pacer replacement & West Yorks electrification?

[bluenoxid]

I brought Blackburn into the equation solely to reflect matters on the "Bruntwood Chairman" thread that is running concurrently with this thread on the same forum where he says links between Blackburn and Manchester on the current route are not good.

150222 on an earlier posting on this thread had commented at the end of his posting where electrification was concerned, that Hebden Bridge and Colne could benefit from an electrified line to Preston and it was basing my ideas upon that particular submission, where Blackburn would obviously be served on the Preston line electrification so discussed, that I brought up the matter of the Todmorden Chord as being an electrified line section leading to an electrified Blackburn to Manchester Victoria service.

This is the reasoning behind my submission for an electrified Blackburn to Manchester service via Accrington, Todmorden and Rochdale. It is to supplement the existing Blackburn - Bolton - Manchester service, which has too many infrastructural problerms to be the subject of line service improvements. Perhaps the Bruntwood Chairman might consider these alternatives....and arrange part-funding for them, if he is so concerned.

Perhaps I should train my mind not to run ideas on two seperate threads concurrently, even if I can see an obvious linkage between them.

Sorry, I was not directly rubbishing your idea by intent. Rather I was pointing out that sadly, in the current scheme of things, Blackburn is unlikely to benefit. It was not an intended slight on your suggestion, rather a reality of the current situation.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Its policy by Government/NR that new third rail networks cant be setup and must be Overhead for compatibility with other services. Any new third rail line no matter the contact type would be refused permission. They want to avoid unnecesary incompatibilities.

Do not make that assumption without checking directly with the authorities. They have clearly stated in their FAQ that this is not a hindrance to them and DLR has successfully extended itself in the past few years. There are other concerns such as retrofitting this to Victorian infrastructure.

The question has been asked.

 

[150222]

Possibally when the mml is electrified leeds to sheffield via barnsley so leedr to nottingham can go electric.

 

[tbtc]

Possibally when the mml is electrified leeds to sheffield via barnsley so leedr to nottingham can go electric.

If the MML from Bedford to Doncaster is done then there are a number of additional lines which should be done at the same time.

For example, fill in the short section from Swinton to Moorthorpe (allows the hourly Sheffield - Dearne Valley - Leeds service to go EMU)...

...do the route from Meadowhall to Leeds via Barnsley and Castleford...

...Birmingham - Derby and Leeds - York (so all the XC route from Birmingham to Glasgow is wired)...

...doing Leeds - York then improves the case for Leeds - Manchester (and so on and so on)...

However, none of those are worth doing unless the MML is done, I think that everything hinges on it.

 

[WatcherZero]

Do not make that assumption without checking directly with the authorities. They have clearly stated in their FAQ that this is not a hindrance to them and DLR has successfully extended itself in the past few years. There are other concerns such as retrofitting this to Victorian infrastructure.

The question has been asked.

20. The proposals won’t work they use an old fashioned third rail electrification system that is not allowed under health and safety legislation

Firstly, we are not proposing an old fashioned system. We are proposing a very modern system elevated approximately 0.5 metre from sleeper level, where the conductor rail is insulated with a protective sheath on all sides except the underside (bottom) of the rail, where current collection takes place. Third rail schemes are permitted under current health and safety legislation and the modern system has many benefits over other types.

They said that third rail was compatible with H&S law, not the same thing as the national moratorium on new third rail lines. The DLR is not a heavy rail line and does not interface with the national rail network. That it was distinct and would never be shared avoiding electrification issues was considered when the DLR was designed. If you dont believe the moratorium exists ask the people involved in future Merseyrail electrification, theyve had to justify every potential schemes validity and why it shouldnt be overhead in each case to the Dft and NR.


