Could all lines be electrified into Leeds?

[quantinghome]

Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...s-through-manchester-leeds-birmingham.210338/

A large number of the services into Leeds will be on the end of the queue for electrification I’m thinking of Kottingley, Sheffield both routes, Selby, Harrogate and Calder valley as well. Maybe battery or Hydrogen but the economic case for wires is a non starter.

Where did you get this conclusion from? NR's decarbonisation strategy has stated the opposite - electrification is more economic than batteries or hydrogen in almost all situations, other than lightly used rural routes. If we are to get rid of diesel then electrifying all routes into Leeds would be the most efficient way of doing it.

 

[LMS 4F]

Where did you get this conclusion from? NR's decarbonisation strategy has stated the opposite - electrification is more economic than batteries or hydrogen in almost all situations, other than lightly used rural routes. If we are to get rid of diesel then electrifying all routes into Leeds would be the most efficient way of doing it.

I am not opposed to the wires going up but just don’t see a service like Knottingley with one train an hour each way being any sort of priority for a very long while.

 

[quantinghome]

I am not opposed to the wires going up but just don’t see a service like Knottingley with one train an hour each way being any sort of priority for a very long while.

Isn't it 2 tph in normal times? A battery-electric train might work - running on overhead line to Castleford, charging up the battery on the way then switching to battery power for the remainder. That's being proposed for some areas of the network. But not electrifying that stretch would leave an odd gap in overhead line coverage for Grand Central services. Future demand for freight would also be a significant consideration. Network Rail are moving towards a rolling programme of electrification and it would be strange to electrify to Castleford but then leave the 5 mile stretch to Knottingley, which doesn't seem to have any major obstacles to electrification. It may be more efficient to do the whole area in one hit rather than do one bit then come back years later for the rest.

 

[quantinghome]

I hope you are correct but as the money tree is bare now and no doubt for a long time in the future I think this and many other similar lines will be using 30 year old diesels for a long time yet.

I think the past few months have dispelled any myths about the existence of the money tree. It's always there for governments if they want to use it. The government can borrow at virtual zero interest at the moment, so there's never been a better time for some proper long term infrastructure investment.

 

[LMS 4F]

I think the past few months have dispelled any myths about the existence of the money tree. It's always there for governments if they want to use it. The government can borrow at virtual zero interest at the moment, so there's never been a better time for some proper long term infrastructure investment.

Yes you are correct but this all going to be paid back once this lot settles down, if ever. Then in the traditional way it will taxes up and cuts to services and projects. What price then wires on lightly used lines against all the other areas clamouring for money. I fear once again the railway will be at the back of a long queue and don’t even mention HS2.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Isn't it 2 tph in normal times? A battery-electric train might work - running on overhead line to Castleford, charging up the battery on the way then switching to battery power for the remainder. That's being proposed for some areas of the network. But not electrifying that stretch would leave an odd gap in overhead line coverage for Grand Central services. Future demand for freight would also be a significant consideration. Network Rail are moving towards a rolling programme of electrification and it would be strange to electrify to Castleford but then leave the 5 mile stretch to Knottingley, which doesn't seem to have any major obstacles to electrification. It may be more efficient to do the whole area in one hit rather than do one bit then come back years later for the rest.

It's usually 1tph via Castleford and 1tph via Wakefield Westgate. However LMS 4F also cited Harrogate which has up to 4tph: if that doesn't make a case for wiring I'm not sure what does. At only 3-4tpd, the Grand Central services can probably be disregarded. Particularly with regard to wiring the section via Askern on which they are the only passenger service.

 

[supervc-10]

There is no magic money tree- it does all get paid back eventually- but if ever there's a time to spend on infrastructure, it's now, whilst borrowing is cheap and to help stimulate the economy. But that's just my opinion. Appreciate that it's all politics!

I think concentrating on getting the busier lines and the small gaps electrified, and basically aiming to get the 195s off them and onto the lesser used lines to displace the 15x would be a good idea. The 195s aren't going anywhere, and in 30 years I'd hope they'd be running the kind of lines that we normally associate with a single 150 or whatever.

As someone (can't remember who) on here has as their signature- electrify and cascade!

 

[37424]

Where did you get this conclusion from? NR's decarbonisation strategy has stated the opposite - electrification is more economic than batteries or hydrogen in almost all situations, other than lightly used rural routes. If we are to get rid of diesel then electrifying all routes into Leeds would be the most efficient way of doing it.

