Electrification of Fylde line

[umontu]

When the electrification starts on this line will there be any other improvements along with it?
And at Kirkham and Wesham today I wondered if the fast lines would be moved together, incidentally I have no idea which is up or down, seems like an awful waste of space and extra steel.

Maybe there could be a better use of that land, not that it needs another platform.

http://rpmedia.ask.com/ts?u=/wikipe...x-Kirkham_&_Wesham_railway_station_240-25.jpg

 

[driver9000]

Very little is known of the actual details included in electrification. The Up Fast is the line furthest away from the platforms (Up is towards Preston). It was slewed by the LMS before the war, they were planning to put an extra island in the space. The space was occupied by Kirkham station signal box.

 

[umontu]

Very little is known of the actual details included in electrification. The Up Fast is the line furthest away from the platforms (Up is towards Preston). It was slewed by the LMS before the war, they were planning to put an extra island in the space. The space was occupied by Kirkham station signal box.

Thanks driver9000 for the reply.

 

[Whistler40145]

Will Network Rail close all the Signal Boxes on the Fylde line & transfer control to Preston?

 

[driver9000]

Apart from the actual electrification, nothing else has been mentioned about infrastructure or signalling changes for the Fylde lines.

Full TCB and colour lighting wouldn't surprise me though. We'll have to wait and see really.

 

[Whistler40145]

I know new Signal Gantries & Signals were installed between Poulton-le-Fylde and Singleton, would this be to replace old equipment or preparing for electrification?

 

[driver9000]

The only new signal is PT69 at Poulton on the Up which replaced the old PT69 which was on the far side of the bridge at the station on the Up end. The colour light Intermediate block signals have been there for a long time (1990 rings a bell), although I believe they are spaced for TCB and have blanked out aspects as necessary.

The other new signal heads are Blackpool North No.2 Down distant and Home signal placed when No.1 was abolished, although they haven't moved those signals.

 

[umontu]

Is there any documentation online on this besides news articles?

 

[lancastrian]

Well I hope that they keep the fast lines through Kirkham & Wesham. What is needed is for the planned platform between the fast lines to be built, the access can be from the over bridge. But sadly knowing how things tend to be, they will proberbly rip up the fast lines, then need to replace them at rediculous extra cost in the near future.

 

[Whistler40145]

I expect that all Signal Boxes will close, transferring control to Preston Power Box?

 

[boing_uk]

Well I hope that they keep the fast lines through Kirkham & Wesham. What is needed is for the planned platform between the fast lines to be built, the access can be from the over bridge. But sadly knowing how things tend to be, they will proberbly rip up the fast lines, then need to replace them at rediculous extra cost in the near future.

They may be known as the "fast lines" but certainly in the down direction they are slower than the slow lines. Kirkham just needs remodelling, with the Up Fast re-aligned on to the LMS platform island and the slows actually being a loop off the main line, rather than the current arrangement, which smacks of BR remodelling on the cheap.

 

[Whistler40145]

I know many trains from Blackpool North use the Kirkham avoiding line, but how many, if any, use it in the opposite direction?

 

[boing_uk]

All trains, unless those stopping at Kirkham use the Up Fast (although very very occasionally for whatever reason they are routed on to the Up Slow - only happened to trains Ive been on twice in three years).

The Down Fast however, I think it really depends on the whim of the signaller and whether anything is coming off the south fylde. Occasionally my morning train comes off the south line while a TPE is heading past on the fast, although a number of times the TPE has been standing at the signal on the slow.

The current layout really just seems odd, for through trains having to negotiate a slower turnout than trains stopping at the station. Its as though BR said "right, the fast lines are going, lets just tack them to the slow lines here and bodge it all together - there; fixed it!".

 

[Whistler40145]

boing_uk, what Kirkham requires is the track layout remodelling & installing bi-directional signals on all lines, build a new platform on the through lines, long enough for two sets of EMUs coupled together or a Pendolino, build a new station entrance, this would become the main platforms.

