Ordsall Chord

[deltic08]

What has that got to do with anything?

You seem like you are a very angry man - the station is still there. MOSI was threatened with closure recently - so I am sure the money has helped keep it going. What do you think would have happened if it closed - the place would be flattened or left to rot.

It has a lot to do with everything. Many Brits fought and gave their lives in WW2 to keep our Nation free from the Nazis and retain freedom of speech. This Government is trying to remove that freedom in so many ways by suppression and it appears in the way public consultation was suppressed in this decision.

 

[lejog]

My nearest railhead is ten miles away. Using public transport to reach Manchester Airport would require a taxi to the bus station, bus to Harrogate, train to Leeds and another train to MIA and that is assuming flight times are sensible.

My wife flew to Australia last year. I couldn't go at the last minute due to a heart attack. Not being allowed to drive, I couldn't take her to the airport and collect her. She chose to drive and leave her car at the airport for a month as this was the most convenient for her. A new £85m chord would not have made any difference to her. She would still have gone by car.

In all the years it has been possible to travel to MIA by train, we have never used it once and not likely to in future.

If very few, 10% quoted, are airport passengers, does that justify a chord at all and through trains. Passengers from east of Piccadilly can still use trains to Piccadilly, even from the Rochdale/Calder Valley line if as suggested reinstatement of the east link is carried out and change into airport trains there. Surely arrangements could be made for cross platform changes into two trains an hour onward to the airport? Are two airport trains an hour going to block up Piccadilly station throat?

When I tried out the new 350/4s from Manchester to Carlisle on a Club 55 offer from Garforth, there was no convenient through train from the East for me and my wheelchair bound travelling companion. There wasn't even a lift at Manchester on the platform we arrived on from Garforth and no wheelchair friendly access at Garforth, the nearest railhead for him with parking for me for TPEx, on the return. I had to carry him over the footbridge and then return for his wheelchair. That did not deter us from travelling.

I am so glad we did it though. He hadn't been out for months and hadn't been on a train for years due to ill health. He died only nine days after going, with cardiac failure from his diabetes, and did nothing else but talk to his wife about the day out to Carlisle for all that week.

We are not just talking £85m but also quadrifying from Deansgate to Piccadilly to allow an increase in Vic-Picc traffic. What is the whole package costing? £300m? £400m? What is the BCR for all this? I suspect this is more of an Osborne boosting proposal than a passenger convenience!!!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Considering Leeds/Bradford is rapidly expanding with International flights, a rail connection from Horsforth is proposed and former RAF Church Fenton right next to the York-Leeds line has just been bought to create a new Yorkshire airport, traffic from Yorkshire to MIA may even decline long term.

I know this is counterintuitive to 99% of the posters to this forum, but the requirements for the Hub were not based on any railway based passenger figures at all, let alone BCRs. In fact there was little or no involvement by the railway industry. Public investment was provided with the aim of stimulate the economy of the North by £4bn by providing better connectivity. Its success or failure will be measured on this criterion, not the number of passengers travelling on the trains through Manchester.

The requirement to connect all main corridors into Manchester with the Airport had nothing to do with the convenience of passengers from places from Ripon, indeed little to do with the number of passengers carried at all, but as an aid to attracting investment into the area. This is a proven economic effect internationally.

Since the requirements were based on economic principles rather than the usual DFT/Network Rail gobbledy gook, it is fair to say they got an easier passage through the Treasury.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It has a lot to do with everything. Many Brits fought and gave their lives in WW2 to keep our Nation free from the Nazis and retain freedom of speech. This Government is trying to remove that freedom in so many ways by suppression and it appears in the way public consultation was suppressed in this decision.

Have you any proof that the public consultation was suppressed? Such an abuse of process would be meat and drink to Whitby's lawyers if it actually occurred.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Have you any proof that the public consultation was suppressed? Such an abuse of process would be meat and drink to Whitby's lawyers if it actually occurred.

And the Labour Party

 

[lejog]

And the Labour Party

Well yes, although Manchester City Council are no doubt part of the plot. I must admit I didn't follow the public consultation in great detail, but it did seem to go on at great length, Google suggests it started in November 2012 and the public enquiry was in 2014? However the conspiracy theorists are already saying public consultation was suppressed.

 

[anorack 1]

It has a lot to do with everything. Many Brits fought and gave their lives in WW2 to keep our Nation free from the Nazis and retain freedom of speech. This Government is trying to remove that freedom in so many ways by suppression and it appears in the way public consultation was suppressed in this decision.

There was a lengthy public enquiry, followed by a judicial review. Both found in favour of Network Rails scheme. How was public consultation suppressed? Or is it a big case of sour grapes on Whitby's part because his route was rejected.

