Possible new station at Thorpe Park (Leeds): consultation open

[YorkshireBear]

Not really. It takes time for the signal behind to clear, so I’d guess that eastbound trains would be overtaken at Thorpe Park/before Garforth, westbound at Cross Gates, if there was four-tracking between those two stations only.

(Which is more or less what @YorkshireBear wrote above.j

Adding a further station at Osmondthorpe/Killingbeck would slow the stopper into the clutches of the next fast service, and you’d be back to where you were.

All of those suburban stations ideas were abandoned (apart from East Garforth) after the first few WY Railplans, probably as traffic levels increased.

Agreed. What that gives you effectively is a dynamic passing loop with two stations. Which should (I think) give you time to pass two fast trains. If they run the fasts as hot behind the stoppers as they do now you should get two past them (the time I lose sat on the Airport services behind the York Leeds stopper from Garforth to Leeds whenever the stopper is more than 1-2L, which it often is as it gets held for late running Liverpool services).

 

[Grumpy]

From Cross Gates to about the M1 over bridge is the maximum it would be. Allowing trains stopping at Thorpe Park and Cross Gates to be overtaken.

And presumably those stopping at Micklefield, subject to the track layout

 

[YorkshireBear]

And presumably those stopping at Micklefield, subject to the track layout

No Micklefield will remain two track, it is a long way beyond the M1 overbridge.

 

[YorksLad12]

Well here's a thing: updated visuals, on WYCA's LinkedIn page. They seem to suggest three platforms and three through lines - so a bit like Slaithwaite and Marsden? But a passing lane (bidi or just westbound), rather than a crawler?

 

[YorkshireBear]

I suspect that is bad visuals. They always said they would build two platforms on a four track alignment, with then a temporary platform to serve the current, York bound line, with bridges between. Suspect the visualisations have just kept the track that isn't being built.

 

[Halifaxlad]

I suspect that is bad visuals. They always said they would build two platforms on a four track alignment, with then a temporary platform to serve the current, York bound line, with bridges between. Suspect the visualisations have just kept the track that isn't being built.

The visualisations do appear to show the outer platforms to be prefab concrete sections with the inner/middle platform GRP (If I remember the term correctly) composite. So it look like they will build both permanent platforms from the get go.

 

[Grimsby town]

Well here's a thing: updated visuals, on WYCA's LinkedIn page. They seem to suggest three platforms and three through lines - so a bit like Slaithwaite and Marsden? But a passing lane (bidi or just westbound), rather than a crawler?

Thanks for posting, definitely interesting that the thinking is a temporary platform that can be removed to allow for four tracking. It seems to suggest that Network rail is fairly confident four tracking will happen and I'd guess that's what funding announced for NPR, between Leeds and York, will deliver.

I'm slightly disappointed they haven't gone with a solution that would allow the slow lines to be located between the slow lines, which would have potentially allowed for a turn back siding for trains to terminate at Thorpe Park. That would have required rebuilding Cross Gates as a central island platform. I hope they consider a potential flyover to allow trains to terminate at Thorpe Park, continue to a siding, reverse and cross the fast tracks to access the Leeds bound platform. That would provide extra resilience in the network and provide Cross Gates and Thorpe Park with turn up and go services.

 

[xdbjacx]

Thanks for posting, definitely interesting that the thinking is a temporary platform that can be removed to allow for four tracking. It seems to suggest that Network rail is fairly confident four tracking will happen and I'd guess that's what funding announced for NPR, between Leeds and York, will deliver.

I'm slightly disappointed they haven't gone with a solution that would allow the slow lines to be located between the slow lines, which would have potentially allowed for a turn back siding for trains to terminate at Thorpe Park. That would have required rebuilding Cross Gates as a central island platform. I hope they consider a potential flyover to allow trains to terminate at Thorpe Park, continue to a siding, reverse and cross the fast tracks to access the Leeds bound platform. That would provide extra resilience in the network and provide Cross Gates and Thorpe Park with turn up and go services.

Why would it be good to have a turn up and go service between Leeds and Thorpe Park only, as opposed to between Leeds and York, or at least between Leeds and Micklefield with the combined efforts of Leeds-York and Leeds-Hull stoppers? If you wanted to build an extremely expensive grade separated turnback, why there specifically?

 

[Grimsby town]

Why would it be good to have a turn up and go service between Leeds and Thorpe Park only, as opposed to between Leeds and York, or at least between Leeds and Micklefield with the combined efforts of Leeds-York and Leeds-Hull stoppers? If you wanted to build an extremely expensive grade separated turnback, why there specifically?

Because Cross Gates and Thorpe Park serve the Leeds urban area and therefore serve large populations and have better onward transport connections. East Garforth and Micklefield serve populations of a couple of thousand, East Garforth because most of Garforth's population will use Garforth and Micklefield because its only a large village. Half-hourly service is about right for that size of catchment area. Garforth gets a fairly good service already, so there's less need for an increase.

The other issue constraint is infrastructure. In my opinion, you'd ideally have a 10-15 minute headway for stopping services calling at Cross Gates, Thorpe Park and continuing on to Garforth, where some trains would terminate and two would continue to York/Selby. Unfortunately, there isn't the room around Garforth for additional tracks/platforms and it's going to be difficult to path additional all stop services all the way to York/Selby (particularly York given it already struggles with capacity).

The cheaper alternative to a flyover is stop services like the York-Blackpool at Cross Gates but that obviously creates a time penalty for those services.

 

[Manutd1999]

Will Thorpe Park be able to terminate local services? 4ph stoppers, 2ph of which continue to York and 2ph terminating at Thorpe Park could work well. Thorpe Park terminators could be extensions of other services east of Leeds (eg, Bradford FS)

 

[Grimsby town]

Will Thorpe Park be able to terminate local services? 4ph stoppers, 2ph of which continue to York and 2ph terminating at Thorpe Park could work well. Thorpe Park terminators could be extensions of other services east of Leeds (eg, Bradford FS)

It's not the plan from what I've seen but it definitely should be considered and would revive the plan for an East Leeds Parkway.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Will Thorpe Park be able to terminate local services? 4ph stoppers, 2ph of which continue to York and 2ph terminating at Thorpe Park could work well. Thorpe Park terminators could be extensions of other services east of Leeds (eg, Bradford FS)

If your going to send electric services through Leeds from Forster Square you might as well send them all the way to York!

 

[Grimsby town]

If your going to send electric services through Leeds from Forster Square you might as well send them all the way to York!

Using which platforms at York? I don't think there's much scope for terminating additonal services without additonal platforms. There's also potential capacity issues at Colton Junction.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Using which platforms at York? I don't think there's much scope for terminating additonal services without additonal platforms. There's also potential capacity issues at Colton Junction.

Since we are in the 'Speculative Discussion' forum...

Additional South facing platforms could be added to the East in what is currently a disused island platform. If what used to be P12 was reinstated next to P8 then the through platforms wouldn't be needed to be used for North facing terminating services as much. I don't think creating capacity at York would be that much of an issue as for Colton Junction I'm not sure how to solve that but I suspect someone else will know.