The current island platform would remain, but with one line removed (current Preston bound line), the track would be remodelled to a single bi-directional line from Kirkham North Jn, whereby trains from Blackpool South would use the same platform, include a line towards Blackpool North & new single lead junction, build a new spur at Kirkham South Jn towards Preston.

Through trains wouldn't have to change lines.

Then remodel Kirkham South Jn, with separate tracks for Blackpool North & Blackpool South lines.

 

[boing_uk]

Thats a bit overkill for the number of trains using the station and would require alot of expensive infrastructure, not least 2 lifts (existing and new platforms) and the ongoing expenses of extra lighting etc. Why does it need bi-di signalling for instance? Sure, the Up Slow is bi di through the platforms - makes sense really - but other lines? Why? If approach speed is the concern, then higher speed S&C for the turnouts and crossovers, not new platforms!

The current arrangement works fine enough and if the line is converted to TCB I am sure there is plenty of capacity left. It just needs tweaking so that the station is a loop off the main line to permit the non-stopping trains to pass at speed. It doesnt need - unless there is a MASSIVE expansion of Kirkham and Wesham in terms of population and passenger usage - four platforms and the additional associated running costs thereon.

Keep it simple to build, simple to maintain. That is enough for those lines.

Niceties of course would be increasing the linespeed betweek Kirkham and Poulton to 75mph for all trains and a dynamic loop between Ansdell and St. Annes on the south fylde.

 

[umontu]

I agree a loop on the south fylde line is needed.
I can't see much being done at Kirkham any time soon, concidering the recent stairs cover that has been put in it might be a waste.

Having a second platform big enough for a pendolino is a must imho, but since Poulton has just been made shorter and currently more trains serve there than Kirkham I can't see there being much reason why that would happen.

Interestingly if there has been talk of the trams somehow using the Blackpool south line to Kirkham and Preston then maybe it stands to reason that the entire network of the south Fylde, North and, if PWRS get their line cleared, the Thornton branch should be thought of in the same plans.

If there was a way round the low floor trams on the high floor platforms it would a great idea to have the station at Kirkham set up with the current platform as a tram platform.

 

[boing_uk]

Trams using the south fylde to Preston? Who thought that one up?

IMO, if trams are to go from Blackpool to Preston, they should really be running on new formation via Freckleton, with street running through St. Annes, Lytham, Warton and the Preston waterside areas, opening up improved communiting and leisure paths to Preston and BAE.

While I applaud the efforts of the group trying to re-open the Fleetwood branch, I feel that this line would provide a much better transport link as a high speed tram to Poulton from Fleetwood, of course maintaining a heavy rail function should industry aspirations for the Fleetwood area come to fruition.

Of course all of this is supposition, without having hard data to support them. Without an in-depth, detailed and completely impartial census of travel requirements around the Blackbool suburban area, there is no way any scheme is going to attract funding or remain profitable because there are too many unknowns, much like the fanciful SELRAP project.

 

[umontu]

Trams using the south fylde to Preston? Who thought that one up?

This has been floating around for a while now, just google it.
I personally think if it was done in a similar style to metrolink in Manchester it might be a good system, then expansion via Warton etc might be possible later on. I seem to remember frequent times I'd be waiting for the 61 from Blackpool to Preston and a 68 would turn up, followed by a chorus of 60+ bas pass holders yelling something along the lines of "It goes round all the houses, I'm not getting on that one."
So the idea of sending the trams by Warton might not be popular, though I won't deny might be a good transport solution.

Anyhoo back to the trains and Blackpool North.

 

[Whistler40145]

My ideas were a bit ambitious!

To increase the line speed to possibly 75 mph, both junctions be remodelled as follows.

Kirkham North Junction - realign the current line towards Blackpool North by using the land of the dormant sidings that run alongside the Blackpool bound line, this could provide a longer & less curved link, meaning trains could have built up speed.