 

[deltic08]

Have you any proof that the public consultation was suppressed? Such an abuse of process would be meat and drink to Whitby's lawyers if it actually occurred.

None whatsoever. Just responding to those who are on this thread. Hadn't heard of Mr Whitby until he was mentioned here. Totally open minded about the Chord at the moment.

 

[HowardGWR]

There was a lengthy public enquiry, followed by a judicial review. Both found in favour of Network Rails scheme. How was public consultation suppressed? Or is it a big case of sour grapes on Whitby's part because his route was rejected.

Just a comment to you and lejog if I may. It was a Public Inquiry not enquiry. The Judicial Review had nothing to do with finding in favour of the merits of the NR scheme but on whether the decision by the SoS was lawful or otherwise, based on whether the Inspector had reported to him correctly. I won't go into the ins and outs but hopefully you can see these are entirely different processes.

 

[anorack 1]

Just a comment to you and lejog if I may. It was a Public Inquiry not enquiry. The Judicial Review had nothing to do with finding in favour of the merits of the NR scheme but on whether the decision by the SoS was lawful or otherwise, based on whether the Inspector had reported to him correctly. I won't go into the ins and outs but hopefully you can see these are entirely different processes.

.
I stand corrected [inquiry]. The Judicial Review found in favour of the Inspector reporting to the SoS correctly. Why is Whitby pursuing it further?

 

[SodTheDrummer]

Out of interest, is anything else 'listed' impacted by the Ordsall Chord apart from the MOSI connection to the network? I know GS bridge will be more visible as the metal extension will be removed, but is there anything else?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

.
I stand corrected [inquiry]. The Judicial Review found in favour of the Inspector reporting to the SoS correctly. Why is Whitby pursuing it further?

Because his ego has been bruised so he's using a spurious argument of preserving heritage in order to force Network Rail to follow his proposal in spite of it being more expensive, less effective, and cutting an important and valuable development site in two. The waters on here have then been further muddied by TBirdFrank's ridiculous plan to use Mayfield. That he also supports Bradford Crossrail means that he fails the "Crayonista" litmus test though.

 

[TBirdFrank]

Or perhaps as a very senior person in the Civil Engineering heirarchy he has forgotten more than many will ever know.

The comical ad hominem attacks on my standpoint say more about those making them than anything I can.

In poker terms I will close simply by saying I'll raise you thirty years in the industry retiring with an all stations status pass against the lowly status the restricted ambitions of so many posters on here display.

Think big - you might get big - tinker round the edges and you will NEVER get the quantum leap.

In the twenty years since privatisation the tories have caused exactly the amount needed to build HS2 straight through the industry into shareholders pockets. HS2 as currently designed heads for a set of buffers above Store St.

If those on here who support the Northern Hub cannot see that such a scenario is an abject monsense then they deserve everything they will get - if Gideon's self aggrandisement scheme ever does fly.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

In poker terms I will close simply by saying I'll raise you thirty years in the industry retiring with an all stations status pass against the lowly status the restricted ambitions of so many posters on here display.

I will respond to that comment above as a website member of 70 years of age and one who finally retired from the position of Senior Head of Projects at a consultancy in March 2010. I have had over thirty years service at the highest echelons of senior management and from 1995 to 2004, I headed our consultancy team in our Toronto office where we were the project lead on the Canadian Hydro Project.

This year will see the 50th anniversary of my approaching the podium at the degree ceremony at Manchester University in 1966, where I was awarded a First in Mathematics.

I may well have suffered a stroke at the age of 67 in July 2012 and two subsequent mini-strokes, but such was my determination to keep the power of speech and mental cognitive usage, that within a short period of time, together with what my Consultant described as my brain "knitting new pathways", I was on the road to a slow but sure full recovery. If you look at my posting count on this website that have been made since I joined this website in April 2011, I have now exceeded 18,000 postings (not counting the very large number of postings on the Quizzes and Games forum that are not counted in such a figure).

 

[The Planner]

In poker terms I will close simply by saying I'll raise you thirty years in the industry retiring with an all stations status pass against the lowly status the restricted ambitions of so many posters on here display.

Whats an all stations status pass got to do anything? I work with several people with those and it is irrelevant. There are plenty of people working on these type of projects with 30 years experience now, or is their experience not good enough as it doesn't agree with your view?

 

[PR1Berske]

It has a lot to do with everything. Many Brits fought and gave their lives in WW2 to keep our Nation free from the Nazis and retain freedom of speech. This Government is trying to remove that freedom in so many ways by suppression and it appears in the way public consultation was suppressed in this decision.

