Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[GRALISTAIR]

Is there a list somewhere of the benefits of the upgrade aside from electrification and when they will come in? E.g. quad tracking, removal of speed restrictions

There is this but it does not have much detail.

The Benefits

thetrupgrade.co.uk

Faster journeys​

We’re speeding up journeys so you can travel to your favourite towns and cities more quickly. Our fastest journey times are forecast to be 63-66 minutes between Manchester and York and 41-42 minutes between Manchester and Leeds.

Greener travel​

We’re electrifying the whole route to enable greener trains to run, reducing our carbon footprint and improving air quality. Our plans aim to save up to 87,000 tonnes of carbon emissions each year – supporting the government’s Net Zero objectives. 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.

More reliable journeys​

We’re making the railway more reliable by remodelling track, installing a new signalling system and upgrading bridges to bring passengers smoother, on-time journeys.

Better stations​

We’re improving stations on the Transpennine route, bringing passengers a better travel experience through improved, more accessible stations.

 

[Bald Rick]

Is there a list somewhere of the benefits of the upgrade aside from electrification and when they will come in? E.g. quad tracking, removal of speed restrictions

Those aren’t benefits - they are scope.

Benefits are quicker journeys, more seats, better frequency, fewer delays, reduced carbon emissions, etc.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Those aren’t benefits - they are scope.

Benefits are quicker journeys, more seats, better frequency, fewer delays, reduced carbon emissions, etc.

I am glad I am not going crazy (allegedly!!) - that was exactly my understanding too. Sorry @absolutelymilk

 

[Bald Rick]

I am glad I am not going crazy (allegedly!!)

Well now you live in a sensible country, you should be well on the way to re-acquainting yourself with sensibleness.

 

[absolutelymilk]

Thanks for the correction, is there a list somewhere of the scope of the upgrade aside from electrification?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Thanks for the correction, is there a list somewhere of the scope of the upgrade aside from electrification?

There is this document which is quite extensive and too big to meaningfully quote. I will try and find a direct link and edit accordingly. Though give me a few hours and I will see what I can do. Though again, it is OUTPUT based not benefits.

The second document is a presentation by David Lawrance (Chief Engineer TRU ) and on slide 2 there is a list of benefits.

What TRU brings Up to six fast services every hour between Leeds and Manchester and up to two stopping services for local connectivity  Boosting capacity by over 33% with more seats  Manchester to York is cut by 14 mins down to 63 mins & Leeds to Manchester is cut by 10 mins down to 41 mins  Four tracking to create network capacity  Delays minutes cut by 50%  £150m+ on diversionary routes  New trains with >60 new carriages  Electrified from York to Manchester  Accessible stations

Well now you live in a sensible country, you should be well on the way to re-acquainting yourself with sensibleness.

rotflmao

 

[YorkshireBear]

Broadly speaking, works I am aware of:

• Full electrification of core York to Manchester (both) electrification. Including significant civils work.
• Four tracking including grade separated junction at Thornhill LNW junction from said Junction to Huddersfield, including a new build cut off at Heaton Lodge Junction for the fast trains.
• Complete rebuild of many stations including Huddersfield, Morley, Stalybridge and any on the four tracking.
• Accessibility improvements at many of the stations on the route.
• Resignalling of much of the route.
• Eventually moving to an ETCS signalling system of some kind, exact scope TBC I believe.
• Line speed improvements in several places most notably Church Fenton (including extending the Leeds bound loop), Miles Platting, Neville Hill and Morley as well as the four track section fast lines.
• Significant track renewals, exact length not sure, but this is being done as part of line speed works and also to reduce disruptive possessions once TRU is complete.
• Resilience works on diversionary routes to reduce delays during blockades.

Hope that provides a helpful summary of physical works, no doubt I have forgotten much of it....

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I wouldn't count on ETCS implementation inside the TRU project.
It would follow the ECML project and that seems to be in trouble.
It would also only apply to the York ROC control area (ie Diggle eastwards).

