Manchester - Liverpool Electrification

[po8crg]

I thought on later it was called a headshunt, but at the time of writing couldn't recall the right term. Thanks. Also noticed they are in the process of removing the electric third rail on this headshunt.

Because of the different return arrangements, they avoid having both DC and AC power on the same track wherever possible. If you can't turn the third rail on because there's no return circuit, then it makes sense to remove it - means that AC and diesel rolling stock that isn't third-rail cleared can run on the lines.

There's a tiny bit of the Snow Hill Tunnel in London that has both power systems, so that trains that fail to changeover are still powered and can be moved out of the tunnel under their own power. It's the only bit of the entire National Rail system that has DC and AC mixed.

 

[martynbristow]

I thought there is a least one spare unit at present which could have been used to replace the failed unit.

You mean a Merseyrail one.
I've never seen that.
They don't keep one in the headhunt even a Liverpool which would serve the same end. I think they always just use the one behind :/

 

[Bald Rick]

There's a tiny bit of the Snow Hill Tunnel in London that has both power systems, so that trains that fail to changeover are still powered and can be moved out of the tunnel under their own power. It's the only bit of the entire National Rail system that has DC and AC mixed.

Apart from the slow lines Euston - Camden, the west London line at Mitre Bridge, the north London line at Acton and Highbury, Ashford, Ebbsfleet etc...

 

[swt_passenger]

It's the only bit of the entire National Rail system that has DC and AC mixed.

It is perhaps the only area (so far) that has a complex system of switchgear that changes the system configuration from AC mode to DC mode depending on the passage of trains through the section, but it is definitely not the only dual electrified railway - as Bald Rick has just highlighted.

It isn't a 'tiny bit' of the Snow Hill tunnel anyway, the dual section extends over the entire length and through Farringdon Station.

 

[po8crg]

Apart from the slow lines Euston - Camden, the west London line at Mitre Bridge, the north London line at Acton and Highbury, Ashford, Ebbsfleet etc...

That's me told, then. Sorry for not having my facts straight.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Because of the different return arrangements, they avoid having both DC and AC power on the same track wherever possible. If you can't turn the third rail on because there's no return circuit, then it makes sense to remove it - means that AC and diesel rolling stock that isn't third-rail cleared can run on the lines.

If they electrify Allerton-Trafford Park with OHLE they will have to have some better arrangements for the overlap at Hunts Cross.

 

[stockport1]

If they electrify Allerton-Trafford Park with OHLE they will have to have some better arrangements for the overlap at Hunts Cross.

4 platforms at hunts cross?
2 3rd rail
2 overhead

 

[edwin_m]

If they electrify Allerton-Trafford Park with OHLE they will have to have some better arrangements for the overlap at Hunts Cross.

How easy would it be to re-build this section with three tracks throughout between Allerton and Hunts Cross, the southernmost being a "siding" for Merseyrail? If Merseyrail doesn't extend towards Warrington then this would remove all interaction between it and the longer-distance trains.

 

[martynbristow]

How easy would it be to re-build this section with three tracks throughout between Allerton and Hunts Cross, the southernmost being a "siding" for Merseyrail? If Merseyrail doesn't extend towards Warrington then this would remove all interaction between it and the longer-distance trains.

Mersey rail needs to move to the opposite side anyway. Thats a must in the grand scheme of things because the crossing of trains causes slight delays.
Merseyrail extending on to Warrington is a good idea but overhead or 3rd rail will be the issue.
Any upgrade will need to be considered in light of new rolling stock because Merseyrail is think on the ground as it is.

 

[Olaf]

A DfT update, to a degree, on the current status of the NR Electrification schemes. Nothing specific on the Liverpool-Manchester scheme, but gives an update on the TPE scheme for those that are interested:
http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=2102593&postcount=76

 

[Gareth]

If they electrify Allerton-Trafford Park with OHLE they will have to have some better arrangements for the overlap at Hunts Cross.

I think a decision needs to be made, between both Merseytravel and Network Rail whether Merseyrail extension to Warrington Central and/or Gateacre are practical or desirable aims. If not, then, to be honest, there's little point in Merseyrail even serving Hunts Cross, as crossing the flat junction and then onto the opposite side of the tracks seems a lot of faffing for just one station. If the answer's yes to Warrington Central and not to Gateacre, then it's better for Merseyrail trains to call at the southerly part of the station, as to reduce conflict with long distance services.

 

[martynbristow]

I think a decision needs to be made, between both Merseytravel and Network Rail whether Merseyrail extension to Warrington Central and/or Gateacre are practical or desirable aims. If not, then, to be honest, there's little point in Merseyrail even serving Hunts Cross, as crossing the flat junction and then onto the opposite side of the tracks seems a lot of faffing for just one station. If the answer's yes to Warrington Central and not to Gateacre, then it's better for Merseyrail trains to call at the southerly part of the station, as to reduce conflict with long distance services.

Agreed but I don't think theres any prospect of getting it electrified :/
With TPE delayed until 2020 at least there won't be the resources or money unless passenger growth is vast.
That corridor does need a better provision of service though it must be awful travelling from Warrington on a stopper :P

 

[Gareth]

I think in the medium term, that line will be electrified; albeit 25kv OHLE. This would mean future Merseyrail rolling stock changing power source at either Hunts Cross, or more practically, Liverpool South Parkway.

Of course, it would have to wait for the new rolling stock, which is a few years away, but the electrification of the line is not realistically going to happen before that anyway,

 

[martynbristow]

I think in the medium, that line will be electrified; albeit 25kv OHLE. This would mean future Merseyrail rolling stock changing power source at either Hunts Cross, or more practically, Liverpool South Parkway.

