North TPE electrification

[snail]

Government press announcements are all about putting the maximum spin with the minimum spend. During the current government's period in office, exactly what new schemes have been announced which had not already been announced by the outgoing Labour government prior to May 2010 ?

The extension of the Manchester-Liverpool scheme to cover Euxton-Blackpool wasn't announced until this time last year.

(But don't let the truth get in the way of a good rant, eh?)

 

[scarby]

As it was mentioned, with so many ex-Scarborough passengers changing at York, how about that running half-hourly purely as a Scarborough-York service and return - would require just 4 units and should be straightforward to run as an extremely punctual service?

Given the investment in the track over recent years, this would give it the sort of train capacity it is built to comfortably accomodate.

Yes, you would lose the direct Leeds and Manchester services, but the substantial payoff is a doubling of frequency, making for better connections to anywhere departing from York. The biggest downside would be experienced by those who regularly commute from Scarborough, Seamer or Malton to Leeds.

 

[shinkansen1966]

The extension of the Manchester-Liverpool scheme to cover Euxton-Blackpool wasn't announced until this time last year.

Good, because I was wondering if anything new had been actually been announced since May 2010.

(But don't let the truth get in the way of a good rant, eh?)

Heavens no !

 

[YorkshireBear]

As it was mentioned, with so many ex-Scarborough passengers changing at York, how about that running half-hourly purely as a Scarborough-York service and return - would require just 4 units and should be straightforward to run as an extremely punctual service?

Given the investment in the track over recent years, this would give it the sort of train capacity it is built to comfortably accomodate.

Yes, you would lose the direct Leeds and Manchester services, but the substantial payoff is a doubling of frequency, making for better connections to anywhere departing from York. The biggest downside would be experienced by those who regularly commute from Scarborough, Seamer or Malton to Leeds.

I think the idea is good, but maybe run it in the opposite half hour to the longer distance service. I dont think they would want to cut off that line from leeds. But adding in a shuttle like you say so it is half hourly york scarbrough would be a very cheap cost effective way of improving the lines potential and service. Maybe even leading to a good patronage increase.

 

[northwichcat]

Good, because I was wondering if anything new had been actually been announced since May 2010.

That was when they realised there would still be 319s left over.

 

[Waverley125]

very very good news. Also means new stock orders needed to run the new services, I'd hope for a batch of 344s (end doors, 5 coaches, like the 444s) to run the long-distance services. I'd suggest half-hourly Liverpool-Newcastle, one running as a 'semi fast' and one running 'fast', i.e. St Helens, Victoria, Huddersfield, Leeds, York, Northallerton, Darlington, Durham, Chester le Street, Newcastle. Add in

In terms of the regional lines, we then need extra EMUs to run the Huddersfield-Manchester and Huddersfield-Leeds stoppers. the 31xs could be a short-term solution, given they're soon to be replaced from the Lea Valley lines.

I'd also hope that this will boost the CBR of some other wiring projects in GL/GM to encourage them. This is especially the case given the Caldervale & Pontefract lines are the official diversionaries either side of Mirfield, and doing Mirfield-Brighouse-Victoria and Mirfield-Wakefield Kirkgate-Leeds would then then massively increase the CBR for doing Methley Junction-Knottingley, Horbury Junction-Sheffield (so wiring the MML all the way to Leeds, and allowing electric MML services to run through to Barnsley) and Brighouse-Halifax-Bradford-Leeds.

Altogether a very good announcement, will improve services in GL/GM, and throughout the north, as well as boosting jobs and massively increasing the chances of more wiring in the north.

 

[northwichcat]

In terms of the regional lines, we then need extra EMUs to run the Huddersfield-Manchester and Huddersfield-Leeds stoppers.

We need extra EMUs but not for the exact services you describe.

The 4 North TPE services from Victoria are to cease to serve Stalybridge and Dewsbury and the Victoria-Huddersfield service is to be withdrawn. Replacing them will be a half hourly semi-fasts between Piccadilly and Leeds calling at Stalybridge, Dewsbury plus 2 of the stations between Stalybridge and Huddersfield.

I think Huddersfield-Leeds stoppers are remaining as is.

i.e. St Helens, Victoria, Huddersfield, Leeds, York, Northallerton, Darlington, Durham, Chester le Street, Newcastle.

I assume you mean St Helens Junction, opposed to St Helens Central.

So is that the 'slow' pattern with the fast missing out St Helens, Northallerton and Chester-le-Street? I'd suggest calling at Newton-le-Willows instead of St Helens Junction to allow connections to and from North Wales services.

