-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Blackpool - Manchester Electrification
- Thread starter GRALISTAIR
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
GRALISTAIR
Established Member
Discussion of Sydney Gardens, Bath, in the Western Eledctrification thread reminds me: what happened to the bridge over the line, a few bridges along from Farnworth Station, that had open stone balustrades supplemented by ugly temporary-looking fencing?
CAF397
Member
Still standing and still the same!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
None that I can see, but from memory I thought they looked square (though there was preparation materials around it). Not sure they looked that rectangular.
GRALISTAIR
Established Member
Blackpool North - Preston is due to be electrified by Spring 2018 according to the Hendy update. It will follow on from Manchester - Preston which is due Dec 2017. All the civils (bridges etc) are done but the whole line needs to be re-signaled. Blackpool North is to be remodeled and there is a blockade planned.
has it been put back again? how do you mean blackpool north is to be remodeled whats wrong with it?
Shaw S Hunter
Established Member
The current station has reverse curves at the outer end of the longer platforms: this is highly undesirable. I believe the remodelled station will have 6 straight platforms of which 2 will be long enough for a Pendolino (presumably 11 cars but I'm not certain of that). Given the alignment of the station the new layout will likely mean the exit will be partly through the area currently occupied by the carriage sidings. I also believe that after electrification there will be no servicing facility for dmus (just washing/cleaning) which, if true, lends some credence to the tales of a new dmu facility in Blackburn. As for what is intended with the archaic layout at Kirkham it's anybody's guess. I've heard a suggestion it may not be a priority so a possible target for budget trimming. Would be glad to be corrected on any of this.
Last edited:
GRALISTAIR
Established Member
https://www.greatermanchester-ca.gov...id/461/item_14
Table page 6 - yes spring 2018
see also bottom of page
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/North_West_electrification.aspx
Last edited:
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Will the station at Blackpool North have any changes made to the number of platforms there? Are there plans of the new-look station available to view?
edwin_m
Veteran Member
Blackpool North isn't the ideal place for DMU servicing anyway. By my reckoning the only regular diesel working there after completion of all planned electrification will be the York service, plus the Colne but that doesn't go to North anyway. Blackburn is a much better place for DMU facilities.
If there's any facility at North I'd guess it would primarily be for EMU stabling/cleaning, to avoid extensive empty running at both ends of the day. Whatever else happens, it would be logical stable trains overnight in some of the platforms.
Last edited:
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
And as of last Monday there is not the slightest sign of any upgrade work going on between Preston and Blackpool.
The line seems stuck in a time-warp.
Hendy says this about completion:
Presumably the new TOC (just Northern, now TPE has vacated Blackpool), will now be able to say what stabling/servicing needs they have with the new stock.
The scheme should now be at GRIP 3, along with the rest of the Preston-Manchester-Stalybridge electrification.
Last edited:
YorkshireBear
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 9,664
I believe when the cost for upgrading the whole line from Preston to Blackpool was given to NR they went... Hmm. Soon enough the project was stalled and was being completely relooked at and descoped.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
From aerial mapping, it looks to me like getting rid of that reverse curve will need a few metres shaving off the car parks to the south, and then re-aligning all tracks to a straighter alignment along with re-building the outer half of each platform. The carriage sidings look to be too far out to be affected although there are a couple of short sidings close to the station that might have to go.
A less radical scheme would leave the platforms as they are but move the throat a bit to the north into the area of these two sidings, giving a reasonably smooth curve instead of what at present is a bit of a zigzag.
A less radical scheme would leave the platforms as they are but move the throat a bit to the north into the area of these two sidings, giving a reasonably smooth curve instead of what at present is a bit of a zigzag.
CAF397
Member
Had a good look at the masts from Ordsall Lane to Lowton Jn today to try to see a comparable one.
The neutral section at Ordsall Lane is mounted on piles, and the one at Parkside Jn is part of a portal.
The only large square concrete masts are for double track cantilevers and also portals (namely between Hurst Hall Crossing and Astley).
Now no need for double track cantilever or portals where these bases are, so still none the wiser.
The neutral section at Ordsall Lane is mounted on piles, and the one at Parkside Jn is part of a portal.
The only large square concrete masts are for double track cantilevers and also portals (namely between Hurst Hall Crossing and Astley).
Now no need for double track cantilever or portals where these bases are, so still none the wiser.
GRALISTAIR
Established Member
Well the real expensive stuff- heavy civils -are complete.
LDECRexile
Established Member
Paul and I travelled from Bolton to Preston and back today, stopping off at Buckshaw Parkway.
I've added Paul's shots to his album here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127646831@N03/albums/72157649792560381
and his shots and mine to the Combined Volume here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127646831@N03/albums/72157661069863633
I'll update the Progressometer after LNW's jaunt next week, I'm away until then.
Thank you Paul.
I've added Paul's shots to his album here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127646831@N03/albums/72157649792560381
and his shots and mine to the Combined Volume here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127646831@N03/albums/72157661069863633
I'll update the Progressometer after LNW's jaunt next week, I'm away until then.