At present, trains travelling from Preston that could use the avoiding line cannot do so without firstly crossing over to the Preston bound line, then gaining access to the avoiding lines.

Why not simplify the layout by installing sets of points enabling trains to gain direct access to the avoiding lines?

This could improve signalling & pathing.

 

[boing_uk]

But why? You are over-complicating the issue for the pattern of train usage on this line.

Sorry for the over simplification, but I am only trying to show diagramatically the layout as attached (for info the Up Main to Up Loop crossovers are switch diamonds over the Down Main).

 

[Whistler40145]

OK
1. What use are the avoiding lines, especially if the majority of trains only use it towards Preston?
2. Why should trains travelling from Preston have to first cross to the Preston Bound line to access the avoiding line?

Why not duplicate Kirkham North Jn, but in reverse, thus creating a faster Junction?

 

[boing_uk]

The avoiding lines become the main line? The slow lines become a loop off the main? I dont see the problem? Non stopping trains to/from Blackpool and Preston use the main, stopping trains use the loops.

 

[umontu]

The avoiding lines become the main line? The slow lines become a loop off the main? I dont see the problem? Non stopping trains to/from Blackpool and Preston use the main, stopping trains use the loops.

My only, and I'll admit personally, problem with that is that it encourages the idea of avoiding Kirkham, I had to wait at Preston today for more than 20 minutes while two trains stopped at Poulton and Blackpool North but avoided Kirkham, really ****ed me off when they were on time but the one I could get was delayed. I don't mind changing but what Kirkham needs is more trains and more people buying tickets (the G4s barrier at Preston should see to that...) then investment, however that's my utopian idea.

 

[lancastrian]

Trams using the south fylde to Preston? Who thought that one up?

IMO, if trams are to go from Blackpool to Preston, they should really be running on new formation via Freckleton, with street running through St. Annes, Lytham, Warton and the Preston waterside areas, opening up improved communiting and leisure paths to Preston and BAE.

While I applaud the efforts of the group trying to re-open the Fleetwood branch, I feel that this line would provide a much better transport link as a high speed tram to Poulton from Fleetwood, of course maintaining a heavy rail function should industry aspirations for the Fleetwood area come to fruition.

Of course all of this is supposition, without having hard data to support them. Without an in-depth, detailed and completely impartial census of travel requirements around the Blackbool suburban area, there is no way any scheme is going to attract funding or remain profitable because there are too many unknowns, much like the fanciful SELRAP project.

Well I don't know about who came up with the daft idea of converting the South Fylde Line to Tram usage. Just another crazy idea from those who keep looking for a supposed "cheap" option. What is really needed on this line is for it to be redoubled from Kirkham through to Lytham. It cannot go much further due to the way they have blocked the line at Ansdel. Then a loop needs to be put in at St Annes, unless when they sold of the land for the supermarket has made this impracticable. In which case the loop needs to be just past St Annes on the Blackpool side. Then using some of the old Trackbed it should be extended from South on to the site of Central, putting in a island platform, so that two trains can be accomodated there.

On top of this Wrea Green Station needs to be reopened. As there are over bridges at both Wrea Green and at Lytham, then a access ramp can be used at both stations, saving the costs of installing lifts. At Moss Side, as the access is on the level, then no lifts or footbridge is required.

With regards to the Fleetwood line, yet again another shortsighted closure, which needs to be reversed as soon as possible. It can be served by either running trains just from Poulton, or even by running them from Blackpool North and reversing them at Poulton. If this is done then both platforms at Poulton need to be signalled bi-directional.

What is really needed with services in the North of England is some common sense thinking and seeing what is actually needed, not just what our political leaders think that is needed.

 

[Whistler40145]

Lancastrian, I also think it's a daft idea for Trams to replace Trains on the South Fylde line!

As for the Fleetwood service, Poulton would have bi-directional Signalling if Preston Power Box controlled the whole line.

Does anyone know who owns the land of the former Poulton avoiding line?