Of course, it would have to wait for the new rolling stock, which is a few years away, but the electrification of the line is not realistically going to happen before that anyway,

Given the CP6 update from NR were looking at at least 2025.
Transpenine, Great Western and Cardiff have all been earmarked and they are going to hold everything back.
The problem is if the line sees no growth it won't get priority, passengers may move across to the faster Chat Moss from Manchester, which would make the route seem like a secondary route.
I always use Chat Moss as its 5 minutes quicker, or more if you go to Victoria.

 

[Gareth]

If you're going from Liverpool to Manchester, yes and Chat Moss should rightfully be the main line for such journeys. However, the CLC route serves many places that don't have the Chat Moss as an alternative. Also, it seems at least some fast or semi-fast services will remain on the route. It's a fairly built up corridor and no doubt a frequent Merseyrail service would be popular. If anything, there's a fair chance that such an extension would help justify the electrification of the whole line.

 

[edwin_m]

If you're going from Liverpool to Manchester, yes and Chat Moss should rightfully be the main line for such journeys. However, the CLC route serves many places that don't have the Chat Moss as an alternative. Also, it seems at least some fast or semi-fast services will remain on the route. It's a fairly built up corridor and no doubt a frequent Merseyrail service would be popular. If anything, there's a fair chance that such an extension would help justify the electrification of the whole line.

As far as I know there are no plans to divert the EMT service, but the new Chester-Leeds service is partly to compensate Warrington for the loss of the other (TPE) hourly fast on the CLC route. The route only just works in timetabling terms now, with the fasts nearly catching up the slows every 30min and a small delay to a fast leaving it stuck behind a slow.

Extending Merseyrail to Warrington would be a good idea, amongst other things relieving the main line via South Parkway to Lime Street. But extending third rail to Warrington would weaken the business case for eventual OLE on the whole route.

 

[DJH1971]

As far as I know there are no plans to divert the EMT service, but the new Chester-Leeds service is partly to compensate Warrington for the loss of the other (TPE) hourly fast on the CLC route. The route only just works in timetabling terms now, with the fasts nearly catching up the slows every 30min and a small delay to a fast leaving it stuck behind a slow.

Extending Merseyrail to Warrington would be a good idea, amongst other things relieving the main line via South Parkway to Lime Street. But extending third rail to Warrington would weaken the business case for eventual OLE on the whole route.

And OLE is needed for the CLC, especially with Manchester to Sheffield being looked into for future electrification.

 

[snowball]

And OLE is needed for the CLC, especially with Manchester to Sheffield being looked into for future electrification.

The taskforce report actually makes the CLC line a first tier priority and Manchester-Sheffield second tier.

 

[8A Rail]

I thought there is a least one spare unit at present which could have been used to replace the failed unit.

In theory, yes, but 319361 was on driving training Allerton - Crewe today, 319364 has far as can be established is not fully fitted out internally.

 

[Viscount702]

In theory, yes, but 319361 was on driving training Allerton - Crewe today, 319364 has far as can be established is not fully fitted out internally.

I am loosing count on how many units are up North,

I thought 361,2,3,4 & 5 were at Allerton and fully fitted out and there are two further units one at Wigan and one at Stockport for training.

 

[Llama]

319366 has been up at Preston for driver training.

 

[8A Rail]

I am loosing count on how many units are up North,
I thought 361,2,3,4 & 5 were at Allerton and fully fitted out and there are two further units one at Wigan and one at Stockport for training.

Not aware of 319365 unless it has arrived very recently. The two training units are 319366 and 319379(?) - neither of them are able to operate on the Passenger trains as not refurbished in any way what so ever, hence training units at Preston and Stockport.

I thought 319364 was fitted out when it arrived but I've read elsewhere that it has not been so internally - awaiting seats etc. I'm sure someone will confirm shortly.

 

[Loop & Link]

deleted

 

[DJH1971]

0716 LIV-MIA DMU vice 319 this morning.

Oh dear.

 

[adsteamfan]

0716 LIV-MIA DMU vice 319 this morning.

So by the look of it, if the infrastructure works had been completed for the December TT change then Northern would have struggled to run any 319s if they can't manage to provide 2 units 3 months later!!

 

[8A Rail]

0716 LIV-MIA DMU vice 319 this morning.

142053 and 150274 was on 1F93 0840 Manchester Airport to Liverpool Lime Street
319363 on 1H45 0916 Liverpool Lime Street to Manchester Airport
Pass Rainhill within a couple of minutes of each other approx 09.27hrs

 

[Geeves]

362 is awaiting some new traction cards apparently.

 

[LDECRexile]

I'm delighted that Stuart Watson has kindly sent a film of 319 363 arriving at Huyton last Thursday. I've put it into an album for Stuart, here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/127646831@N03/sets/72157650885092418/

and added it to the Combined Volume as 3366l here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/127646831@N03/sets/72157648494725811/

Thank you Stuart.

 

[AM9]

So by the look of it, if the infrastructure works had been completed for the December TT change then Northern would have struggled to run any 319s if they can't manage to provide 2 units 3 months later!!

Not necessarily. It was becoming clear that the infrastructure was running late well before December. If there was a need for units to be in service at that time, steps would have been taken to put them in place. Also, the usage those units that would have been deployed would not necessarily be the same therefore any incipient failure patterns could be different.

 

[swt_passenger]

Not necessarily. It was becoming clear that the infrastructure was running late well before December. If there was a need for units to be in service at that time, steps would have been taken to put them in place.

The obvious step to have taken would have been to bring them into service without the refresh initially, until numbers built up.

AFAICS there had always been enough units transferred to Northern to allow for the expected December start, events conspired to allow the refresh to go ahead before the units entered service.