Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[Monkeyhead]

Duplicate post

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Wow, they're certainly putting the can into cantilever...

The one on the platform is massive - from the look of it they have had to set it back behind the footbridge stairs to avoid it getting in the way any more than it already does. That means the span is huge and the column size has to be very big to support it.

Yes - very ugly imho.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I hadn’t realised until the train journey back from York that the wiring seems to be up form Church Fenton to Micklefield, and plenty of structures up to East Garforth that look ready for having wires installed.

There is a small gap around church Fenton awaiting the bridge renewal but yes that's correct. And Micklefield to just shy of Neville Hill is rapidly progressing now with all piles in and most masts up with progress greater towards the micklefield end.

 

[quantinghome]

Yes - very ugly imho.

"We begged Network Rail in vain to make their OLE more in keeping with the village's rustic aesthetic."

"And?"

"They told us to **** off."

 

[Zomboid]

It's not especially pretty, but once it's been there a few years it'll just be part of the landscape. And anyone getting close to it will have the benefit of electric trains.

 

[zwk500]

"We begged Network Rail in vain to make their OLE more in keeping with the village's rustic aesthetic."

"And?"

"They told us to **** off."

And if they'd gone with headspans, the forum boards would be full of complaints in a few years time about why the OLE falls off so often and that NR should have known better and built it stronger....

They really can't win, can they.

The OLE must remain in a narrow corridor of 3-dimensional space (especially with the bridge and curve), and must be able to resist the forces of passing trains (90mph linespeed) and environmental conditions. Uprights on a station platform must be 2.5m back from the platform edge, so any structure (STC or TTC) is going to be large and bulky to deal with the forces involved.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The OLE must remain in a narrow corridor of 3-dimensional space (especially with the bridge and curve), and must be able to resist the forces of passing trains (90mph linespeed) and environmental conditions. Uprights on a station platform must be 2.5m back from the platform edge, so any structure (STC or TTC) is going to be large and bulky to deal with the forces involved.

But what was wrong with using the simpler and less intrusive Series 2 OHLE design that was installed on the Chat Moss route between Edge Hill and Manchester (line speed also 90mph) around 2012? This is also part of the Transpennine route.

 

[Zomboid]

But what was wrong with using the simpler and less intrusive Series 2 OHLE design that was installed on the Chat Moss route between Edge Hill and Manchester (line speed also 90mph) around 2012? This is also part of the Transpennine route.

For all intents and purposes, that is series 2.

 

[WAO]

Serial (i.e repetitive) installations are usually favoured for speed and therefore cost (its hourly expensive to have all those orange types on site), even if another foundation is needed but for a lighter mast, so one wonders why the portals further along the platforms weren't copied (or TTC's used throughout?). However ground conditions and possible obstruction of the footbridge will have affected the choice. Spacing is an issue on a curve as is contact wire distance to the platform. There is of course more choice in spacing which now seems to range from 50 - 95m as against the old 240'/73m standard.

I imagine the designer knew best.

WAO

 

[zwk500]

But what was wrong with using the simpler and less intrusive Series 2 OHLE design that was installed on the Chat Moss route between Edge Hill and Manchester (line speed also 90mph) around 2012? This is also part of the Transpennine route.

Yes, because it's completely unobtrusive at all the stations...

Eccles, with massive gantry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eccle...Eccles_railway_station_(geograph_4004665).jpg
Particroft, with massive gantry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patri...icroft_railway_station_(geograph_4004223).jpg
Headspans and a gantry at Newton-le-Willows: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/...illows_railway_station_(geograph_3818425).jpg
The similarly intrusive TTC at Earlestowne: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/...:Platform_1,_Earlestown_railway_station_2.jpg

Somebody better at physics than me can probably work out how much additional force is generated on the cantilever by moving it back 2.5m. And how much additional force is imposed on the cantilever for the curve. It might need an OLE engineer to tell us how the impact of the reduced tolerances for the bridge (note the OLE stanchions are fixed to the bridge at Garforth due to clearances, so the OLE has limited scope to move) requires a stronger structure.