Equating the manner of an inquiry into railway infrastructure with a broadbrush evaluation of World War II seems somewhat over-baked, if I can put it like that. MOSI has lost some track and two Northern cities gain extra connectivity: nobody has died.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Or perhaps as a very senior person in the Civil Engineering heirarchy he has forgotten more than many will ever know.

In terms of rail systems engineering and some of the correspondents on here, I very much doubt it.

The comical ad hominem attacks on my standpoint say more about those making them than anything I can.

In poker terms I will close simply by saying I'll raise you thirty years in the industry retiring with an all stations status pass against the lowly status the restricted ambitions of so many posters on here display.

I'd be careful shouting the odds about years of service - the early Chord development was supported by several ex-BR staff with over 40 year's railway service (one of them previously in the operations team covering Manchester, another an ex-very-senior-engineer at BRHQ) - your point? (and no, I'm not even on that list, before you start).

Ah yes, you make a grand statement or two, and then don't answer the questions anyone poses to you. Debate is all about challenging standpoints; if we (the rail industry) didn't challenge prehistoric standpoints (such as yours and Whitby's, and others) then we'd spend our time and money building the first thing someone shouted about ... not a good solution, long-term.

 

[Senex]

I know this is counterintuitive to 99% of the posters to this forum, but the requirements for the Hub were not based on any railway based passenger figures at all, let alone BCRs. In fact there was little or no involvement by the railway industry. Public investment was provided with the aim of stimulate the economy of the North by £4bn by providing better connectivity. Its success or failure will be measured on this criterion, not the number of passengers travelling on the trains through Manchester.

The requirement to connect all main corridors into Manchester with the Airport had nothing to do with the convenience of passengers from places from Ripon, indeed little to do with the number of passengers carried at all, but as an aid to attracting investment into the area. This is a proven economic effect internationally.

Since the requirements were based on economic principles rather than the usual DFT/Network Rail gobbledy gook, it is fair to say they got an easier passage through the Treasury.

Well said, sir! The whole business represents an episode of strategic thinking only too rare in the history of Britain's railway industry though very common if we look at things that have happened with the railway systems on mainland Europe.

From a strategic perspective it has been clearly and coherently argued that the Ordsall Link is the connection that provides the facilities needed and that the restoration of the old L&Y Ardwick Branch connection into Piccadilly, desirable as that might or might not be in its own right, cannot meet the needs adequately for a whole string of reasons.

We can all argue about whether what is to be built in West Manchester is enough to give both reliable operation and to be future-proof, but it does seem that the route that Network Rail has gone for is indeed the best option, and NR's enquiry evidence does seem to shew very clearly how Whitby's route is inferior in engineering and operational terms. And keeping a rail link for MOSI just to use on very very infrequent occasions seems to be a very poor reason for opposing the NR scheme (and certainly not one that would have convinced the early railway engineers and builders like Stephenson himself).

 

[quantinghome]

In poker terms I will close simply by saying I'll raise you thirty years in the industry...etc.

A good engineering solution stands on its own merits. You don't seem to have responded to the actual points raised against your proposals other than with rhetoric. Instead, you are playing top trumps with your service record, which isn't a good sign of the strength of your argument.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Instead, you are playing top trumps with your service record

... and losing.

 

[Altfish]

Looks like the works are starting in anger this morning...

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/rail-news/ordsall-chord-foundation-works-set-to-start

...let's hope they knock the viaduct down first.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Or perhaps as a very senior person in the Civil Engineering heirarchy he has forgotten more than many will ever know.

Mark Whitby does the engineering work for embassies and art galleries, he's not a railway engineer, god alone knows why he was even involved in the whole consultation process, but the contention he doesn't actually know what he's talking about is a fairly accurate one.

I expect criticism for saying that, but to head that off, I know he's a former president and a fellow of the Institute of Civil Engineers, but that means very little, other than he's really, really good in the area of civil engineering he's specialising in, it doesn't mean he's really good at every civil engineering discipline, there's simply nothing other than his designs for the Ordsall Chord on which to assess his abilities, and looking at them, he's not a good railway engineer.

No railway engineer worth their salt would put forward a design with so many conflicts and pathing issues, so yeah, he doesn't know what he's talking about.

In poker terms I will close simply by saying I'll raise you thirty years in the industry retiring with an all stations status pass against the lowly status the restricted ambitions of so many posters on here display.

It's not about status, there are plenty of people out there who are MS4 or equivalent, some are brilliant, some are incompetent and have been promoted out of harms way. I don't wish to be rude, but until you can prove your brilliance, I'm going to pigeon hole you in the second group.

