Hebden Bridge-Burnley closing for several months?

[Arglwydd Golau]

See this thread for details and pics.

Thanks for the link to the thread, must have missed that as I try to keep an eye out for places that I know, I've since read a couple of local newspaper reports which states that the line was back in action four hours later which seems rapid by today's standards.

 

[Darren R]

I've just happened upon an old press release on the NetworkRail website, dated 3rd May 2013. The story is about a public information event on May 11th, which obviously is long gone, but it does give more information about the planned works.

Summary:

Local people in Burnley and Todmorden will have the chance to find out more about the planned refurbishment of Holme Tunnel at a public information event on Saturday 11th May.

Network Rail needs to carry out a programme of work to repair and strengthen the 250m long Holme Tunnel near the village of Holme Chapel. The work will result in the closure of the railway between Burnley Manchester Road and Todmorden for 20 weeks between November 2013 and March 2014.

Over time, movement of the ground around the tunnel has led to the tunnel lining becoming severely distorted. A 20mph speed restriction is currently in place for trains running through the tunnel, but remedial work is needed to make sure trains can continue to use the tunnel in future.

As well as relining and strengthening sections of the tunnel, allowing the speed limit to be raised to 45mph, Network Rail will also be laying new track, installing improved drainage and rebuilding the severely damaged Todmorden Portal.

Network Rail’s contractors will set up a site compound in Holme Chapel starting on Monday 20 May to allow for the enabling works, which are scheduled to run from July to November.

The main tunnel blockade will run from Saturday 9 November 2013 to Sunday 30 March 2014, during which time a replacement bus service will operate between Burnley Manchester Road and Todmorden and Burnley Manchester Road and Hebden Bridge.

Link to the full article (there's also a photo of the inside of the tunnel):
http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/News-Releases/Burnley-and-Todmorden-rail-users-urged-to-find-out-more-about-Holme-Tunnel-upgrade-1d5b.aspx

Pity I didn't notice it in time to go to the meeting, but at least we have more details now and confirmation buses will be running from Burnley Manchester Road.

I did wonder why there are replacement buses to Todmorden as well as Hebden Bridge?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I did wonder why there are replacement buses to Todmorden as well as Hebden Bridge?

Would this be as a result of the location of the A646 valley road (Burnley Road) in the area that leads directly into Todmorden, then proceeding onwards to Hebden Bridge.

If you wanted to use a minor road that would avoid Todmorden, there is, of course, the eons-old route to Hebden Bridge from the Burnley area, via Blackshaw Head and Heptonstall, but noting the time of winter when the Holme Tunnel will be closed, with the cold winds blowing over Stansfield Moor (shades of Wuthering Heights), would not make this a proposition to look forward to...

 

[Grumpy]

Raising the speed limit to 45mph is all very well, but is there some reason why it couldn't be higher? The whole route gives the impression of lack of ambition with trains ambling along at steam age speeds. Last time I used this route the speeds at Hall Road jn were only 5/10 mph

 

[crispy1978]

This is a 7 day a week closure I assume?

I will be going from Scarborough to Accrington 4 or 5 times in that period of time. And I hate rail replacement buses - so might have to source an alternative route!!!

 

[142094]

This is a 7 day a week closure I assume?

I will be going from Scarborough to Accrington 4 or 5 times in that period of time. And I hate rail replacement buses - so might have to source an alternative route!!!

Full 20 weeks - quite hard to do the work without closing both lines for that length of time unfortunately.

 

[Darren R]

Raising the speed limit to 45mph is all very well, but is there some reason why it couldn't be higher? The whole route gives the impression of lack of ambition with trains ambling along at steam age speeds. Last time I used this route the speeds at Hall Road jn were only 5/10 mph

I think the reason it can't be raised higher is because NetworkRail can't be sure there will be no further movement. The area is quite unstable and I think there may be an old abandoned spoilheap above the tunnel. I think there used to be a coal minehead just nearby the southern portal to the tunnel.

The low speed limits overall are mostly as a result of the very tight curvature and severe gradients af the route, rather than the state of the infrastructure. Journey times from Burnley Manchester Road to Hebden Bridge are 23 minutes at the moment, compared to 26 mins in 1947 with an extra stop at Stansfield Hall to serve Todmorden. I tend to agree about the low turnout speeds at Hall Royd Jn though - it is very restrictive. I'm guessing this is because when the area was remodelled and resignalled in the early 1970s there was very little coming over Copy Pit and mostly consisted of freight. The only regular passenger services at that time was the summer Saturdays Only services from West Yorkshire to Blackpool.

Would this be as a result of the location of the A646 valley road (Burnley Road) in the area that leads directly into Todmorden, then proceeding onwards to Hebden Bridge.