I'm not sure Stalybridge station has been or will be rebuilt, but the approach routes have been remodelled to increase speeds towards Victoria.

 

[Geeves]

I wouldn't count on ETCS implementation inside the TRU project.
It would follow the ECML project and that seems to be in trouble.
It would also only apply to the York ROC control area (ie Diggle eastwards).

I'm not sure Stalybridge station has been or will be rebuilt, but the approach routes have been remodelled to increase speeds towards Victoria.

Don't forget they made the old freight lines into a useable platform as well as adding a second bay platform on the other side. Must be more new stuff than old!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

To me - these are very key benefits.

Manchester to York journey will be cut by 14 mins down to 63 mins
Leeds to Manchester journey will be cut by 10 mins down to 41 mins

 

[Nottingham59]

To me - these are very key benefits.
...
Leeds to Manchester journey will be cut by 10 mins down to 41 mins

Still pretty feeble in my opinion. Leeds to Manchester is 40 miles as the crow flies, so that is an average speed of less than 60mph.

 

[Zomboid]

Still pretty feeble in my opinion. Leeds to Manchester is 40 miles as the crow flies, so that is an average speed of less than 60mph.

Short of building a whole new line (and so far that's just hot air, though maybe my children will live to see it built), it's a pretty good speed to cross some pretty significant geology.

 

[David Bullock]

Short of building a whole new line (and so far that's just hot air, though maybe my children will live to see it built), it's a pretty good speed to cross some pretty significant geology.

It brings it roughly in line with the fast Edinburgh-Glasgow post-electrification, but with 50% higher frequency which will knock a further 5 mins off door to door journey times.

 

[KN94]

Still pretty feeble in my opinion. Leeds to Manchester is 40 miles as the crow flies, so that is an average speed of less than 60mph.

Try doing Leeds City Centre to Manchester City Centre by car in 41 minutes. Having a quick look now, no traffic, no roadworks, suggests 59 minutes.
If TRU delivers 41 minutes (or even 45 minutes) between the two cities, with four, five, or six, trains per hour, that's a good offering.

 

[GraphitProjekt]

Apparently minute journey time savings do have measurable effects on passenger behaviour, although I admit I understand how that can be, unless it's all about being able to make a tight connection to additional train services.

I'm not sure what the current frequency is (2/hr made from Scarborough-MIA + Newcastle-Liverpool?), but increasing frequency I think would have a much more substantial effect than the journey time. As they say, frequency is freedom

 

[The Ham]

Still pretty feeble in my opinion. Leeds to Manchester is 40 miles as the crow flies, so that is an average speed of less than 60mph.

40 miles in 41 minutes puts it on a par with journey times with Basingstoke to Waterloo (the fastest do 45 miles in 42 minutes - yes that's sightly faster but it only stops at Woking, those which also stop at Clapham Junction take around 47 minutes).

Apparently minute journey time savings do have measurable effects on passenger behaviour, although I admit I understand how that can be, unless it's all about being able to make a tight connection to additional train services. I'm not sure what the current frequency is (2/hr made from Scarborough-MIA + Newcastle-Liverpool?), but increasing frequency I think would have a much more substantial effect than the journey time. As they say, frequency is freedom

Indeed, in public transport modeling the rough guide is that people will generally factor 1/2 the frequency as the "delay" that they will encounter by using a service - they might not ever suffer that "delay" but it's a factor and quite significant in how long they feel a journey is.

That means that on an hourly service 30 minutes of "delay", so if the traveling time is 50 minutes, the total perceived journey is 80 minutes.

If you reduce the journey by 10 minutes, you're still taking of the total being 70 minutes.

If you increase frequency to 2tph the "delay" reduces to 15 minutes and so the total (without journey time improvements) becomes 65 minutes.

Also improve the journey time by 10 minutes and the total is 55 minutes.