 

[WatcherZero]

Only thing ive heard so far is £5bn of 'shovel ready' investment to be announced, the rest of the '£40bn' to take place during the next Parliament.

Finance wise £5bn from more cuts to public services, £20bn raid on pensions and £15-£20bn opened up to foreign investment with guarenteed rates of return (infrastructure bonds).

 

[Sapphire Blue]

very very good news. Also means new stock orders needed to run the new services, I'd hope for a batch of 344s (end doors, 5 coaches, like the 444s) to run the long-distance services.

Class 379's please!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Another 7-8 years from now to electrify 65 miles of railway ? That's ages !

Well, as I understand it there will be a North West electrification team (Balfour Beatty have won the contract), a GW team down south, and a Scottish team for EGIP.
The NW scheme (about 80 route miles) ends Dec 2016.

TP electrification will not be straightforward as there are imponderables about capacity (resignalling, Standedge Tunnels etc) to be sorted first.
I can't see how they will do the wiring in less than a couple of years, hence 2018/19.
Unless they mobilise another team (but that will put the cost up).
The NW scheme was going to use "traditional" methods, while the larger GW scheme was going to use "high-output" methods (factory trains etc).
Will TP be the former (my guess) or the latter (might get it done quicker, but at higher cost)?

On top of that, the debate about wiring the Cardiff Valleys assumed that the NW team would do that after finishing to Blackpool, but that will not be possible if they are doing TP at the same time.

I'm no engineer, but elsewhere on this forum there are doubts expressed about NR's ability to design and roll out several substantial electrification projects in parallel after running down the capability over the years.
The theory is the skilled resources are now working abroad and will have to be enticed back (ie high cost).

My own view on all these new schemes is that NR still has to demonstrate it can deliver electrification at acceptable cost (cf McNulty).
You can be sure the Treasury has not issued a blank cheque.

 

[Waverley125]

We need extra EMUs but not for the exact services you describe.

The 4 North TPE services from Victoria are to cease to serve Stalybridge and Dewsbury and the Victoria-Huddersfield service is to be withdrawn. Replacing them will be a half hourly semi-fasts between Piccadilly and Leeds calling at Stalybridge, Dewsbury plus 2 of the stations between Stalybridge and Huddersfield.

I think Huddersfield-Leeds stoppers are remaining as is.

where's that been announced? It seems a very strange way to organise services? Given Dewsbury & Stalybridge have fairly large catchment areas, I would have thought the best way would be to run 2 Victoria-Leeds services Huddersfield only, and 2 Dewsbury & Stalybridge, with half-hourly stoppers either side.

This'd leave you with 4 fasts through Ashton under Lyme, and 2 stoppers, with the potential to run stoppers into Piccadilly via Guide Bridge from the west bay at Stalybridge. You could then run additional fasts into Piccadilly using the released capacity from the Airport/Liverpool serivces going into Victoria.

I'd also hope this'll boost destinations either side of the Huddersfield corridor. If Hull's not getting wired, I'd really like to see a Hull-Holyhead services of 2 x 185s. A calling pattern something like

Selby
Leeds
Huddersfield
Victoria
Newton le Willows
Warrington Bank Quay
Runcorn East
Chester
Rhyl
Colwyn Bay
Llandudno Junction
Bangor
Holyhead

I assume you mean St Helens Junction, opposed to St Helens Central.

So is that the 'slow' pattern with the fast missing out St Helens, Northallerton and Chester-le-Street? I'd suggest calling at Newton-le-Willows instead of St Helens Junction to allow connections to and from North Wales services.

No, that was the proposed 'fast' service. I'd also consider losing Chester le Street from it, as I think a cross-Newcastle Darlington-Morpeth stopper would work perfectly well.

 

[Nym]

Just holdeth thy horses on 'Hull and Middlesbrough Not Being Wired' We don't know what is being done yet, if it's the Network Rail plan, it does include Hull.

 

[northwichcat]

Well, as I understand it there will be a North West electrification team (Balfour Beatty have won the contract)

Not quite. They've won it for phase 1 when there are 3 phases. If they screw up phase 1 someone else will get phase 2.

TP electrification will not be straightforward as there are imponderables about capacity (resignalling, Standedge Tunnels etc) to be sorted first.

Some of the plans for extra loops, resignalling etc. are parts of the Manchester Hub which should be complete by 2016.

 

[Nym]

And the TPE N Core services through Sandledge according to the Northern Hub will definately be 6tph, 4 fast Vic - Hud - Lds, 2 semi fast Vic or Pic - Stalybridge - Greenfeild / Marsden - Huddersfeild - One of the next stations - Leeds.

The semi fast could be either into Piccadilly or Victoria...