Also some other rather alarming stuff from the site and FAQ, firstly they havent given any proposals to NR yet say they havent had any opposition from them (of course not!). They havent checked public opinion, instead taking the National Passenger Trends survey and saying stuff like:

The proposals address the top five issues repeatedly stated by passengers to be of importance, including value for money (these proposals would enable a far more efficient operation of the route with more seats/services), punctuality/reliability (electric trains are significantly more reliable than diesels), ability to get a seat (on average the trains provide 40% more seats than currently on offer) and more trains when people want to travel (increased frequency). Passenger Focus research also includes passenger expectations from new rolling stock, which indicates a preference for more comfortable seats, improved ability to get a seat and proper provision for standing passengers. The rolling stock proposed addresses all three of these key expectations.

So yeah, passengers want more seats, this proposal gives more seats therefore people must support our proposals!!!
That isnt a reasonable and logical assessment of local opinion.

 

[Waverley125]

I'd add that though this proposal is for W.Yorks it could equally be applied anywhere i.e. Manchester or the Valley lines.

As has been said, the problem with wiring Leeds is that little of it is self contained. Leeds-Sheffield will get done (both routes, inc. out to Knottingley) with the MML, and Huddersfield-Leeds-York as part of any TPE wiring, leaving only the line to Bradford & Harrogate as near-standalone projects.

Given my preference for reopening the bowling curve and running Leeds-Todmorden stoppers I don't think this is such a problem.

 

[tbtc]

I'd add that though this proposal is for W.Yorks it could equally be applied anywhere i.e. Manchester or the Valley lines

Much as I'd love Yorkshire electrification to be extended into a "network" (and not just a couple of routes), the Valley Lines are a better candidate - everything through Cardiff Queen Street is pretty self contained (ignore Maesteg/ Ebbw Vale etc for now).

That's where you can replace large number of Pacers directly with electrification (without worrying about complicated cascades which take a few years to finalise)

 

[philjo]

For the Leeds area other than the self-contained Harrogate route I think the best 2 routes to do next are:
Leeds-Selby plus Hambleton junctions which gives the 2nd route to ECML & allows the Selby commuter services to be run as EMUs (with some possibly going through to Bradford or Skipton) to avoid having to terminate in Leeds station in the peak hour)
It will reduce the cost of later on extending to Colton Junction for northbound services to York & also from Selby to Hull.

Sheffield via Swinton & Rotherham as half of this route is already wired (as part of the ECML) & it will connect 3 of Yorkshire's cities on a busy commuter route. (Plus possibly Swinton to Doncaster)
The added capacity/accellaration of the EMUs will increase capacity on the congested Doncaster-Leeds line.
At the Sheffield end they would only need to wire certain platforms for now.
This will reduce the cost of the overall MML wiring at a later date aas then they would pnly need to wire from Sheffield southwards.

 

[bluenoxid]

They said that third rail was compatible with H&S law, not the same thing as the national moratorium on new third rail lines. The DLR is not a heavy rail line and does not interface with the national rail network. That it was distinct and would never be shared avoiding electrification issues was considered when the DLR was designed. If you dont believe the moratorium exists ask the people involved in future Merseyrail electrification, theyve had to justify every potential schemes validity and why it shouldnt be overhead in each case to the Dft and NR.


Also some other rather alarming stuff from the site and FAQ, firstly they havent given any proposals to NR yet say they havent had any opposition from them (of course not!). They havent checked public opinion, instead taking the National Passenger Trends survey and saying stuff like:



So yeah, passengers want more seats, this proposal gives more seats therefore people must support our proposals!!!
That isnt a reasonable and logical assessment of local opinion.

Aw Balls. Sorry, I misread.

 

[cslusarc]

The idea was basically:

• Strip the "Grand Tour" back to a Bradford - Huddersfield - Wakefield service
• Strip the Leeds - Selby service into a stand alone route (no running through to Manchester etc)
• Divert the York - Blackpool service via Dewsbury/ Brighouse (instead of Bradford/ Halifax), to swap with the Leeds - Brighouse - Manchester service
• You then have four trains an hour from Leeds to Bradford, three from Bradford to Rochdale and four from Rochdale to Manchester. Convert this into four an hour from Leeds to Manchester (via Bradford/ Rochdale) at the cost of a unit or two and you have a frequent enough service to justify electrification.