 

[Altfish]

Mark Whitby does the engineering work for embassies and art galleries, he's not a railway engineer, god alone knows why he was even involved in the whole consultation process, but the contention he doesn't actually know what he's talking about is a fairly accurate one.

I expect criticism for saying that, but to head that off, I know he's a former president and a fellow of the Institute of Civil Engineers, but that means very little, other than he's really, really good in the area of civil engineering he's specialising in, it doesn't mean he's really good at every civil engineering discipline, there's simply nothing other than his designs for the Ordsall Chord on which to assess his abilities, and looking at them, he's not a good railway engineer.

Isn't one definition of a civil engineer something like, "Someone who can build for 6d what any fool can build for 1/-"
Well Whitby has failed that simple test.

 

[snowball]

Out of interest, is anything else 'listed' impacted by the Ordsall Chord apart from the MOSI connection to the network? I know GS bridge will be more visible as the metal extension will be removed, but is there anything else?

The scheme includes 10 listed building authorisations relating to 7 listed buildings, all of which are bridges or viaducts, including the demolition of two of them. See for example the Inspector's Report, round about page 35.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...chment_data/file/416803/Inspectors_Report.pdf

 

[lejog]

It has a lot to do with everything. Many Brits fought and gave their lives in WW2 to keep our Nation free from the Nazis and retain freedom of speech. This Government is trying to remove that freedom in so many ways by suppression and it appears in the way public consultation was suppressed in this decision.

Have you any proof that the public consultation was suppressed?

None whatsoever.

Words fail me.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Well said, sir! The whole business represents an episode of strategic thinking only too rare in the history of Britain's railway industry though very common if we look at things that have happened with the railway systems on mainland Europe.

I totally agree

Words fail me.

You and me both.

 

[HowardGWR]

What intrigues me is why leave was given to Whitby for an appeal. I can say from experience that embarking on JR is not to be undertaken lightly. The costs can be astronomical and their Lordships don't like going against the judgement of even a junior colleague without good reason.

So there must be a smidgeon of doubt about this case.

Let's all hope I'm being pessimistic.

 

[kevconnor]

Update on the appeals hearings, they are now showing as 'Float on 12-Apr-16 or 13-Apr-16 - estimated length (in hours): 10:00' best educated guess work is this is the hearing date.

Old Post
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Post

Another quick search has brought up this description of a 'Floating Trial'

It is a trial which has not been allocated a judge or courtroom, but if either become available on the day (due to a 'fixed' trial not being ready) then the floater will be called on.

 

[SodTheDrummer]

Mark Whitby does the engineering work for embassies and art galleries, he's not a railway engineer, god alone knows why he was even involved in the whole consultation process, but the contention he doesn't actually know what he's talking about is a fairly accurate one.

Hang on, didn't he design a footbridge over the Irwell or something? Surely that makes him more qualified than anyone to design a critically important modern rail infrastructure solution??
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The scheme includes 10 listed building authorisations relating to 7 listed buildings, all of which are bridges or viaducts, including the demolition of two of them. See for example the Inspector's Report, round about page 35.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...chment_data/file/416803/Inspectors_Report.pdf

Thanks for that Snowball!

 

[rebmcr]

.
I stand corrected [inquiry]. The Judicial Review found in favour of the Inspector reporting to the SoS correctly. Why is Whitby pursuing it further?

'Cause he's a bumhole.

 

[deltic08]

Words fail me.

You edit down to distort the post. Why miss out what I added?

I said I was open minded about the Ordsall Chord, which you are not, so I can look at both sides of the argument which you cannot. You are too blinkered and too partisan to be objective.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I totally agree
You and me both.

You as well if you agree with lejog

 

[lejog]

My post was considered. Your original post

It has a lot to do with everything. Many Brits fought and gave their lives in WW2 to keep our Nation free from the Nazis and retain freedom of speech. This Government is trying to remove that freedom in so many ways by suppression and it appears in the way public consultation was suppressed in this decision.

contained no qualification whatsoever and unambiguously presents the suppression as fact, whatever the context. (Apart from being in my view, pure conspiracy theory worthy of a tin foil hat award.)

I'll leave others to decide whose views are blinkered.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What intrigues me is why leave was given to Whitby for an appeal. I can say from experience that embarking on JR is not to be undertaken lightly. The costs can be astronomical and their Lordships don't like going against the judgement of even a junior colleague without good reason.

So there must be a smidgeon of doubt about this case.

Lets' all hope I'm being pessimistic.

I've read somewhere (but don't know if its true) that Whitby is covered by a protective costs order, in which case his personal liability for legal costs incurred by the DfT/Network Rail if/when he loses will be limited.