• 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!

Has electrification to Windermere been authorised?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
21,915
Location
Mold, Clwyd

BantamMenace

Member
Joined
2 Dec 2013
Messages
573
Does this announcement mean that the Windermere branch will be staying with TPE and not transferring to Northern.

(N.B. I may have missed something that has already confirmed it will be staying with TPE)
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,234
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Does this announcement mean that the Windermere branch will be staying with TPE and not transferring to Northern.

(N.B. I may have missed something that has already confirmed it will be staying with TPE)

I don't think that's been confirmed. It'd be an option for Northern to operate it using 319s, perhaps portion worked to/from Manchester with a Blackpool EMU to reinstate the through service.

Neil
 

21C101

Established Member
Joined
19 Jul 2014
Messages
2,559
Yes, good news. But nothing about Hull.
That might be above Baroness Kramer's pay grade though.
Hopefully more from George Osborne next week.

Quelle Surprise. Must be an election coming up soon....

Westmorland and Lonsdale is a constituency represented in the House of Commons of the UK Parliament since 2005 by Tim Farron, a Liberal Democrat. The constituency is based on the South Lakeland district of Cumbria. Important towns by size in the constituency include Kendal, Windermere and Kirkby Lonsdale. It is named for the Westmorland and Lonsdale districts of Cumbria.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westmorland_and_Lonsdale_(UK_Parliament_constituency)


Susan Veronica Kramer, Baroness Kramer, PC (née Richards; born 22 July 1950) is a British Liberal Democrat politician. She was Member of Parliament (MP) for Richmond Park from 2005 to 2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Kramer,_Baroness_Kramer
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
Does this announcement mean that the Windermere branch will be staying with TPE and not transferring to Northern.

Proposed idea in the Northern/TPE consultation is for TPE to run Manchester Airport to Scotland and possibly Liverpool to Scotland and all other North West services to transfer to Northern.
 

Olaf

Member
Joined
29 Mar 2014
Messages
1,054
Location
UK
Been officially green lit today, £16m for 10 miles of electrification, target date 2017.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/rail-electrification-plan-for-lake-district

Imagine this announcement timing is to provide clarity for TPE/Northern bidders.

This paragraph is not very clear:
Network Rail will now develop a detailed plan for the work, which could be completed as early as 2017.

Is that saying that the detailed plan could be ready as early as {start of/end of} 2017, or that the electrification implementation will be completed by the same, or that electric services will start by same????

There is no corresponding announcement by NR that I can see.
 
Last edited:

EltonRoad

Member
Joined
2 Jun 2009
Messages
1,029
Location
Kendal
Why don't they put in a siding at Windermere while they're at it. Then we could see the return of excursion trains, including steam, surely an ideal destination. Who knows maybe even a direct service to London!
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
8,144
Location
Leeds
Today's announcement prompts the question, where is Lostock Junction to Wigan up to? The two are listed together in the CP5 Enhancements Delivery Plan as under discussion.
 

21C101

Established Member
Joined
19 Jul 2014
Messages
2,559
Why don't they put in a siding at Windermere while they're at it. Then we could see the return of excursion trains, including steam, surely an ideal destination. Who knows maybe even a direct service to London!

The Windermere branch is basically a long siding. I guess thats why the wiring is so cheap. Basically a few miles of plain line catenary and no substations.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
19,676
Why don't they put in a siding at Windermere while they're at it. Then we could see the return of excursion trains, including steam, surely an ideal destination. Who knows maybe even a direct service to London!

Wouldnt even get off the fag packet unless it was done to up the frequency on the line. Nothing but logistics is stopping a direct service now. One thing it will sort is the tortuous level crossing restrictions.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Today's announcement prompts the question, where is Lostock Junction to Wigan up to? The two are listed together in the CP5 Enhancements Delivery Plan as under discussion.

Wigan was authorised about a year ago.
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
8,144
Location
Leeds
Wigan was authorised about a year ago.

