Blackpool - Manchester Electrification

[LDECRexile]

Wrinkley has kindly sent this about the Ladybridge-Lostock area:

Murphys have left the site at Lostock station, the plant, materials and the large pile of spoil near Beaumont Road bridge have all gone. They have tidied up between the station and Ladybridge.

Just a bit of landscaping being finished near the bridge and the fencing is almost complete, but still no sign of anything directly connected to putting the wires up yet.

Thank you Wrinkley, good to hear from you.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Wrinkley has kindly sent half a dozen shots he took yesterday in the Ordsall Chord area.

I've added them to his album here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/127646831@N03/albums/72157654034635234

and to the Combined Volume here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/127646831@N03/albums/72157661069863633

Thank you Wrinkley

 

[ALX400]

Hi All,

Been away a while with work commitments but back now , I've been keeping up with the thread though some cracking photos and info as per, I plan to get to Chorley and take some photos once work in that area starts from the 18th June, I've not noticed anymore steel other than the 5 trial masts we know south of Adlington.

 

[Whistler40145]

How will the OHLE structures and wires be installed under the stone arches in the Chorley area and how will the necessary tension be maintained to ensure that there's no sagging of the wires?

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

How will the OHLE structures and wires be installed under the stone arches in the Chorley area and how will the necessary tension be maintained to ensure that there's no sagging of the wires?

The Chorley flying arches now rest on steel beams (done a couple of years ago) so the OHLE will be fitted to the beams instead.
I guess they will replace the usual portals at that point.

 

[snowball]

The Chorley flying arches now rest on steel beams (done a couple of years ago) so the OHLE will be fitted to the beams instead.
I guess they will replace the usual portals at that point.

It was done in two stages.

This video shows the original removal of the stone arches and replacement by steel in 2008:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q23aj3vZzCw

There's probably another one somewhere showing the reinstatement of the stone above the steel in 2014 but here's a still:

http://www.globalrailnews.com/2014/08/21/chorley-flying-arches-return/

 

[Whistler40145]

Thanks for your information, much appreciated.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[PDG1949]

How will the OHLE structures and wires be installed under the stone arches in the Chorley area and how will the necessary tension be maintained to ensure that there's no sagging of the wires?

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Have a look at a similar situation during the Liverpool - Wigan electrification at Thatto Heath 'canyon' - between Eccleston Park station and the high sandstone cutting just before Thatto Heath station

https://www.flickr.com/photos/127646831@N03/15286233639

 

[snowball]

Apologies if this link about the Chorley works has been posted before:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=30064799720

 

[Whistler40145]

Those OHLE Support Structures used in Thatto Heath Canyon look quite suitable for use under the Chorley Stone Arches.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[notlob.divad]

Given that the arches where re-built specifically for electrification, will they not just hang the OHLE from the new steelwork, rather than attaching more steelwork to the retaining side walls?

I have copied a link to Chris Newman's excellent photograph for reference

https://www.flickr.com/photos/zacerin/19005365533

 

[snowball]

I have copied a link to Chris Newman's excellent photograph for reference

https://www.flickr.com/photos/zacerin/19005365533

The pale patches on the walls to the nearer side of each arch are where the stone arches previously sprang from.

 

[swt_passenger]

The pale patches on the walls to the nearer side of each arch are where the stone arches previously sprang from.

Are they not where the temporary lighter coloured (galvanised?) steel arches were fitted, via rectangular plates against the stonework?

As shown in your originally linked video (at around 1m 20s) the temporary arches were fitted before the original stone arches were removed, but parallel to them and in a slightly different position to the original stone arches. The spreader plates for the temporary arches first become visible at 2m 15s or so, therefore surely the current steel reinforced arches are back in the same places as originally built, although higher?

 

[notlob.divad]

Are they not where the temporary lighter coloured (galvanised?) steel arches were fitted, via rectangular plates against the stonework?

As shown in your originally linked video (at around 1m 20s) the temporary arches were fitted before the original stone arches were removed, but parallel to them and in a slightly different position to the original stone arches. The spreader plates for the temporary arches first become visible at 2m 15s or so, therefore surely the current steel reinforced arches are back in the same places as originally built, although higher?

I think snowball is correct. I think the current steel reinforced arches connected to the same spreader plates that the temporary arches used and were not put back in the same position as they where originally located.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think snowball is correct. I think the current steel reinforced arches connected to the same spreader plates that the temporary arches used and were not put back in the same position as they where originally located.

Not according to the pictures I've found of them being installed:

http://i0.wp.com/www.globalrailnews...014/08/ChorleyFlyingArches.jpg?resize=720,400

This first picture shows the new arches in position with the temporary ones cut off behind.

http://www.thisislancashire.co.uk/resources/images/3239526/

This second shot, shows the temporary light coloured plates still in place in front of the new arches again with the galvanised temporary arches cut off, the permanent arches are mounted on a completely new plate in the weathering steel finish.

The temporary plates do not extend above the coping stones of the original cutting wall, the permanent plates are significantly higher, and you can see where the stonework has been repaired underneath them. You can also see a bracket on the outward facing face of the plate that I expect mounts over the top of the cutting wall.

