Blackpool - Manchester Electrification

[LeylandLen]

I live in the Preston area so am aware of serious plans to build another road bridge across the Ribble to the west of Preston joining up to the M55 at .missing junction 2 to cope with expected traffic growth on the Fylde so it would make sense to at least do basic preparations assuming the Blackpool sth branch will be electrified in the distant future with maybe a few passing loops if it cant be doubled again?

 

[CAF397]

Or at minimum bases being constructed/going in. Sure seems strange to me. If you want to keep a project on time, you do stuff elsewhere - surely helps the critical path.

I'm sure I read that steel work work would start to be erected this summer. There's still time.

What does annoy me is the opportunity to do mast bases, and indeed the Chorley station works, could have happened last summer whilst the line was shut every evening and weekend for the Farnworth Tunnel works. Typical railway. If they can pay twice for something they will do.

 

[snowball]

I'm sure I read that steel work work would start to be erected this summer. There's still time.

In January the programme for Lostock to Euxton was this:

Key Milestone Dates- Phase 4 Electrification:

* Euxton to Chorley (Pack 6E)
  + Trial Holes           April 2016
  + Foundations           June 2016
  + Steel Installation    September 2016

* Chorley to Heath Charnock (Pack 6D)
  + Trial Holes           April 2016/May 2016
  + Foundations           September 2016
  + Steel                 February 2017

* Heath Charnock to Adlington (Pack 6C)
  + Trial Holes           April 2016/May 2016
  + Foundations           July 2016/August 2016
  + Steel                 January 2017

* Adlington to Blackrod (Pack 6B)
  + Trial Holes           February 2016
  + Foundations           March 2016/April 2016
  + Steel                 November 2016

* Blackrod to Lostock (Pack 6A)
  + Trial Holes           February 2016
  + Foundations           February 2016/March 2016
  + Steel                 May 2016

 

[GRALISTAIR]

In January the programme for Lostock to Euxton was this:

Exactly - according to that timetable we should have a lot of bases by now and some masts. Worrying.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

In January the programme for Lostock to Euxton was this:

So by now we should have foundations Lostock-Adlington and Chorley-Euxton, and steel Lostock-Blackrod.
All we have (in the 12 months since Balfours walked away) is 20-odd foundations around Buckshaw Parkway, and the 5 trial masts near Adlington which have been there since the turn of the year.
The existing foundations cover maybe 50% of the route (Lostock-Euxton).
And those milestones don't cover Lostock-Salford or Blackpool or Stalybridge, all due for completion within 2 years.

My only thoughts are that maybe NR has diverted the resource to the GW scheme ("all hands to the pump" etc), and maybe now EGIP.

 

[WatcherZero]

Was announced a year ago, diverting resources from Midland Main Line and North West to Great Western.

 

[LDECRexile]

1. Bad news: 8 July 2016, Paul and I could see no evidence of any electrification work from Salford Central to Lostock Junction.

2. News: Princes Bridge is still in place, thundering great crane next to it.

3. Good news: 8 July 2016, ALX400 has sent two photos he took at Blackrod, showing evidence of ACTION.

I can hardly remember how to do this, but here goes:

I've added his shots 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

Thank you ALX

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Was announced a year ago, diverting resources from Midland Main Line and North West to Great Western.

I don't remember that. NW was never "paused", that was MML and TP.
The supposed problem in the NW was the contractor walked off the job.
NR then added 12 months to the completion dates (Hendy), and are once again missing their milestones.

 

[snowball]

I seem to remember speculation, rather than an announcement, about diversion of resources from NW to GW.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I seem to remember speculation, rather than an announcement, about diversion of resources from NW to GW.

It may indeed have been a reason why Balfour Beatty stopped NW work, as they are also doing the Crossrail part of GW.
Though I don't think this was an NR decision, more a commercial one for BB.
NR are supposed to have a new NW contractor working to the milestones you posted upthread.

 

[Lankyline]

I see the appeal of expanding the Blackpool tram system into a Blackpool and Fylde system, With a run up to Blackpool North Station. However I don't understand why you would cut it to Lytham. Would it not make sense taking it to a Kirkham Interchange?

Ideally you would also re-instate it out to Poulton and onto the old Fleetwood line track as well.

I am not old enough to know this, but was the old Central Station demolished so that the M55 could be built all the way into the middle of the town, back in the day when rather than being the polluting monsters we now see them as, cars where the kings of the future.

Blackpool council wanted the land that's why they petitioned the transport minster and look what they did with it uk's biggest car park. The M55 came later once they got their way.
I suggested cutting back to Lytham because there's nothing between there and Kirkham, if Blackpool council got their act together they could create a joined up system between North and South

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Time to dig out the crank handle for the ProgressOmeter!