The 13 Dec 2013 press release gave that impression, but was it fully authorised or was put it in the same semi-authorised state that Windermere was in until today? I suspect the latter. The CFP5 Enhancements Delivery plan seems to think so.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
9,213
Location
SE London
Wouldnt even get off the fag packet unless it was done to up the frequency on the line. Nothing but logistics is stopping a direct service now.

A siding at Windermere won't help the frequency - you'd need a passing loop somewhere along the line to allow higher frequencies. All a siding would do is give somewhere for a 'special' train to sit while the regular service runs up and down the line. But the rub is - it could only do that if you also added some signalling along the line. I'm guessing that at present there is no signalling at all on the line - it runs on the basis that only one train at a time can occupy the entire branch. I'm also guessing that adding some signalling where there is currently none would bump up the cost a lot. Rather hard to justify if it's only for irregular excursions, but perhaps a bit easier to justify if it was for a loop to allow for a more frequent day-to-day service.

Although I realize nothing like that is going to happen in the foreseeable future, I hope the electrification is done in a way that does allow for the possibility of adding a passing loop later on, as I'm sure the branch could easily support a more frequent service, at least in the summer.

One thing it will sort is the tortuous level crossing restrictions.

I'm guessing you particularly mean the one at Burneside. It'd be very nice if that was sorted part of the electrification - but is there any reason to think it will be?
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
35,419
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
Which of the two very small halts on the branch line has a very low speed restriction and a narrow country lane the crosses the line....Burneside or Staveley?

Would electrification pose any problems with high-laden hay lorries that are said to use this narrow lane, as there are not any real alternative road routes in the hill areas on the other side of the line?
 

Elecman

Established Member
Joined
31 Dec 2013
Messages
3,572
Location
Lancashire
Burneside has 2 level crossings i by a very minor road either side of the station and another level crossing nearer to Stavely .
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
19,676
A siding at Windermere won't help the frequency - you'd need a passing loop somewhere along the line to allow higher frequencies. All a siding would do is give somewhere for a 'special' train to sit while the regular service runs up and down the line. But the rub is - it could only do that if you also added some signalling along the line. I'm guessing that at present there is no signalling at all on the line - it runs on the basis that only one train at a time can occupy the entire branch. I'm also guessing that adding some signalling where there is currently none would bump up the cost a lot. Rather hard to justify if it's only for irregular excursions, but perhaps a bit easier to justify if it was for a loop to allow for a more frequent day-to-day service.

Which was my point, you have no chance whatsoever of new infrastructure based on one off trains.

I'm guessing you particularly mean the one at Burneside. It'd be very nice if that was sorted part of the electrification - but is there any reason to think it will be?

Yes as it would decrease the journey time further which counts massively in the whole life costs. I would be very surprised if it wasnt part of the project.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
The 13 Dec 2013 press release gave that impression, but was it fully authorised or was put it in the same semi-authorised state that Windermere was in until today? I suspect the latter. The CFP5 Enhancements Delivery plan seems to think so.

It was in semi authorised state before then similar to Windermere was until today, approved subject to acceptable business case. last December they were happy with the business case so signed off the cash. The government terminology to look out for is 'will be carried out' without the disclaimer 'subject to'.
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
Quelle Surprise. Must be an election coming up soon....

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/rail-electrification-plan-for-lake-district
"Passengers in the Lake District can look forward to faster, greener and more reliable train journeys"

Are they implying that the current 185-worked service is not reliable? Just wait until 350s start working the line... :lol:

Not sure if the election has anything to do with it. With Windermere only being served by modern 185s I doubt the majority of people see electrification and retaining the same service frequency as an improvement. In fact with the plan being for Windermere to transfer to Northern regardless it likely means older trains will take over from the 185s.

Now if there had been an announcement that Windermere would get an increase in frequency or an hourly direct service to Manchester then you could question whether it's been announced now due to the upcoming election.
 

Class 170101

On Moderation
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
8,661
Even so, at £1m per single track km it's pricey.

I would agree.