If you wanted to use a minor road that would avoid Todmorden, there is, of course, the eons-old route to Hebden Bridge from the Burnley area, via Blackshaw Head and Heptonstall, but noting the time of winter when the Holme Tunnel will be closed, with the cold winds blowing over Stansfield Moor (shades of Wuthering Heights), would not make this a proposition to look forward to...

I hadn't considered the route the replacement buses would take, but yes it would have to be over the A646 (the Heptonstall route is a great drive - but it's not a route for coaches!) and that would mean it virtually driving past Todmorden station so it makes sense. I read it as meaning a bus service between Burnley Manchester Rd and Hebden Bridge, and another route to Todmorden. But in recent years there have been numerous weekend closures of Copy Pit and bustitutions, and I don't think they've ever served Todmorden as well as Hebden Bridge before. It made me wonder if there was any connexion with the Todmorden Curve re-opening.

The thought occurs to me though - how are trains going to terminate at Burnley Manchester Road? There is neither signalling to allow wrong-line working from Gannow Junction, nor the facility to turn trains back without them having to go through the tunnel to use the crossover at Copy Pit.

 

[edwin_m]

They could probably set up pilotman working between Gannow Jn and Manchester Road, using the down line in both directios so that all trains serve the platform at Manchester Road which has level access and an area alongside where the coaches can turn round.

It's a shame nothing can terminate at Todmorden from the Hebden Bridge direction as this would shorten the bus journey. It probably becomes possible when the new junction for the curve is put in. If all buses call at Todmorden it may be quicker to use one of the Leeds-Manchester trains to/from there rather than the bus to Hebden Bridge.

 

[Grumpy]

I think the reason it can't be raised higher is because NetworkRail can't be sure there will be no further movement. The area is quite unstable and I think there may be an old abandoned spoilheap above the tunnel. I think there used to be a coal minehead just nearby the southern portal to the tunnel.

The low speed limits overall are mostly as a result of the very tight curvature and severe gradients af the route, rather than the state of the infrastructure. Journey times from Burnley Manchester Road to Hebden Bridge are 23 minutes at the moment, compared to 26 mins in 1947 with an extra stop at Stansfield Hall to serve Todmorden. I tend to agree about the low turnout speeds at Hall Royd Jn though - it is very restrictive. I'm guessing this is because when the area was remodelled and resignalled in the early 1970s there was very little coming over Copy Pit and mostly consisted of freight. The only regular passenger services at that time was the summer Saturdays Only services from West Yorkshire to Blackpool.



.

Darren-thanks for that. So approx. 70 years on and no improvement in journey times (apart from 3 minutes saved by the Stansfield station closure). Difficult to see how a 158 with a better power/weight ratio,better acceleration and braking than whatever was running in 1947 couldn't improve matters.

Similarly it's 40 years since the Hall Royd area was remodelled but surely the pointwork will have been replaced since then and the opportunity lost to improve matters. It needs 70mph turnouts.

Whilst I accept there are some curves, much of the route is fairly straightish and should be capable of higher speeds. I just get the impression that there is no interest in the service-perhaps because it doesn't serve Manchester. Yet it connects some significant population centres and has potential.

Given the tunnel is only 250m or so long and there is nothing of much value above it I wonder if simply opening it out might have been a better long term solution, given the instability problems. Might even have been quicker.

 

[edwin_m]

I believe there is also an issue with ground conditions, which affects not only the tunnels but also the formation itself. There was certainly an alarming bulge in one of the retaining walls last time I was up that way.

When Hall Royd was re-signalled in the early 70s there were still sidings in the middle of the triangle which may have constrained the junction layout. These have now gone and there is probably room for something a bit faster but it's unliekely to happen at least until the switches and crossings are due for renewal and possibly not until the signalling is done (which is in the indefinite future as I understand it).

 

[Signal Head]

Similarly it's 40 years since the Hall Royd area was remodelled but surely the pointwork will have been replaced since then and the opportunity lost to improve matters. It needs 70mph turnouts.

Sectional Appendix shows the turnout speed at Hall Royd Junc. is 30 MPH (not 5/10 MPH as another poster suggested). This speed continues round the curve (check-railed, which is an indication of how sharp it is) to Stansfield Hall so it's difficult to see any value in putting 70MPH turnouts in since the train wouldn't get very far at that speed.

 

[Darren R]

Darren-thanks for that. So approx. 70 years on and no improvement in journey times (apart from 3 minutes saved by the Stansfield station closure). Difficult to see how a 158 with a better power/weight ratio,better acceleration and braking than whatever was running in 1947 couldn't improve matters.

Similarly it's 40 years since the Hall Royd area was remodelled but surely the pointwork will have been replaced since then and the opportunity lost to improve matters. It needs 70mph turnouts.