 

[Zomboid]

Serial (i.e repetitive) installations are usually favoured for speed and therefore cost (its hourly expensive to have all those orange types on site), even if another foundation is needed but for a lighter mast, so one wonders why the portals further along the platforms weren't copied (or TTC's used throughout?). However ground conditions and possible obstruction of the footbridge will have affected the choice. Spacing is an issue on a curve as is contact wire distance to the platform. There is of course more choice in spacing which now seems to range from 50 - 95m as against the old 240'/73m standard.

I imagine the designer knew best.

WAO

The designer would have been someone skilled in the job and would have considered a whole bunch of variables before coming to the conclusion that the TTC was the best available option for that location.

Unless that individual is here to enlighten us why that decision was taken then "but it doesn't look very pretty" is just meaningless noise from people who don't know enough to judge.

Obviously nobody is infallible, but without any evidence there's no reason to think that this isn't the best available solution for that situation.

 

[YorkshireBear]

"We begged Network Rail in vain to make their OLE more in keeping with the village's rustic aesthetic."

"And?"

"They told us to **** off."

I assume rustic aesthetic is not referring to garforth specifically!

 

[59CosG95]

The designer would have been someone skilled in the job and would have considered a whole bunch of variables before coming to the conclusion that the TTC was the best available option for that location.

Unless that individual is here to enlighten us why that decision was taken then "but it doesn't look very pretty" is just meaningless noise from people who don't know enough to judge.

Obviously nobody is infallible, but without any evidence there's no reason to think that this isn't the best available solution for that situation.

It's well worth remembering that Series 1 structures have been used between Man Vic & Stalybridge tunnel already, and that they are currently going in between Huddersfield & Leeds, so Garforth (and indeed East Garforth, Micklefield, and Cross Gates) are no different to anywbere else on the route. These were also done after the UKMS range was born, mixing the two ranges together.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

And if they'd gone with headspans, the forum boards would be full of complaints in a few years time about why the OLE falls off so often and that NR should have known better and built it stronger....

They really can't win, can they.

Very true!

 

[AndrewE]

The designer would have been someone skilled in the job and would have considered a whole bunch of variables before coming to the conclusion that the TTC was the best available option for that location.

Unless that individual is here to enlighten us why that decision was taken then "but it doesn't look very pretty" is just meaningless noise from people who don't know enough to judge.

Obviously nobody is infallible, but without any evidence there's no reason to think that this isn't the best available solution for that situation.

I can understand headspans (wires) being out of favour, but the WCML gantries have performed without any failures that I know of and have the benefit of 2 (presumably) smaller foundations.
These cantilever things will obviously need massively bigger foundations because of the overturning moment, exacerbated by the mass of the huge great cantilever arm. It's hard to see how they will be more economical (or reliable) than a gantry. (And why the name change to Portal?)

 

[Tetragon213]

Iirc, Disney uses olive green paint (dubbed "Go-Away Green) on functional stuff they don't want the public to notice.

Wonder if that would work here?

The designer would have been someone skilled in the job and would have considered a whole bunch of variables before coming to the conclusion that the TTC was the best available option for that location.

Unless that individual is here to enlighten us why that decision was taken then "but it doesn't look very pretty" is just meaningless noise from people who don't know enough to judge.

Obviously nobody is infallible, but without any evidence there's no reason to think that this isn't the best available solution for that situation.

Errr... Wouldn't be too sure about that, if the standards of some of the engineers I've met on this project are any indication! The West of Leeds section in particular has some "interesting" characters doing design work there...

 

[Spartacus]

Iirc, Disney uses olive green paint (dubbed "Go-Away Green) on functional stuff they don't want the public to notice.

Wonder if that would work here?

Alright with something not being noticed when it's purpose isn't safety critical....

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Iirc, Disney uses olive green paint (dubbed "Go-Away Green) on functional stuff they don't want the public to notice.

Maybe a more suitable green matching whatever colour the foliage generally is around there?
Although it'd be a lot of paint!

 

[The exile]

Iirc, Disney uses olive green paint (dubbed "Go-Away Green) on functional stuff they don't want the public to notice.

Painting masts green would be far too German - they’ve been doing it for years.