 

[edwin_m]

Given that the arches where re-built specifically for electrification, will they not just hang the OHLE from the new steelwork, rather than attaching more steelwork to the retaining side walls?

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that was exactly what would happen, but I don't remember where (possibly in Rail Engineer magazine). Certainly it would be possible to clamp OLE to the bottom flange of those girders without major difficulty, very much as was done in Victoria station for example. Any other method would be more visually obtrusive, and it would largely defeat the point of doing a costly rebuilding if the result was obscured by the OLE supports.

 

[swt_passenger]

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that was exactly what would happen, but I don't remember where (possibly in Rail Engineer magazine). Certainly it would be possible to clamp OLE to the bottom flange of those girders without major difficulty, very much as was done in Victoria station for example.

Here is the Rail Engineer magazine article you're thinking of which does indeed include the point about clamping OHLE equipment to the bottom flanges of the arches:

http://www.railengineer.uk/2014/10/07/amalfi-lancashire/

 

[edwin_m]

Here is the Rail Engineer magazine article you're thinking of which does indeed include the point about clamping OHLE equipment to the bottom flanges of the arches:

http://www.railengineer.uk/2014/10/07/amalfi-lancashire/

The brain cell thanks you profoundly for your assistance.

 

[LDECRexile]

Here is the Rail Engineer magazine article you're thinking of which does indeed include the point about clamping OHLE equipment to the bottom flanges of the arches:

http://www.railengineer.uk/2014/10/07/amalfi-lancashire/

Great article, thank you.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Talking to an Orangeman it seems that the work which was expected on the Ordsall Chord site over the weekend was cancelled on Friday because of concerns that some planned demolition work could threaten structures nearby. Further investigation is needed to be confident these risks are fully controlled.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Is there an electrification project going on, or not?
First run round for 3 weeks and I couldn't discern anything new on the route.
This makes it about 5 weeks since new bases appeared.
The base for the platform extension at Chorley is in place.
A new signal gantry is up on the north side of the Liverpool St bridge at Ordsall Lane.
Only 18 months to electric service...

 

[thealexweb]

Is there an electrification project going on, or not?
First run round for 3 weeks and I couldn't discern anything new on the route.
This makes it about 5 weeks since new bases appeared.
The base for the platform extension at Chorley is in place.
A new signal gantry is up on the north side of the Liverpool St bridge at Ordsall Lane.
Only 18 months to electric service...

Indeed. I travel frequently between Bolton and Edinburgh and the dream of fast direct service again is a far away now as it has been for the past couple of years.

 

[ianhr]

Indeed. I travel frequently between Bolton and Edinburgh and the dream of fast direct service again is a far away now as it has been for the past couple of years.

Are we waiting for a quiet announcement that it has been put back to CP6? i.e. possibly 'binned'.

I thought Carillon were supposed to have picked it up from BB but I am not aware of NR making public any signing of a new contract.

Also where does this leave Northern's plans for the deployment of new rolling stock?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Well I am sure our resident engineers will have comment - but essential civils - Chorley area in particular are happening. We also saw with Liverpool -Manchester - in particular Liverpool - WCML via Shaw St and Jct , that progress seems slow at first then as soon as steel starts going in it picks up fast. I think with some upcoming blockades etc in Chorley area et al that other electrification related work, piles/holes, bases, steel, cantilevers and wire will start happening. I am not too disheartened yet.

Are we waiting for a quiet announcement that it has been put back to CP6? i.e. possibly 'binned'.

IMHO way too much political capital/Northern Powerhouse etc, for this to happen.

 

[LDECRexile]

Is there an electrification project going on, or not?
First run round for 3 weeks and I couldn't discern anything new on the route.
This makes it about 5 weeks since new bases appeared.
The base for the platform extension at Chorley is in place.
A new signal gantry is up on the north side of the Liverpool St bridge at Ordsall Lane.
Only 18 months to electric service...

I tried Bolton to Buckshaw Parkway and back today, too. Only thing I saw not mentioned above was track panels lying immediately south of Buckshaw and quite a lot of new rail lying in the 4 foot here and there.

The foot crossing north of Adlington station looks to be officially reopened and back in business. The other foot crossings north of Bolton are all untouched.

I take Graham's point about things being speeded up when they get cracking, but in the Spring public briefings gave dates such as May 2016 for steel north of Adlington.

Disquieting.

PS, one bit of good news - the buffet at Chorley is open. Not so at Bolton, alas.

 

[SodTheDrummer]

I tried Bolton to Buckshaw Parkway and back today, too. Only thing I saw not mentioned above was track panels lying immediately south of Buckshaw and quite a lot of new rail lying in the 4 foot here and there.

The foot crossing north of Adlington station looks to be officially reopened and back in business. The other foot crossings north of Bolton are all untouched.

I take Graham's point about things being speeded up when they get cracking, but in the Spring public briefings gave dates such as May 2016 for steel north of Adlington.

Disquieting.