The one complication in that is that if you can get to 3tph or better than usage significantly improves as timetables become slightly irrelevant as people will start to just turn up for the next service as the delay of only just missing a service becomes small enough to be fairly insignificant.

Obviously, whilst that starts at 3tph, the more frequent the better as more people will be willing to just turn up.

 

[Iskra]

Broadly speaking, works I am aware of:

• Full electrification of core York to Manchester (both) electrification. Including significant civils work.
• Four tracking including grade separated junction at Thornhill LNW junction from said Junction to Huddersfield, including a new build cut off at Heaton Lodge Junction for the fast trains.
• Complete rebuild of many stations including Huddersfield, Morley, Stalybridge and any on the four tracking.
• Accessibility improvements at many of the stations on the route.
• Resignalling of much of the route.
• Eventually moving to an ETCS signalling system of some kind, exact scope TBC I believe.
• Line speed improvements in several places most notably Church Fenton (including extending the Leeds bound loop), Miles Platting, Neville Hill and Morley as well as the four track section fast lines.
• Significant track renewals, exact length not sure, but this is being done as part of line speed works and also to reduce disruptive possessions once TRU is complete.
• Resilience works on diversionary routes to reduce delays during blockades.

Hope that provides a helpful summary of physical works, no doubt I have forgotten much of it....

Are there any improvements to the section between Leeds and Neville Hill to improve capacity at the busy section to the depot?

 

[YorkshireBear]

Are there any improvements to the section between Leeds and Neville Hill to improve capacity at the busy section to the depot?

Not aware of any.

 

[yorkie]

Are there any improvements to the section between Leeds and Neville Hill to improve capacity at the busy section to the depot?

Not aware of any.

If anyone has any ideas for any such improvements, please post them here:

Could improvements be made to reduce congestion around Neville Hill depot?

Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/transpennine-route-upgrade-and-electrification-updates.88054/ Are there any improvements to the section between Leeds and Neville Hill to improve capacity at the busy section to the depot? Would an entirely new depot for...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Zomboid]

40 miles in 41 minutes puts it on a par with journey times with Basingstoke to Waterloo (the fastest do 45 miles in 42 minutes - yes that's sightly faster but it only stops at Woking, those which also stop at Clapham Junction take around 47 minutes

Whilst that's not exactly the GWML, it is very straight and not massively hilly (Basingstoke is quite high up in south of England terms, so it's broadly downhill towards London, but the hills of northern Hampshire aren't quite the Pennines.

Averaging 60mph over 40 miles across the Pennines with all the curves is really good going, and much more impressive than managing a slightly higher average speed along the SWML.

 

[Palmerston]

40 miles in 41 minutes puts it on a par with journey times with Basingstoke to Waterloo (the fastest do 45 miles in 42 minutes - yes that's sightly faster but it only stops at Woking, those which also stop at Clapham Junction take around 47 minutes).

On a good day, it can to get to Basingstoke in 39 minutes so there's a bit of padding in there too.

 

[Killingworth]

Whilst that's not exactly the GWML, it is very straight and not massively hilly (Basingstoke is quite high up in south of England terms, so it's broadly downhill towards London, but the hills of northern Hampshire aren't quite the Pennines.

Averaging 60mph over 40 miles across the Pennines with all the curves is really good going, and much more impressive than managing a slightly higher average speed along the SWML.

Here on both South Pennine routes of about 42 miles an average of as much 60 mph would be good. Curves, gradients, geology, tunnels and congestion through urban areas.

 

[quantinghome]

Are there any improvements to the section between Leeds and Neville Hill to improve capacity at the busy section to the depot?

The line around Neville Hill is being realigned for a higher speed.

From Marsh Lane to Neville Hill the linespeed is being increased by 20mph. Some of the bridges between Marsh Lane and Leeds station are being replaced to enable faster speeds as well.

Quite how this translates to improved capacity I don't know - I presume that improving linespeed on approaches to busy stations gives you a fair bit of capacity improvement as you clear the signal sections quicker and can reduce headways. Even a 30 second reduction would count for quite a lot.