 

[MboroFC]

What were the engineering works this time last month please? Assuming they were at Huddersfield.

 

[Geeves]

What were the engineering works this time last month please? Assuming they were at Huddersfield.

Bradley Junction east of Huddersfield was the major work area with various bridges demolished, replaced with OHLE friendly structures and the entire junction was relayed

 

[MboroFC]

Bradley Junction east of Huddersfield was the major work area with various bridges demolished, replaced with OHLE friendly structures and the entire junction was relayed

Thank you

 

[Geeves]

Thank you

No problem! We also have Huddersfield station track alterations V2 to look forward to as well, plus I am looking forward to what ever wierd and wonderful scheme them come up with to get trains on to the new viaduct at Ravensthorpe with whatever half done state the approaches are in!

 

[QueensCurve]

The

Headspans and a gantry at Newton-le-Willows: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/...illows_railway_station_(geograph_3818425).jpg
The similarly intrusive TTC at Earlestowne: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/...:Platform_1,_Earlestown_railway_station_2.jpg

The wiring at Newton Le W and Earlstown was installed as part of the Weaver to Glasgow electrification in the early 1970s. I think that twin track cantilever will be a more recent modification.

 

[59CosG95]

The

The wiring at Newton Le W and Earlstown was installed as part of the Weaver to Glasgow electrification in the early 1970s. I think that twin track cantilever will be a more recent modification.

Precisely. The twin track cantilever there is Series 2, although, if hairs are being split (as is so common on this forum), the design of the mast and boom itself goes back as far as the Mk3 era (definitely GN Suburban, possibly Weaver-Glasgow).

The cantilevers hanging from the boom, however, are assuredly newer, and would have been installed as part of NWEP.

But back to Garforth - the choice of using the large Series 1 TTC mast there was very much a designer's choice. Why? We'll never really know, but I suspect a potential reason for choosing a mast with a rectangular hollow section (500x350 IIRC) rather than an older-style TTC was likely because it has no footholds, and so eliminates the possibility of any ne'er-do-wells treating live electrical infrastructure as a set of monkey bars.

 

[Jamesrob637]

The latest Sarah Bell vid is up

 

[Mr Mean]

Does anyone know why Dewsbury is keeping the blue and white theme and not going the full weaver green/black like batley, mirfield etc?

Had a peek at the works yesterday and the extension of the leeds bound platform under the road bridge looks to be extremely narrow. What are the limits of narrowness for platforms? It reminded me of some Underground platforms that get really narrow towards the end nearest tunnels. The Huddersfield bound platform similarly extends under the road bridge but doesn't suffer from the same width issues.

When does this set of works finish?

 

[Paul AC]

The wiring at Newton Le W and Earlstown was installed as part of the Weaver to Glasgow electrification in the early 1970s. I think that twin track cantilever will be a more recent modification.

In those photos, the Newton-le-Willows wiring dates back to the 1970s; the Earlestown wiring is from the 2015 electrification towards Edge Hill.

 

[zwk500]

What are the limits of narrowness for platforms?

Side/Single-Face Platform:
Up to 100mph: 2.5m minimum width, any shelters/benches etc placed behind that. Isolated columns can be 2m from the edge if not able to place them 2.5m away. Can be reduced to 2m over the last 20m of the platform if it isn't part of an access or exit route (normal or emergency), passengers won't naturally congregate for the reduced width portion, and everybody agrees.

If the speed (normal or Enhanced Permissible Speed) is 100mph or more: 3m minimum width from the platform edge.

Island/Double-face platform:
Both lines 100mph or above: 6m
1 line 100mph or above: 5.5m
both lines <100mph: 4m.
In all cases if there is a building or structure between the platform faces then the 2.5m/3m minimum width applies to the portion alongside the structure.

(GIRT7020 Iss 2.1)

Projects can seek derogation from the standards if site constraints prevent these widths.

 

[Tetragon213]

Does anyone know why Dewsbury is keeping the blue and white theme and not going the full weaver green/black like batley, mirfield etc?

I believe is was something to do with the listed status of Dewsbury Station (Grade II)