 

[northwichcat]

where's that been announced?

By Network Rail in the Manchester Hub document. The MEN Media jumped all over it because they wrongly assumed there would be one Piccadilly-Leeds semi-fast an hour meaning stations would lose service when in fact there would be two.

Given Dewsbury & Stalybridge have fairly large catchment areas, I would have thought the best way would be to run 2 Victoria-Leeds services Huddersfield only, and 2 Dewsbury & Stalybridge, with half-hourly stoppers either side.

Stalybridge will have 4tph to Leeds and 6tph to Manchester under the plans while Dewsbury will have 4tph to Manchester and 5tph to Leeds. Keeping Dewsbury and Stalybridge off the long distance services makes them less stop-start and better for the long distance travellers. The larger EMUs will provide extra capacity. Given the size of Stalybridge and Dewsbury that level of service is quite generous, some towns of similar size only get 2tph.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The semi fast could be either into Piccadilly or Victoria...

Running the semi-fasts from Victoria is based on only half the current North TPE services being diverted to Victoria and half still going directly to Piccadilly, which isn't the likely outcome.

 

[Batman]

Here's an idea.

Could 1 of the 2 Liverpool - Newcastle tph opperated by 350's be extended onto Edinburgh to provide an hourly service at the local stations in Northumberland north of Morpeth?

It was mentioned earlier about XC services being diverted from Newcastle to Middlesborough. Here's an interesting point to consider. What about the local stations between Middlesborough and Northallerton? Will XC have to serve them, remebering that 10 car IEP trains will probably be inservice by the time the new timetable starts in 2018/19.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Not quite. They've won it for phase 1 when there are 3 phases. If they screw up phase 1 someone else will get phase 2.
Some of the plans for extra loops, resignalling etc. are parts of the Manchester Hub which should be complete by 2016.

Yes I see BB got just Phase 1 to start with - very sensible!
The Hub spend is not approved yet is it - other than Ordsall Lane.

Electrifying Standedge is bound to prompt a review of the best long-term solution for the tunnel, I imagine.
Also begs the question of Stalybridge-Guide Bridge. I bet this will be left for TfGM to sort out from their budget.

 

[northwichcat]

It was mentioned earlier about XC services being diverted from Newcastle to Middlesborough. Here's an interesting point to consider. What about the local stations between Middlesborough and Northallerton? Will XC have to serve them, remebering that 10 car IEP trains will probably be inservice by the time the new timetable starts in 2018/19.

10 car IEP on EC services yes but on XC services no. At best it will be 6 car Voyagers with a Pantograph vehicle.

Page 27 shows a full list of the proposed IEP routes and the alternatives that have been explored:
http://www2.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/iep/fosterreview/pdf/annex.pdf

 

[Batman]

Also begs the question of Stalybridge-Guide Bridge. I bet this will be left for TfGM to sort out from their budget.

I can only immagin it's a matter of common sense that Guide Bridge to Stalybridge and Leeds to York will be electrified as part of the project?

 

[table38]

Guide Bridge to Stalybridge ... will be electrified as part of the project?

Technically, the bit from Guide Bridge as far as Dukinfield will be need to be re-electrified

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mancunian1001/5733514276/

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I can only immagin it's a matter of common sense that Guide Bridge to Stalybridge and Leeds to York will be electrified as part of the project?

Yes, I agree.
But I've seen enough government announcements not to expect common sense!
With the NW announcement it took a long while before Huyton-Wigan and Preston-Blackpool were confirmed.
The text I have seen (BBC web site, and MEN report) only mentions Manchester to Leeds.
Maybe learn more when something appears on the DfT web site.

And there's another problem.
We are assuming "tick" it's approved, followed by money to pay for it.
However, it looks like a conditional approval, dependent on private sector Pension Funds being willing to make the investment - ie it is not government money.
I think this one, like previous PFI projects, will run and run before we can be sure it will happen.

 

[4SRKT]

As it was mentioned, with so many ex-Scarborough passengers changing at York, how about that running half-hourly purely as a Scarborough-York service and return - would require just 4 units and should be straightforward to run as an extremely punctual service?

Given the investment in the track over recent years, this would give it the sort of train capacity it is built to comfortably accomodate.

Traffic on the A1237 York north ring road is badly impacted at rush hours by the closure of Haxby Gates level crossing. Traffic backing up from the crossing blocks the Haxby Road/ring road roundabout. This is a real pain and an obstacle to reopening a station at Haxby as you don't want trains slowing down here. I can imagine objections by residents of the large villages that form York's outer suburbs to the north to a more frequent train service shutting the gates more often.

