy]

Isn't part of the TRU about allowing an increased number of freight movements?

Such as? UK Freight seems to be mainly long haul containers from southern ports and quarry traffic .Cant see how that fits.

 

[Jamesrob637]

Such as? UK Freight seems to be mainly long haul containers from southern ports and quarry traffic .Cant see how that fits.

From that new terminal being built near Newton-le-Willows.

 

[Phillipimo]

Such as? UK Freight seems to be mainly long haul containers from southern ports and quarry traffic .Cant see how that fits.

Some more info in this thread. It seems there is a plan to provide a W12 cleared route for freight utilising the TRU route across the Pennines.

Northern England W12 Upgrades Pipeline

Previously, I posted about Loading Gauge upgrades associated with the Transpennine Route Upgrade (here), which came via an FOI request. Within the FOI they mentioned a separate W12 upgrade project. The response from that FOI indicated the results below, but please take these with a pinch of...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Bayum]

No way for diesel/electric freight traction to take advantage of the wires? Or would there not be enough benefit for this to be worthwhile?

 

[edwin_m]

I expect electrifying Stalybridge to Huddersfield will be the most critical for delivering freight capacity.

This is the most steeply graded section, where passenger trains will catch up with diesel freight.

Electric freights can sustain a much higher speed when climbing, and with line speeds being relatively low in this area, they will keep ahead of passenger trains much better.

 

[M60lad]

Probably not the right thread to post this but is there a reason why Platform 3 at Marsden isn't used much if at all these days? I would have thought that if a stopper from Huddersfield is running late then it could be looped at Platform 3 to late another train pass it instead of having the train behind sit behind it while it calls at every Station to Stalybridge.

 

[Grumpy]

From that new terminal being built near Newton-le-Willows.

I can see that being a good distribution centre serving container trains from the southern ports, and helping see off Trafford Park, but I can’t see much of that running through Hudderfield

 

[edwin_m]

There may be scope for containers from Liverpool to the north-east, but north-west to north-east is probably too short for rail to be competitive.

 

[3RDGEN]

One of the stated outputs of TRU is up to 15 extra (electric hauled) freight paths per day, the Liverpool - Drax Biomass service is one that's been mentioned to divert that way. It's not clear if that's 15 each way, say one per hour excluding peak hours, our 15 in total both ways.

"https://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/new-funding-boost-for-transpennine-route-upgrade" - "More freight capacity – enabling up to 15 extra freight trains per day....".

"https://thetrupgrade.co.uk/benefits/" - "Greener Travel - We’re also developing a proposal to move more goods by rail (up to 15 more freight trains each day) which is expected to remove over 1,000 lorries off the road each day.".

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

One of the stated outputs of TRU is up to 15 extra (electric hauled) freight paths per day, the Liverpool - Drax Biomass service is one that's been mentioned to divert that way. It's not clear if that's 15 each way, say one per hour excluding peak hours, our 15 in total both ways.

The commitment to W12 gauge on TRU is very welcome.
But the Drax biomass flow is not guaranteed to exist in the 2030s when TRU might be finished.
The government plan is to reduce Drax to a backup station by 2030, and there are increasing forces against any biomass burn beyond 2030.
Depends of course on progress in the renewables and nuclear sectors, and the impact of possible alternative government energy policy.

 

[Wavertreelad]

There may be scope for containers from Liverpool to the north-east, but north-west to north-east is probably too short for rail to be competitive.

Once Peel extends the railhead at Seaforth for which they already have planning permission, then the economies of scale will start to kick in and reduce the cost making east/west movements by rail more cost-effective allowing shipping lines which control the majority of movements of individual containers to concentrate their road transport on the final mile delivery to the customer.

At some point next year Freightliner is expected to become part of the second-largest global shipping line CMA CGM, whilst the largest shipping line MSC already owns the UK's largest road haulier Maritime Transport Limited through it's wholly owned subsidiary Medlog, who I believe already operate a terminal at Doncaster. MSC, it's wholly owned subsidiary WEC Lines and CMA CGM all operate sailings in and out of the Port of Liverpool.

Intermodal Logistics Park North (ILPN) which is the trading name of the new freight terminal at Newton Le Willows was purchased over two years ago in an off market deal by the developer Tritax presumably because they had a customer interested in operating the site.

Whilst it's known that Freightliner have taken "an interest" in the site, it's not certain they were the party behind the purchase of site as the scheme also includes some substantial capabilities which would be more akin to the sort of operation conducted by Maritime Transport Limited, plus the fact Tritax were also behind a similar scheme at Hinckley for Maritime Transport Ltd.

The actual owner of ILPN remains a mystery as the company has been registered in the Channel Islands so it's not possible to discover the ultimate owners through UK Government records, but the site will largely be used to handle intermodal trains from UK southern ports and is unlikely to have services to and from the Port of Liverpool.

 

[1D53]

Probably not the right thread to post this but is there a reason why Platform 3 at Marsden isn't used much if at all these days? I would have thought that if a stopper from Huddersfield is running late then it could be looped at Platform 3 to late another train pass it instead of having the train behind sit behind it while it calls at every Station to Stalybridge.

It's very slow that's why. Tje approach control signalling plus line speed through the points makes it a hefty time penalty compared to running through 2.

 

[edwin_m]

The actual owner of ILPN remains a mystery as the company has been registered in the Channel Islands so it's not possible to discover the ultimate owners through UK Government records, but the site will largely be used to handle intermodal trains from UK southern ports and is unlikely to have services to and from the Port of Liverpool.

Agreed, Liverpool to Newton is far too short for rail. The location does however allow trains to access in all directions via the connecting curves to the WCML.

 

[Mag_seven]

Can we get back to posting scheme UPDATES please.
thanks

 

[Batley Lad]

Batley Station Area.

Union Mills Viaduct - Four pairs of OLE brackets have now been installed across the sixteenth arch structure.



Platform Extensions

Platforms have received foundation and line side segment extensions but still await backfilling and final surface.

Both extensions are in the space between Soothill overbridge and the current stations.



Footbridge Foundations

Piling for the proposed lifts and footbridge have commenced. The area behind platform two is the more advanced of the two sites with formwork and rebar built ready for concrete.




Piling for platform one and associated works have closed the current station car park.

 

[kmc1962]

I noticed that work at Mirfield Station looks to be progressing again - the new footbridge was receiving attention yesterday from men and machines, though I couldn't quite see what was being done.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

@Batley Lad - great update photos- thanks.

 

[swt_passenger]

I noticed that work at Mirfield Station looks to be progressing again - the new footbridge was receiving attention yesterday from men and machines, though I couldn't quite see what was being done.

There was some good coverage of Mirfield yesterday in Sarah Bell’s video here:

 

[fishwomp]

There was some good coverage of Mirfield yesterday in Sarah Bell’s video here:

Loving the new photographer's vantage point on the steps by platform 3 (eg. at 3 minutes 8 seconds) - glad they thought of us!