• Trial holes for OLE bases just north of Salford Crescent
• Road Rail MEWPS parked up for work at Bolton
• large amounts of plant at Lostock (which could be for the junction or the big track slue just south of it)

 

[Geeves]

There have been possessions took around 22:00 every night this week on the line beyond Lostock Junction right the way up to Euxton Junction so this can only be a good sign!

 

[LDECRexile]

Time to dig out the crank handle for the ProgressOmeter!

• Trial holes for OLE bases just north of Salford Crescent
• Road Rail MEWPS parked up for work at Bolton
• large amounts of plant at Lostock (which could be for the junction or the big track slue just south of it)

Am on hols in Devon, have left starting handle at home. Will be tickled pink to get the old jalopy going again.

 

[ALX400]

Thought i could hear something going on over the past few days vibration like noise, sounds good though at least somethings happening finally, them drops under the bridge at station road are only recent

 

[SodTheDrummer]

Time to dig out the crank handle for the ProgressOmeter!

• Trial holes for OLE bases just north of Salford Crescent
• Road Rail MEWPS parked up for work at Bolton
• large amounts of plant at Lostock (which could be for the junction or the big track slue just south of it)

This is indeed good news Mr Locke, thank you Sir.

However (sorry to be the harbinger of doom ) I am worried about the 'bridge issue' - I know you can't reveal any specific details, but can you say if the issue is being dealt with/likely to be dealt with anytime soon?

 

[CAF397]

...large amounts of plant at Lostock (which could be for the junction or the big track slue just south of it)
[/LIST]

Forgive me if that has been covered elsewhere. What track slue? South of Lostock Jn is Beaumont Rd bridge, which is already well clear of any OLE distances (being the huge bridge it is), then the next two bridges have been rebuilt?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Forgive me if that has been covered elsewhere. What track slue? South of Lostock Jn is Beaumont Rd bridge, which is already well clear of any OLE distances (being the huge bridge it is), then the next two bridges have been rebuilt?

Maybe it's to allow a faster speed on the Chorley route, by moving the Wigan junction further east.
Currently 75mph on the Chorley and 35/40mph over the branch junction.
Maybe 90/50 in the future (hopefully)?

 

[LDECRexile]

Back from Devon to find a note from Wrinkley with three photos.

He writes:

I have been looking at all the posts re. the weak bridge near a station that appears to be holding up the electrification work and will need a rebuild. Some people are suggesting it’s the one at Trinity Street, Bolton. I’m not sure about that, the bridge was rebuilt in the 1960s and your photos 5776e, g and i show the bridge built on concrete beams, Philip Phlopp says the problem is caused by salt corrosion of a steel beam. However, the bridge was repaired and relaid in July 2014 including waterproofing to stop water leaking on to the station, so take your pick.

He also added three photos of electrification plant at Lostock Junction, which suggests summat might be about to happen.

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.

Devon produced just one item relevant to this thread, as per the photo below.....

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Well good grief I hope the current Joseph Locke lives a lot longer than the mere 55 years of the previous one !

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Back from Devon to find a note from Wrinkley with three photos.

He writes:<snip>Some people are suggesting it’s the one at Trinity Street, Bolton. I’m not sure about that, the bridge was rebuilt in the 1960s and your photos 5776e, g and i show the bridge built on concrete beams, Philip Phlopp says the problem is caused by salt corrosion of a steel beam. However, the bridge was repaired and relaid in July 2014 including waterproofing to stop water leaking on to the station, so take your pick.

The bridge to be replaced due to salt corrosion is Plymouth Road, Blackpool. It was one of the bridges that someone suggested was the problem structure, but it's not (and it's on the wrong phase of the NW Electrification to boot). I know the suggestions and bridge replacement speculation got into a terrible mess at one point, so apologies to Wrinkley for not being clear enough.

 

[snowball]

I haven't seen any suggestion that the bridge with the clearance problems is weak.

The road over Trinity Street bridge was dualled in the late 60s or early 70s so the bridge may have been reconstructed then.

Similarly Windsor Bridge at Salford Crescent, which has also been named in this thread as a candidate, may have undergone reconstruction either when the Windsor Link was built, or during one of the stages of dualling the A6 through Salford. One of those stages included building the road bridges over University Road and the slip road to Albion Way.

 

[SodTheDrummer]

I haven't seen any suggestion that the bridge with the clearance problems is weak.

The road over Trinity Street bridge was dualled in the late 60s or early 70s so the bridge may have been reconstructed then.

Similarly Windsor Bridge at Salford Crescent, which has also been named in this thread as a candidate, may have undergone reconstruction either when the Windsor Link was built, or during one of the stages of dualling the A6 through Salford. One of those stages included building the road bridges over University Road and the slip road to Albion Way.