I agree that a half hourly service is desirable though, and that a station at Haxby also so, so a solution needs to be found. While Manchester may not be a massive deal as a destination, I think Leeds is, so making the Scarborough trains go through to Blackpool is very sensible. The half hourly would just be made up by extra workings between York ans Scarboro, with everything calling at Haxby.

One thing that we need to beware of is that turning over the Scarboro line to Northern without doubling the frequency could see a decrease in capacity as Northern often uses 2-car 158s on the Blackpools. It's bad enough having one 3-car 185 per hour in summer; imagine one 2-car 158!!

 

[LE Greys]

Traffic on the A1237 York north ring road is badly impacted at rush hours by the closure of Haxby Gates level crossing. Traffic backing up from the crossing blocks the Haxby Road/ring road roundabout. This is a real pain and an obstacle to reopening a station at Haxby as you don't want trains slowing down here. I can imagine objections by residents of the large villages that form York's outer suburbs to the north to a more frequent train service shutting the gates more often.

I agree that a half hourly service is desirable though, and that a station at Haxby also so, so a solution needs to be found. While Manchester may not be a massive deal as a destination, I think Leeds is, so making the Scarborough trains go through to Blackpool is very sensible. The half hourly would just be made up by extra workings between York ans Scarboro, with everything calling at Haxby.

One thing that we need to beware of is that turning over the Scarboro line to Northern without doubling the frequency could see a decrease in capacity as Northern often uses 2-car 158s on the Blackpools. It's bad enough having one 3-car 185 per hour in summer; imagine one 2-car 158!!

Haxby needs a bridge, and a station (I don't know the area, so I'm not sure if that is practical). Also, what about a summer-only Scarborough Flyer from King's Cross? Is there a market for it?

 

[Whistler40145]

It would be absolutely ludicrous not to electrify Neville Hill to Colton Junction. I would also electrify Leeds to Huddersfield via Wakefield Kirkgate, the link to Wakefield Westgate, Wakefield Kirkgate to Colton Junction via Castleford, Wakefield Kirkgate to Hare Park Junction, Wakefield Kirkgate to Colton Junction via Knottingley plus the Wakefield Kirkgate avoiding curve.

 

[LE Greys]

It would be absolutely ludicrous not to electrify Neville Hill to Colton Junction. I would also electrify Leeds to Huddersfield via Wakefield Kirkgate, the link to Wakefield Westgate, Wakefield Kirkgate to Colton Junction via Castleford, Wakefield Kirkgate to Hare Park Junction, Wakefield Kirkgate to Colton Junction via Knottingley plus the Wakefield Kirkgate avoiding curve.

Add Micklefield-Hull, Temple Hirst-Selby and Doncaster-Gilberdyke. That has the added advantage of freeing up a lot of 180s from Hull Trains. I reckon that this would be far more likely than the old Midland lines, at least until they do the MML (whenever that is).

 

[Waverley125]

the areas in West Yorks that need electrifying are:

Leeds-Knottingley-Doncaster
Leeds-Hull
Selby-Doncaster
Doncaster-Gilberdyke
Leeds-York via Harrogate
Neville Hill-Colton Junction
Leeds-Huddersfield via Halifax
Halifax-Victoria
Mirfield-Leeds via Kirkgate
Horbury Junction-Meadowhall
Moorthorpe-Sheffield

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Just to indulge in the fanciful for a moment, if the TP electrification got as far as Hambleton, you could run Pendolinos from the north-west into King's Cross, and 225s from the north-east into Euston, via Huddersfield.

If not feasible on a daily basis it would give a whole new dimension to weekend diversions from the north to/from London "via an alternative route".

Or in the unlikely event of a dewirement on the southern ECML/WCML...

 

[scarby]

Also, what about a summer-only Scarborough Flyer from King's Cross? Is there a market for it?

I believe Grand Central have at least chewed over the idea. Would then be year-round I think.

At the moment there is the East Midlands high summer Saturdays only St Pancras-Scarborough and return. Not great for ex-London with a very early start and late return and East Coast+TPE is much quicker. I think it's more designed for holidaymakers from the Midlands stops en-route.

 

[Lampshade]

...as Northern often uses 2-car 158s on the Blackpools.

Which they shouldn't be doing, although it's become quite a regular occurance; the centre cars were explicitly for use on York - Blackpool services.

 

[Nym]

Do I need to point out that if TPE N gets electrified fully exld. Scarbrough it could well be the case that Blackpool N - York - Scarbough will end up being Class 185 operated anyway? Same for the Calder Valley Semi-Fasts via Bradford Interchange (also candidates to extend to Scarbrough)