 

[umontu]

Lancastrian as I believe I've pointed out before in some previous discussions the Wrea Green station can not be opened on its former sight, it's at the end of a yard that was, at least when I was younger, owned by Warings who have hgv's driving round there.
However right before the bridge would be great if the farmer were to sell their land there.

Based on what has become of the former track bed between Blackpool South and Houndshill I can't see any line being reopened, partly due to the pedestrian crossings there now, the road using the bridges, the car parks and the general redevelopment of the land there.
Maybe Blackpool FC would want a station though...

As for the trams on the south line, it's not bad an idea until someone points out that the floor height, the single track, the location they'd terminate, the imaginary link between Lytham road and the prom make it all difficult.

 

[driver9000]

Does anyone know who owns the land of the former Poulton avoiding line?

One of the local farmers.

The Tram idea for the South line came about when the Penistone Tram-Train was first being discussed, the idea seems to be dead in the water now (thankfully).

If trains were to run Blackpool-Fleetwood reversing at Poulton there wouldn't need to be bi-directional signalling, the current signalling can already handle such moves - although the shunt signals on the Up line would need converting into main aspect signals. The Down line has a Shunt limit for trains coming off the Fleetwood line enabling them to reverse in the platform for Blackpool North.

I don't think we are going to see much in the way of improvements to the Blackpool South line - as much as a boost in the service frequency would bring there is too much reluctance to spend money or even show interest in even a simple passing loop at St Annes or Lytham, which in my opinion are the best options for a loop mainly because the platforms are still there. Remodelling Kirkham South Junction would be a huge benefit in making the junction an easier turn out to and from the Fast lines if we are to see long distance or express local services. In the Down direction trains wouldn't have to slow to by being brought down to a red for the 30mph crossings, instead they could be given flashing yellows and - say for arguments sake 60mph crossings (presuming they stay as the diverging line). The Down Fast is already cleared for 75mph between South and North Junctions before falling to 60/70mph beyond North Junction. The Up Fast could have the 40mph eased by slewing the track back into a straighter line and maybe even keeping the speed up at 70 only falling for the junction then rising to 75mph (again, presuming the Fast lines stay as the diverging route). Then again if they were to go to all that trouble, making the Fast lines the 'main' route would be the better option.

 

[boing_uk]

Thing is, does the South Fylde line need anything more than a half-hourly service? If not, then a single loop between Ansdell and St Annes is all thats needed. However I quite agree that the line needs extending in to Blackpool as far as Chapel St.

Re-opening Wrea Green may create better journey options for that village, but as with anything, supposition and reality are two different things. Which is why there needs to be a complete and thorough travel census across Fylde and Wyre to determine the best options for investment. Niceties aren't really an option...

 

[umontu]

Which is why there needs to be a complete and thorough travel census across Fylde and Wyre to determine the best options for investment. Niceties aren't really an option...

Can't see a census happening but I agree, I do know some people in Wrea Green that would welcome the station, stories of coming back from Manchester Airport after being in Las Vegas then walking from Kirkham & Wesham while jet-lagged spring to mind.

 

[driver9000]

Thing is, does the South Fylde line need anything more than a half-hourly service? If not, then a single loop between Ansdell and St Annes is all thats needed. However I quite agree that the line needs extending in to Blackpool as far as Chapel St.

In reality, no it doesn't. If a 30 minute service was to exist I presume the 'extra' service would terminate at Preston. Extending the line beyond it's current terminus at Blackpool South is very unlikely to happen given the costs involved with acquiring the land and all the other associated costs involved extending the line which would only get as far as Bloomfield Road (1 mile or so?) before hitting obstacles built on the track bed, assuming the council would sell the land those car parks are on in the first place. I doubt the traffic levels would be there to warrant extending the line apart from on match days, which may yet be a temporary peak because before Blackpool were promoted very little football traffic was carried to Blackpool South.

A performance study was carried out last year which focused on the Fylde lines involving Network Rail, TPE and Northern looking at ways to potentially improve the Fylde lines.