NR decarbonisation strategy is one thing, getting the money for it is another, if there is any electrification of the routes out of Leeds beyond the main TPE route in the next 15 years I will be amazed.

 

[YorksLad12]

It's usually 1tph via Castleford and 1tph via Wakefield Westgate. However LMS 4F also cited Harrogate which has up to 4tph: if that doesn't make a case for wiring I'm not sure what does. At only 3-4tpd, the Grand Central services can probably be disregarded. Particularly with regard to wiring the section via Askern on which they are the only passenger service.

I think GC can be discounted full stop as it's an unusual route, up to four times per day only, and they don't have bi-mode stock.

Notionally you'd say Calder Valley services would be a prime candidate following on from TRU, but it's a huge route, and if you do Victoria to Leeds via Halifax and Bradford then you'd have to do Halifax to Huddersfield, and Todmorden to Blackburn. So I'd plan Leeds to Harrogate and Leeds to Huddersfield via Halifax as the next stretches, then Halifax to Victoria.

 

[37424]

I think GC can be discounted full stop as it's an unusual route, up to four times per day only, and they don't have bi-mode stock.

Notionally you'd say Calder Valley services would be a prime candidate following on from TRU, but it's a huge route, and if you do Victoria to Leeds via Halifax and Bradford then you'd have to do Halifax to Huddersfield, and Todmorden to Blackburn. So I'd plan Leeds to Harrogate and Leeds to Huddersfield via Halifax as the next stretches, then Halifax to Victoria.

Calder Valley is a strong argument, but you certainly don't need to do Todmorden-Blackburn as part of any Calder Valley Electrification, doing the the fill in through Brighouse yes as it would be comparatively short assuming the main TPE route has already been electrified.

 

[alexl92]

I feel like Leeds - Harrogate needs doing, but the challenge is that I think there'd be uproar if you tried to extend it to Knaresborough. Good luck getting permission to put up knitting across the Viaduct and ruin one of the most photographed views in a town that relies on the tourist economy!

(Photo from Wikimedia commons)

 

[JonathanH]

I feel like Leeds - Harrogate needs doing, but the challenge is that I think there'd be uproar if you tried to extend it to Knaresborough. Good luck getting permission to put up knitting across the Viaduct and ruin one of the most photographed views in a town that relies on the tourist economy!

(Photo from Wikimedia commons)

There are plenty of examples of sympathetic electrification on photogenic bridges and viaducts - eg Maidenhead, Berwick etc.

 

[alexl92]

Hmmm... having googled both, I still think you wouldn't get away with it in Knaresborough without massive objections from the town. They're under Harrogate Borough Council, who have refused Tesco permission on about 4 occasions to open anything bigger than one local store because it would bring the tone of the town down!

 

[Halifaxlad]

Hmmm... having googled both, I still think you wouldn't get away with it in Knaresborough without massive objections from the town. They're under Harrogate Borough Council, who have refused Tesco permission on about 4 occasions to open anything bigger than one local store because it would bring the tone of the town down!

Harrogate Borough Council refused Network Rail permission to install a bar/handrail along that viaduct not so long ago that only just poked out above the parapet. I can see HBC automatically rejecting the idea of wires on it before they have even seen what they would look like. It shouldn't be too difficult to design something sympathetic, as a long as each post was inline with the castellated turrets.

Just need to show the Council what it would look like and give them an ultimatum of having wires or a direct Knaresborough to Leeds service, as if NR can't wire Knaresborough, we might as well just terminate the wires at Harrogate and split the service!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

To answer the OP yes. Leeds - Huddersfield then to York then to Selby and rolling to Hull. Then to Sheffield. Harrogate battery

 

[JKF]

Electrification north of Leeds in the 90s was a real game changer for local services and increased passenger numbers significantly, plus made towns on the route like Shipley and Bingley more desirable places to live (it helps that Leeds Station is very well sited). Similar improvements on other incoming lines could produce the same benefits, although increasing frequency might be hard due to capacity issues, at least until HS2 arrives.

I’ve long thought the line to Bradford Interchange could use a lot of improvement, it feels slow and tired. Electrification could also improve timings such that stations could be added (Armley, Laisterdyke?).