Not sure about Crescent as I don't alight there often, but when I last got off at Bolton the other day I stood under the bridge whilst the train went onwards (Clitheroe service) and it seemed to me that there wasn't much clearance with an imaginary pantograph to where I was standing - easily enough for me, but I'm a short arse, but a say 6'9" bloke with a big brolly might conceivably be within striking distance of the potential OLE and I presume NR would need to consider this type of extreme to cover themselves. I'll take some photos next time I'm there to illustrate..

IIRC Trinity street was rebuilt in the 80's when they demolished the original station - some great pics of the old building and its demolition here - http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/gallery/album/1273-bolton-trinity-street-station-1980s/ - again I think due to corrosion issues - a shame, as the original building was much nicer than what we have now (which you could argue is really mainly on Newport Street rather tha Trinity St, but I digress), but at least they have left the platform buildings, even though these seem to be largely unused... The concrete plinth is still there between platform 3 & 4 that carried the supports for the building, which you can see in the photos.

Bolton is very busy at commuter times, hopefully once the new bus station opens it will increase.. We shall see....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well good grief I hope the current Joseph Locke lives a lot longer than the mere 55 years of the previous one !

Indeed.

Reading up on Mr Locke Esq. (Victorian version) it would seem that we have more to thank him for than the Stephensons..(not underestimating G&R S contributions to railway) but...

Locke's greatest legacy is the modern day West Coast Main Line (WCML), which was formed by the joining of the Caledonian, Lancaster & Carlisle, Grand Junction railways to Robert Stephenson's London & Birmingham Railway. As a result, around three-quarters of the WCML's route was planned and engineered by Locke.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Locke#Later_life_and_legacy

 

[wrinkley]

The bridge to be replaced due to salt corrosion is Plymouth Road, Blackpool. It was one of the bridges that someone suggested was the problem structure, but it's not (and it's on the wrong phase of the NW Electrification to boot). I know the suggestions and bridge replacement speculation got into a terrible mess at one point, so apologies to Wrinkley for not being clear enough.

Thank you Philip, but I think the mistake was as much mine as yours. My information re. the bridge came from here. https://www.networkrailmediacentre....ons-trinity-street-bridge-to-start-this-month

Not sure about Crescent as I don't alight there often, but when I last got off at Bolton the other day I stood under the bridge whilst the train went onwards (Clitheroe service) and it seemed to me that there wasn't much clearance with an imaginary pantograph to where I was standing - easily enough for me, but I'm a short arse, but a say 6'9" bloke with a big brolly might conceivably be within striking distance of the potential OLE and I presume NR would need to consider this type of extreme to cover themselves. I'll take some photos next time I'm there to illustrate..

Looking at photos 5776 e, g and i, and assuming that the white bricks are the old size (3" high plus 1/4" mortar), I estimate the height from platform to underside of bridge is approx. 4.26 metres.

 

[CAF397]

It was me who put forward Salford Crescent and Bolton bridges as candidates to the 'problem' bridge, based on what we know about the issue.

The issue raised caused by a change in standards from the height of the OLE to the platform edge - thus a 'low bridge' by today's standards, plus the fact that the problem could be putting the project at risk due to the increased cost.

So we are looking at a station (because hats where the interface is), and out of the stations where bridges haven't been rebuilt (Horwich, Lostock, Bolton, Clifton, Salford Crescent) Horwich appears higher than Bolton and Salford Crsecent. Whilst if it was Lostock or Clifton then these are fairly quiet roads (compared to Bolton of Salford Crescent).

 

[snowball]

My information re. the bridge came from here. https://www.networkrailmediacentre....ons-trinity-street-bridge-to-start-this-month

Neither Firefox nor Windows Explorer will let me read that link - thay say NR's site is improperly configured and a security risk.

 

[wrinkley]

Neither Firefox nor Windows Explorer will let me read that link - thay say NR's site is improperly configured and a security risk.

I have emailed websupport@networkrail.co.uk to get an answer. I could be be that the certificate is out of date. I have seen this message before on other quite genuine major websites.

 

[Mordac]

I have emailed websupport@networkrail.co.uk to get an answer. I could be be that the certificate is out of date. I have seen this message before on other quite genuine major websites.

In the meantime, just delete the s from HTTPS, as this
http://www.networkrailmediacentre.c...ons-trinity-street-bridge-to-start-this-month

 

[wrinkley]

In the meantime, just delete the s from HTTPS, as this
http://www.networkrailmediacentre.c...ons-trinity-street-bridge-to-start-this-month

Thanks

 

[rebmcr]

It could be be that the certificate is out of date.

No, they're just using the wrong one. The site is hosted on Microsoft's "Azure" lease-a-server system, and the certificate being used is only valid for that base service.

NR's web developers should have created their own certificate that also lists each of the web addresses that they want to put there (such as networkrailmediacentre.co.uk), and replaced the basic certificate with it.