Whilst I accept there are some curves, much of the route is fairly straightish and should be capable of higher speeds. I just get the impression that there is no interest in the service-perhaps because it doesn't serve Manchester. Yet it connects some significant population centres and has potential.

Given the tunnel is only 250m or so long and there is nothing of much value above it I wonder if simply opening it out might have been a better long term solution, given the instability problems. Might even have been quicker.

I think you've missed my point in relation to journey times. Undoubtedly todays' 158s have much better acceleration than clapped-out BR standard classes (158s rarely need banking over Copy Pit these days, although it's not unkown). My point was that the speed limits on the line now are as low as they've always been, because of the sharp curves and gradients. I think you're under-estimating how severe some of those curves are. Unfortunately, added to that, the section of the line where it comes closest to being straight(ish) is the section with Holme Tunnel in the middle - the section most vulnarable to movement.

I can't disagree that the journey over Copy Pit and through the Calder Valley does seem to be a slow one (I think that every time I use it), but at least in regards to the Gannow Jn - Hall Royd Jn section we have to blame the Pennine geography rather than NetworkRail. (But further down the Calder Valley and up towards Bradford, that's a different matter!)

As for just eliminating the tunnel altogether by opening it up, I'm not an engineer and I've only seen the tunnel from within - I'm not sure how much depth of earth there is above the tunnel, nor how practical it would be (ignoring cost.) I'm guessing it must be enough to make a cutting not viable otherwise it would have been considered when the line was first built. But a cutting would be just as susceptible to movement as a tunnel.

 

[L&Y Robert]

Sectional Appendix shows the turnout speed at Hall Royd Junc. is 30 MPH (not 5/10 MPH as another poster suggested). This speed continues round the curve (check-railed, which is an indication of how sharp it is) to Stansfield Hall so it's difficult to see any value in putting 70MPH turnouts in since the train wouldn't get very far at that speed.

With new turnout geometry (a bit nearer Tod than now) those check-rail curves could be eased as well. Do it NOW - I mean, during the stoppage.

 

[yorksrob]

It may be slow but it is, at least, quite a scenic stretch of line to my mind.

 

[Signal Head]

With new turnout geometry (a bit nearer Tod than now) those check-rail curves could be eased as well. Do it NOW - I mean, during the stoppage.

Nope. Doesn't look like anywhere near enough room to iron out the curve, those check rails go right round to Stansfield Hall you know, by the time you've eased that lot, your junction points will be more or less 45degrees!

And you'll land the junction points on top of, or the wrong side of the crossover on the L&Y lines, which has to stay until the curve layout is open.

And you'll burger up the new curve signalling by interfering with the overlaps, standage, and signal spacing (braking distances).

And, even if you do all that, there's another bit of check rail on the Copy Pit side of Stansfield Hall, and to straighten that out you'll need to demolish and rebuild the footbridge there, steal several gardens, if not actually the houses themselves, and you'll adversely alter the geometry of the junction onto the new curve, which is quite tight as it is.

Afraid Hall Royd to Gannow is some way off being a contender for HS3

 

[edwin_m]

Going by the OS mapping on Bing, the curve from Hall Royd to Stansfield Hall is 200 to 250m radius and you're not going to get more than 30mph on that.

The mapping also shows most of the new curve in place! Not sure if it is bang up to the minute or 40 years out of date...

 

[Darren R]

Going by the OS mapping on Bing, the curve from Hall Royd to Stansfield Hall is 200 to 250m radius and you're not going to get more than 30mph on that.

The mapping also shows most of the new curve in place! Not sure if it is bang up to the minute or 40 years out of date...

I'll be generous and say they are being over-efficient! Unless there's been a huge leap forward in the last few weeks there is no track in place yet. (Either that or I should've put my spec's on!)

 

[yorksrob]

No need for the optitians. Wasn't there today when I went past.

 

[Grumpy]

Whilst accepting most of the above, and that 70mph at Hall Royd was a tad over-optimistic, I am still not convinced nothing can be done.

Like L&Y Robert I thought the curvature might be eased by moving the turnout towards Tod.

Similarly can better use be made of the trackbed by singling and slewing- there is only one train/hour in each direction (accepting you might need to retime so they don't cross in this area)?

Is the maximum use being made of cant or is everything still optimised on 8f's banking unfitted coal trains and only one passenger train/day each way?

Even west of Cornholme where the track is relatively straight there is no sense of urgency. I wondered if the speed through the tunnel was only being raised to 45mph as that seems to be the prevailing speed on the rest of the line.

The timetable may be 23 minutes from Burnley to Hebden Bridge but a train I was on yesterday took 19 minutes which included a section at near walking pace on the approach to Tod which I assumed was either a signal check or temporary slack.