Thank you Paul.
YorkshireBear
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 9,664
Yeah i don't think the upgrade relied much on the bridge rebuilds anyway. Was more the cost of remodelling.
A trailing crossover is being put in on the Chorley side of Buckshaw parkway station, or so I believe.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
Does this replace the one further west, or does it form an extended reversible loop of some kind?
On the Blackpool route, the bridges either side of Poulton look low to me. Maybe some track lowering is going to be needed there.
The signal box at Salwick also seems to be propped up with stays at each corner, definitely "on its last legs" so to speak.
While we are on about costs, it's usually resignalling (linked to remodelling) which makes a large proportion of route upgrade costs.
Salford-Euxton is already fairly modern, but Fylde Jn-Blackpool is back in the stone age.
Joseph_Locke
Established Member
Funny you should say that, 'cos I already did.
It effectively replaces Friday Street GF crossover, which is removed to allow platform works to take place at Chorley. Plus it tidies up a few other things as well.
Yes, some of it is only 30 years old!
Last edited:
driver9000
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 4,556
Does this replace the one further west, or does it form an extended reversible loop of some kind?
On the Blackpool route, the bridges either side of Poulton look low to me. Maybe some track lowering is going to be needed there.
The signal box at Salwick also seems to be propped up with stays at each corner, definitely "on its last legs" so to speak.
While we are on about costs, it's usually resignalling (linked to remodelling) which makes a large proportion of route upgrade costs.
Salford-Euxton is already fairly modern, but Fylde Jn-Blackpool is back in the stone age.
The scaffold around Salwick box looks to be related to work on the veranda at the front of the box.
LDECRexile
Established Member
Wrinkley has kindly sent some shots of the work near Ladybridge.
I've also added a shot I took at Buckshaw Parkway earlier in the week but accidentally omitted from final posting, it is 5808w.
I've added Wrinkley's shots to his album here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127646831@N03/albums/72157654034635234
and all the shots to the Combined Volume here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127646831@N03/albums/72157661069863633
Thank you Wrinkley.
On our jaunt Paul and I noticed what looked to our laymen's eyes like preparation work for a third track a short distance south of Chorley station on the northbound (Down) side. Can anyone please say what this work really is?
I've also added a shot I took at Buckshaw Parkway earlier in the week but accidentally omitted from final posting, it is 5808w.
I've added Wrinkley's shots to his album here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127646831@N03/albums/72157654034635234
and all the shots to the Combined Volume here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127646831@N03/albums/72157661069863633
Thank you Wrinkley.
On our jaunt Paul and I noticed what looked to our laymen's eyes like preparation work for a third track a short distance south of Chorley station on the northbound (Down) side. Can anyone please say what this work really is?
Joseph_Locke
Established Member
Prep for the finally-lets-sort-Chorley-out scheme ...
notlob.divad
Established Member
- Joined
- 19 Jan 2016
- Messages
- 1,609
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
Network Rail has this uncanny ability to pull rabbits out of the hat.
Like the work at Oxenholme, this has just appeared out of the blue, but has clearly been in the pipeline for ages.
It explains all the fiddling about south of Chorley station, and also the plan to raise line speeds over the route to 100mph (currently only 50mph through Chorley).
You won't find any of this in the CP5 plan, or in the related Route Plans.
While I applaud NR for producing an impressive upgrade scheme, why do they not provide any information about the overall aims and intentions for the route before they suddenly announce blockades for the work?
It would help the PR in situations where projects overrun (like the Farnworth work), if people understood the scale of the wider work involved in route upgrades like this.
All we tend to get is generic guff about "faster, quieter, greener" trains with more seats.
LDECRexile
Established Member
Good find, thanks for sharing.
Joseph_Locke
Established Member
Yep. Chorley platform walls are too close together to get electric trains through, so hence all this work - lowering, bridge and platform rebuilding, crossover removal. Sorry about the timing ... that isn't me.
What do you want? We could spend all week discussing the detail of the work on Phase 4 alone, but 95% will happen in standard possession access and you'll have an electrified railway at the end. Rest assured that there is a plan and it is carefully considered to avoid disruption; that said, Chorley isn't the last big job on the route ...
p.s. not 100mph through Chorley, ever.
Last edited:
LDECRexile
Established Member
Could you please expand on this a little? I'd always assumed all trains were built to fit width-wise, even if pantographs require more height clearance than steam and diesel.
The sentence on the NR website actually says
"The track then has to be realigned through the station so faster trains can pass each other"
I took this to mean that a curve is being straightened, and/or because the kinematic envelope of a moving train gets slightly larger with higher speed, the tracks need moving slightly further apart.
There is also a standard that requires live OLE to be 3.5m away from any public areas (or shielded), which means it has to be pretty high through stations to be 3.5m away from a platform edge. Hence the reason for much higher footbridges etc.
Last edited:
- Status