Electrifying routes and then continuing to run DMUs on them long distance undermines the case for electrification (hence me being against reintroducing Manchester - Windermere services unless the Windermere branch is wired).

1. I just don't get it why so many services continue treat Bradford Interchange as a through station even though it is designed as a terminus. Since this station is designed as a terminus, I propose that all services that run to Bradford Interchange treat it as a terminus and reverse.
a.) Divert the York - Blackpool service via Dewsbury/ Brighouse (instead of Bradford/ Halifax) yielding a faster route. If omitting some smaller stops to route could be passed on to TPE.
b) Revise the Leeds-Selby service to orginate at Bradford Interchange
c) Simlify the Grand Tour into several services like Bradford Interchange to Wakefied via Brighthouse, Bradford Interchange to Huddersfield via Brighthouse, Leeds to Bradford Interchange via Dewsbury and Brightouse
2. Eventually several sectiions would then be ideal candidates for electrification like Colton Junction/Temple Hirst Junction/Hull-Leeds - Bradford Interchange, Selby Junctions and link, Hambleton Junctions and link, Leeds-Manchester Victoria via Huddersfield, Bradford Interchange - Manchester Victoria via Rochdale and Sowerby Bridge/Halifax-Mirfield/Deighton.

 

[Waverley125]

the way I'd like to see wiring developed in W.Yorks is something like this:

As part of Midland Mainline

Sheffield-Moorthorpe (-Leeds)
Sheffield-Barnsley-Wakefield Kirkgate-Leeds
Sheffield-Doncasrer
Leeds-Castleford-Pontefract-Knottingley-Goole
Sheffield-Pontefract-York

As Part of TPE

Huddersfield-Leeds-York
Leeds-Selby-Hull
Huddersfield-Wakefield Kirkgate
Huddersfield-Halifax-Bradford-Leeds
Victoria-Rochdale-Halifax
Todmorden-Burnley-Preston
Doncaster-Hull via Goole

Other

Leeds-Harrogate-York
Doncaster-Selby
Sheffield-Retford


Other infrastructure

Bradford Crossrail & Reopening of Low Moor-Horbury

allows through EMU workings from Airedale & Wharfedale to Halifax, Huddersfield, Wakefield & five towns (i.e. a Cross-Bradford EMU service), as well as 'Bradford loop' services to Leeds

Reopening Harrogate-Pateley Bridge & Ripon

gives further destinations beyond Harrogate to H-line trains & opens up important public transport links in North Yorkshire

Bowling curve

removes Reversal of trains through Bradford on Caldervale line, speeding up Leeds-Halifax & Caldervale services.


Service Implications

Run Leeds-Todmorden stoppers to overlap with Victoria-Accrington stoppers (assuming Todmorden curve reinstated)

Cut Leeds-Victoria through services, and run these as Bradford-Liverpool expresses (Halifax, Todmorden, Rochdale, Victoria, Salford, Newton le Willows, St Helens)

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

a.) Divert the York - Blackpool service via Dewsbury/ Brighouse (instead of Bradford/ Halifax) yielding a faster route. If omitting some smaller stops to route could be passed on to TPE.

I am sure that there will be those in the Bradford area will be horrified to read of this suggestion of losing Blackpool as a destination. I am led to believe that First TPE have no extra stock to provide the alternative services stated in your comment above.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I am sure that there will be those in the Bradford area will be horrified to read of this suggestion of losing Blackpool as a destination. I am led to believe that First TPE have no extra stock to provide the alternative services stated in your comment above.

It turns into a local train from Halifax-Bradford-Leeds.