 

[L&Y Robert]

Nope. Doesn't look like anywhere near enough room to iron out the curve, those check rails go right round to Stansfield Hall you know, by the time you've eased that lot, your junction points will be more or less 45degrees!

And you'll land the junction points on top of, or the wrong side of the crossover on the L&Y lines, which has to stay until the curve layout is open.

And you'll burger up the new curve signalling by interfering with the overlaps, standage, and signal spacing (braking distances).

And, even if you do all that, there's another bit of check rail on the Copy Pit side of Stansfield Hall, and to straighten that out you'll need to demolish and rebuild the footbridge there, steal several gardens, if not actually the houses themselves, and you'll adversely alter the geometry of the junction onto the new curve, which is quite tight as it is.

Afraid Hall Royd to Gannow is some way off being a contender for HS3

But, but, but ... I think it used to be an easier curve, with the junction nearer Tod, maybe back in the late 1800s. I understood (and I don't know now from where) that it was all altered, and a huge excavation carried out and retaining wall built, so that there could be enough of the branch to get a loose coupled coal train destined for Lancashire well clear of the main line before stalling on the up-grade (to wait there for one of those filthy dirty 4F bankers that used to hang about in the triangle. That was the procedure, the train ran forward up the bank until they could go no more, and a banker eased out of the triangle siding, crossed the west-bound Todmorden curve onto the - well, North bound I suppose, and buffered up to the guard's van. They were never coupled. Then there was the whistle code, and off they'd go, up the hill. I can hear 'em now - used to live near there you know, just down from Kitson Wood signal box ). If you look at the alignment of the branch and the main, doesn't it just look as if it's been altered at some time?

 

[edwin_m]

I don't know the history but I agree it looks as if it has been altered, with the junction previously just east of the Hallroyd Road overbridge. Your theory on why also sounds plausible. An alternative (or additional) reason would be to provide a headshunt for the sidings within the triangle so that shunting could take place without affecting either of the converging lines.

However if this happened for either or both of reasons, I think most of the curve would have remained on the original alignment and therefore the speed would not be significantly altered by moving the junction back to its presumed original site.

 

[Signal Head]

I don't know the history but I agree it looks as if it has been altered, with the junction previously just east of the Hallroyd Road overbridge. Your theory on why also sounds plausible. An alternative (or additional) reason would be to provide a headshunt for the sidings within the triangle so that shunting could take place without affecting either of the converging lines.

However if this happened for either or both of reasons, I think most of the curve would have remained on the original alignment and therefore the speed would not be significantly altered by moving the junction back to its presumed original site.

Wot 'e said.

 

[edwin_m]

The link below says that the junction has been moved eastwards and implies more than once, but doesn't give any further details.

http://www.hall-royd-junction.co.uk/Hall_Royd_Prototype/Hall_Royd_prototype.html

 

[Signal Head]

But, but, but ... I think it used to be an easier curve, with the junction nearer Tod, maybe back in the late 1800s. I understood (and I don't know now from where) that it was all altered, and a huge excavation carried out and retaining wall built, so that there could be enough of the branch to get a loose coupled coal train destined for Lancashire well clear of the main line before stalling on the up-grade (to wait there for one of those filthy dirty 4F bankers that used to hang about in the triangle. That was the procedure, the train ran forward up the bank until they could go no more, and a banker eased out of the triangle siding, crossed the west-bound Todmorden curve onto the - well, North bound I suppose, and buffered up to the guard's van. They were never coupled. Then there was the whistle code, and off they'd go, up the hill. I can hear 'em now - used to live near there you know, just down from Kitson Wood signal box ). If you look at the alignment of the branch and the main, doesn't it just look as if it's been altered at some time?

You appear to be correct, as to the original layout. A quick look at www.old-maps.co.uk turns up a decent quality 1894 map where the layout is as you suggest. The 1907 looks the same, but after that they don't zoom in enough to be sure, at least until the 1956 version. So, it would appear that the shifting of the junction took place somewhat later than you thought.

But, in all of these old layouts the main part of the curve looks the same as it does today, so even if the junction was moved back there'd be no real benefit.

When the curve goes in the signal protecting the junction on the Down L&Y is probably going to have to move towards Hall Royd Jcn. to maintain enough standage from the new junction. Moving the junction back to where it used to be would probably knacker that up by pushing that signal back towards Tod Stn.

When the junction comes up for renewal, now that the GF connection into the DCE sidings is defunct, it's probably feasible to ease it a little, to take out the slight 'bulge' in the EL tracks where they used to go around the water column IIRC, but this could be done without moving the point toes, just make the turnouts a little longer.