PS, one bit of good news - the buffet at Chorley is open. Not so at Bolton, alas.

They're missing a trick at Bolton - it's a very busy station at peak times, there's nice Victorian buildings at platform level which seem to be largely unused - there should be a buffet at least, would make a killing in the mornings, more waiting rooms etc. Shame they had to demolish the old Trinity Street station back in the 80s..

On the subject of Bolton, do any of our resident engineer chaps/chapesses know what Bolton remodeling will involve exactly? Or is it a secret?

 

[LDECRexile]

I'm delighted that ALX400 has been in touch after a long gap.

He's sent some shots of Chorley, which I've added to his album here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/127646831@N03/albums/72157651121057352

and to the Combined Volume here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/127646831@N03/albums/72157661069863633

Welcome back!

 

[Francis]

Note no shelter on the temporary down platform at Chorley. Yesterday morning the ten or so people waiting for the delayed 0902 to Blackpool North were huddled under umbrellas in the driving rain. Any chance of a tarpaulin or something, NR?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

A letter in today's Rail (p44) from the chairman of the Blackpool and Fylde RUA contains the glum news that line speeds on the Preston-Blackpool line are staying at the current 75mph.
I never believed NR's 125mph hype when the scheme was first mooted about 4 years ago, but I did think that an increase to 90/100mph was on the cards.
If you are going to resignal and remodel the route at Kirkham, Poulton and Blackpool it would be a crying shame if nothing better than 75mph was achieved on the largely flat and straight sections east of Poulton.
I'm not aware of any NR announcement about this, but it does suggest a major upgrade is not going to happen.
Does anyone know any better?

 

[Joseph_Locke]

A letter in today's Rail (p44) from the chairman of the Blackpool and Fylde RUA contains the glum news that line speeds on the Preston-Blackpool line are staying at the current 75mph.
I never believed NR's 125mph hype when the scheme was first mooted about 4 years ago, but I did think that an increase to 90/100mph was on the cards.
If you are going to resignal and remodel the route at Kirkham, Poulton and Blackpool it would be a crying shame if nothing better than 75mph was achieved on the largely flat and straight sections east of Poulton.
I'm not aware of any NR announcement about this, but it does suggest a major upgrade is not going to happen.
Does anyone know any better?

Yes ....

125mph is always going to be a bit pointless on a railway only 17 or so miles long, with a couple of heavy curves dotted along it and a few level crossings to contend with. Even that relative dragster of the train world, the Voyager, would take over three miles to get to 125mph - it simply isn't cost effective.

Whilst the route is to be resignalled and re-controlled to MROC, IIRC the scale of the track and formation works required for 100mph was a problem hitherto not identified. That's not to say that the signalling and OLE won't be good for 100mph (And I don't actually know if it is or not), waiting for the track to catch up later when funds are available. This is the case elsewhere.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Yes ....
125mph is always going to be a bit pointless on a railway only 17 or so miles long, with a couple of heavy curves dotted along it and a few level crossings to contend with. Even that relative dragster of the train world, the Voyager, would take over three miles to get to 125mph - it simply isn't cost effective.

Whilst the route is to be resignalled and re-controlled to MROC, IIRC the scale of the track and formation works required for 100mph was a problem hitherto not identified. That's not to say that the signalling and OLE won't be good for 100mph (And I don't actually know if it is or not), waiting for the track to catch up later when funds are available. This is the case elsewhere.

Thanks for the info.
It sounds ominously like the putative Gobowen-Shrewsbury-Wolverhampton line speed increase (70-90mph).
This was promised (NR even introduced an accelerated Shrewsbury-Wolverhampton timetable) but found to be undeliverable (had to revert to the old one).
For Blackpool I wonder if it is lack of money (ie Hendy) or inadequate asset knowledge?
(Not expecting an answer...).

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Thanks for the info.
It sounds ominously like the putative Gobowen-Shrewsbury-Wolverhampton line speed increase (70-90mph).
This was promised (NR even introduced an accelerated Shrewsbury-Wolverhampton timetable) but found to be undeliverable (had to revert to the old one).
For Blackpool I wonder if it is lack of money (ie Hendy) or inadequate asset knowledge?
(Not expecting an answer...).

Additional example. Salford Crescent - Atherton - Hindley has a top speed of 50mph. Back in the day it was 70, indeed it was the L+Y's mainline to Liverpool, but eventually the jointed track got into such a state as to require the lower speed to become the rule. A few years ago the track was completely renewed with cwr and now the ride is smooth enough that drivers occasionally find themselves needing to touch the brake in the dips along the way. Prior to the work taking place Network Rail said that once the track had bedded in the linespeed would be increased to 60. Didn't happen.

Presumably 50mph is a cutoff point in maintenance regime with a higher speed requiring additional effort and expense. The cynic in me says that until the higher speed makes a significant change to the timetable possible NR will save the money rather than up the speed. Unless of course someone else wants to pay (TfGM?)

And just to emphasise how strange the situation is the continuation of that route, Wigan to Southport, was and is a 70mph line, even though by the time the track there was renewed the ride had become decidedly lively.