Then there's the ETCS signalling as well.

 

[yorkshirerail]

The line around Neville Hill is being realigned for a higher speed. From Marsh Lane to Neville Hill the linespeed is being increased by 20mph. Some of the bridges between Marsh Lane and Leeds station are being replaced to enable faster speeds as well. Quite how this translates to improved capacity I don't know - I presume that improving linespeed on approaches to busy stations gives you a fair bit of capacity improvement as you clear the signal sections quicker and can reduce headways. Even a 30 second reduction would count for quite a lot. Then there's the ETCS signalling as well.

Presumably this will all happen in the 13 week block of Neville Hill in 2028

 

[quantinghome]

Presumably this will all happen in the 13 week block of Neville Hill in 2028

I believe the bridges are being replaced in a week-long blockade over Christmas 2027.

 

[yorkshirerail]

I believe the bridges are being replaced in a week-long blockade over Christmas 2027.

Interesting thanks for the info

 

[zwk500]

I wouldn't count on ETCS implementation inside the TRU project.
It would follow the ECML project and that seems to be in trouble.
It would also only apply to the York ROC control area (ie Diggle eastwards).

This thread has the approximate phasing (caveats about timescales noted):

ETCS Rollout on Transpennine Route Upgrade

Hi all, Recently just got the results back from an FOI from Network Rail about the specifics and timelines for ETCS rollout across the TRU. Thought it might be of interest to some! https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ertms_timeline_and_data_as_part It includes a map of where ETCS will be...

www.railforums.co.uk

For anyone interested, the key dates are as follows:

June 2032: Cross Gates to Ulleskelf overlay (trackside signals still in use) [Neville Hill area May 2033]

May 2034: Huddersfield (platforms 5/6 only) to Cottingley overlay (trackside signals still in use)

Jan 2035: Neville Hill to Ulleskelf 'signals away' (trackside signals taken out of use)

March 2036: Stalybridge area overlay (trackside signals still in use)
March 2036: Mossley to Cottingley 'signals away' (trackside signals taken out of use)


Interesting that there doesn't appear to be an 'overlay stage' for the Mossley to Huddersfield section;
it just goes straight to the final signals away stage - good luck with that!



MARK

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Yes indeed, I saw that thread at the time, but forgot the detail.

I don't doubt the intention of the plan, which does include the western ramp of Standedge as well as the route east to York.

But having just read Roger Ford's article in Modern Railways (June), the plan/dates for ETCS rollout must be under threat because of the complexity and delay in the ECML programme.

The main issue seems to be getting ETCS equipment designed and shoehorned into freight locos, notably class 66, for the "signals away" operation..

 

[zwk500]

But having just read Roger Ford's article in Modern Railways (June), the plan/dates for ETCS rollout must be under threat because of the complexity and delay in the ECML programme.
The main issue seems to be getting ETCS equipment designed and shoehorned into freight locos, notably class 66, for the "signals away" operation..

Agree, although of course once the locos are fitted for the ECDP, they wouldn't need to be re-fitted for TRU. Of course, if they're using different pools of loco for the ECDP and TRU flows, then they'll need to go through it all again...

I fervently hope that as the body of knowledge around ETCS/ERTMS increases, the speed of rollout does likewise. But I suspect that building up to that critical mass will take a frustratingly long time.

Update: have just seen the June EDP: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-co...Delivery-Plan-England-and-Wales-June-2026.pdf Which Lists the following milestones:

ECDP Tranche 2 - Ready to commence L2 operational migration: Aug-26 Revised and on target
ECDP Tranche 2 - Ready to operate No-Signals: Subject to Change Control, Update Expected Sep-26
ECDP Tranche 4 - all no-signals areas operational: Oct-30, On target.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Scheme E2,3,4 (basically Leeds- Church Fenton) has the following benefit I forgot about.

This scheme enables the closure of multiple level crossings