 

[tbtc]

(after the TPE line from Huddersfield to York is finished) Knaresborough to Armley should be the priority IMHO (replace the service east of Knaresborough with an hourly Harrogate - York DMU - that section of line isn't frequent enough to warrant electrification where there are so many other lines unwired).

Instead of wiring east of Knaresborough, you'd be better to focus limited resources on the Aire Valley down to Knottingley - that would allow you to run a half hourly Leeds - Castleford - Knottingley service (replacing the Leeds - Castleford - Sheffield service north of Barnsley) which should be under twenty miles of electrification - but IMHO the line down the Aire Valley through Pontefract is ripe for the kind of transformation in passenger numbers that the line up the Aire Valley through Shipley had thirty years ago.

Wiring the line from Moorthorpe to Sheffield as well as the line from Doncaster to Swinton would come in at under thirty miles and remove one DMU per hour out of Leeds but three DMUs per hour out of Sheffield (so that's more of a South Yorkshire thing than a West Yorkshire one).

Notionally you'd say Calder Valley services would be a prime candidate following on from TRU, but it's a huge route, and if you do Victoria to Leeds via Halifax and Bradford then you'd have to do Halifax to Huddersfield, and Todmorden to Blackburn. So I'd plan Leeds to Harrogate and Leeds to Huddersfield via Halifax as the next stretches, then Halifax to Victoria.

All you'd have to do would be make the "Leeds - Dewsbury - Brighouse - Hebden Bridge" service the same one as the "Leeds - Hebden Bridge - Burnley - Preston" one...

...and then everything from Leeds to Bradford Interchange would run through to Rochdale and Manchester, which would simplify things a lot. You could have a much simpler timetable on the Calder Valley line (e.g. balanced departures from both Leeds and Manchester, but maybe with the services that are "stoppers" one side of Hebden Bridge running as semi-fast the other side of Hebden Bridge?)

One reason to wire the line through Brighouse would be if it meant that the Bradford Interchange - Huddersfield service could be sped up so that you could get away with one EMU (instead of the wasteful situation where we need two DMUs since one unit can't do a round trip of thirty eight miles in an hour).

 

[YorksLad12]

(after the TPE line from Huddersfield to York is finished) Knaresborough to Armley should be the priority IMHO (replace the service east of Knaresborough with an hourly Harrogate - York DMU - that section of line isn't frequent enough to warrant electrification where there are so many other lines unwired).

I disagree. Armley to Harrogate, definitely. But if the proposed redoubling from Knaresborough to York happens, do the whole route and then both Leeds-York routes are done.

Instead of wiring east of Knaresborough, you'd be better to focus limited resources on the Aire Valley down to Knottingley - that would allow you to run a half hourly Leeds - Castleford - Knottingley service (replacing the Leeds - Castleford - Sheffield service north of Barnsley) which should be under twenty miles of electrification - but IMHO the line down the Aire Valley through Pontefract is ripe for the kind of transformation in passenger numbers that the line up the Aire Valley through Shipley had thirty years ago.

Yes... we discussed that in the "what to do with the Hallam Line" thread. You'd have to wire up the Westgate-Kirkgate-Streethouse route though - don't the two Pontefract routes interwork? If you ran that other leg as a separate DMU service it would be under wires from Leeds to Westgate and Monkhill to Knottingley.

All you'd have to do would be make the "Leeds - Dewsbury - Brighouse - Hebden Bridge" service the same one as the "Leeds - Hebden Bridge - Burnley - Preston" one...

...and then everything from Leeds to Bradford Interchange would run through to Rochdale and Manchester, which would simplify things a lot. You could have a much simpler timetable on the Calder Valley line (e.g. balanced departures from both Leeds and Manchester, but maybe with the services that are "stoppers" one side of Hebden Bridge running as semi-fast the other side of Hebden Bridge?)

One reason to wire the line through Brighouse would be if it meant that the Bradford Interchange - Huddersfield service could be sped up so that you could get away with one EMU (instead of the wasteful situation where we need two DMUs since one unit can't do a round trip of thirty eight miles in an hour).

Pass. I haven't looked at the Calder Valley route recently, but will take your word for it. Huddersfield-Leeds via Bradford was previously a service until it was split to allow (Hell-)Hull-Halifax to run of course; it would be nice if it was also done but we'd still have a lot of diesel under wires from other services until the rest of the route was done. Good diversionary route though, if anything happens via Dewsbury.