I am not expert when it comes to electrification but surely there must be an opportunity to implement a Paisley Canal style electrification programme to reduce the costs further?
 
Last edited:

21C101

Established Member
Joined
19 Jul 2014
Messages
2,559
Not sure if the election has anything to do with it. With Windermere only being served by modern 185s I doubt the majority of people see electrification and retaining the same service frequency as an improvement. In fact with the plan being for Windermere to transfer to Northern regardless it likely means older trains will take over from the 185s.

Now if there had been an announcement that Windermere would get an increase in frequency or an hourly direct service to Manchester then you could question whether it's been announced now due to the upcoming election.

I would expect that in April, just before the election....;)
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
21,915
Location
Mold, Clwyd
I would agree.
I am not expert when it comes to electrification but surely there must be an opportunity to implement a Paisley Canal style electrification programme to reduce the costs further?

Network Rail usually wants to upgrade lines during electrification (eg the level crossings mentioned earlier), apart from the essential clearance work.
It's always difficult knowing where the costs come from.

The NR Electrification RUS (2009) quotes unit costs of £500K-£650K per stkm as the then baseline, with opportunities for NR to improve on these rates from economies of scale and design improvements.
So £1m per stkm on the simplest of branch lines does not sound like progress to me (nor the cost overruns on the GW scheme, which should have economies of scale if any project does).
It all means that future electrification schemes are that much harder to justify.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
20,363
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
A siding at Windermere won't help the frequency - you'd need a passing loop somewhere along the line to allow higher frequencies. All a siding would do is give somewhere for a 'special' train to sit while the regular service runs up and down the line. But the rub is - it could only do that if you also added some signalling along the line. I'm guessing that at present there is no signalling at all on the line - it runs on the basis that only one train at a time can occupy the entire branch. I'm also guessing that adding some signalling where there is currently none would bump up the cost a lot. Rather hard to justify if it's only for irregular excursions, but perhaps a bit easier to justify if it was for a loop to allow for a more frequent day-to-day service.

Although I realize nothing like that is going to happen in the foreseeable future, I hope the electrification is done in a way that does allow for the possibility of adding a passing loop later on, as I'm sure the branch could easily support a more frequent service, at least in the summer.



I'm guessing you particularly mean the one at Burneside. It'd be very nice if that was sorted part of the electrification - but is there any reason to think it will be?

There is some signalling on the line, however this is solely to provide protection for the MCG crossing near Burneside, and also protection for at least one other crossing. If I remember correctly, there is a strangely-numbered 'signal A' just on the Oxenholme side of Staveley for this purpose. Apart from this, the starting signal at Oxenholme admits trains to the entire branch, once in possession of the train staff which is obtained from an instrument on Oxenholme platform.
 

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,712
There was talk about 12 years ago in the North West Evening Mail or the Westmorland Gazette of having a passing loop at Kendal or Burneside and having a double platform at Windermere but neither of which have been implemented. I think Arriva Trains Northern wanted to run trains along there but I am not sure where from but the capacity wasn't there.

I noticed some residents mention on Twitter that they are concerned that they will get Class 319s on the branch which they don't want as they are older than the 185s currently used but we will have to wait and see what will be allocated to the Windermere branch.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,234
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I noticed some residents mention on Twitter that they are concerned that they will get Class 319s on the branch which they don't want as they are older than the 185s currently used but we will have to wait and see what will be allocated to the Windermere branch.

Another thing that potentially *could* be done with it which might be of benefit would be to convert it to a tram, and continue the service on from Windermere station down the hill to Bowness. Providing the extra stations and a passing loop would be far cheaper for light rail.

Neil
 

spongsdad

Member
Joined
17 Sep 2013
Messages
160
Another thing that potentially *could* be done with it which might be of benefit would be to convert it to a tram, and continue the service on from Windermere station down the hill to Bowness. Providing the extra stations and a passing loop would be far cheaper for light rail.

Neil
That might produce some limitations on through services to Manchester Airport though; unless of course Manchester Metrolink have some undisclosed plans :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top