Aside from Leeds, there are very few passengers for stations beyond Hebden Bridge from West Yorkshire, maybe Halifax has a few for the connection from Huddersfield, but I do think that it would be better fast via Dewsbury than via Bradford.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Population of Bradford = 293,717

Population of Dewsbury = 54,341

Which offers more Blackpool travel potential?

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Population of Bradford = 293,717

Population of Dewsbury = 54,341

Which offers more Blackpool travel potential?

It matters jack about population, having done Blackburn-Leeds and vice versa maybe 40-50 times, I doubt there is very little either way for diverting it via Bradford or Dewsbury. Bradford is a massive time penalty, and there aren't that many that board for stations beyond Hebden Bridge.

 

[Rhydgaled]

However, none of those are worth doing unless the MML is done, I think that everything hinges on it.

Much as I'd love Yorkshire electrification to be extended into a "network" (and not just a couple of routes), the Valley Lines are a better candidate - everything through Cardiff Queen Street is pretty self contained (ignore Maesteg/ Ebbw Vale etc for now).

That's where you can replace large number of Pacers directly with electrification (without worrying about complicated cascades which take a few years to finalise)

I think Maesteg and Ebbw Vale should be done as part of ValleyLines electrification (along with everything through Queen Street, inc. Vale Of Glamorgan trains to Bridgend) so that the whole network is run by a standard fleet of new EMUs. Maesteg and Ebbw Vale might not be self-contained, but the GWML should be electrified anyway. There would still be a cascade I think, with roughly 10 to 15 150s becoming available, anyone know the exact numbers? (Wales would keep the rest for new and strengthened services elsewhere). I suggest 8 of these released 150s replace FGW's 8 143s, which then leaves Northern as the sole Pacer operator I think. The problem then is, once you've done the ValleyLines is there enough time wire enough lines by 2020 to replace the Pacers without buying more DMUs? If that's your objective, you certainly can't afford to electrify any line which only releases Intercity stock (I'm assuming there are only Intercity trains on parts of the MML) until 2020. You could start on the upper reaches of the MML (where there are local trains) though, then plug the gap from Bedford to Leicester and Corby in 2020. I may be wrong about a lack of local trains on that section though.

The main problem I see with wanting Harrogate to be electrified with 3rd rail is the IEP probably will not have 3rd rail shoes and therefore still have to be dragged by a locomotive, or worse be bi-mode, on the East Coast KGX - Harrogate and Leeds - Aberdeen workings. Otherwise, discusions of electrification are somthing to be pleased about but standard 3rd rail stock would probably be better than tube stock (I can't remember the details, but I assume the tube stock would be converted from 4th rail to the Mersyrail/NSE standard 3rd rail system).

 

[IanXC]

The problem then is, once you've done the ValleyLines is there enough time wire enough lines by 2020 to replace the Pacers without buying more DMUs? If that's your objective, you certainly can't afford to electrify any line which only releases Intercity stock (I'm assuming there are only Intercity trains on parts of the MML) until 2020. You could start on the upper reaches of the MML (where there are local trains) though, then plug the gap from Bedford to Leicester and Corby in 2020. I may be wrong about a lack of local trains on that section though.

There is some scope for cascading intercity stock to inter regional routes.

27x 222 could cascade:
- 25x 158s from Liverpool-Norwich, ensuring all services are at least 4 cars
- 9x 170s from TPE, with remaining 185s use for strengthening elsewhere in TPE. Presumably RA2 222s would be a suitable 170 replacement for Hull services.

13x HST sets could cascade:
- (guestimate warning!) 18x 220s from core XC to 'Turbostar XC' (presumably theres some double formed diagrams that could be demised)
- 15x 2car 170s + 4x 3car 170/6s are then displaced.

This gives:
- 25x 158s
- 24x 2car 170s
- 4x 3car 170s

so thats 53 units vs 98 Pacers with Northern. Which coupled with the North West electrification and services which would be EMU following electrification around Sheffield could just about eliminate Pacers?

 

[Rhydgaled]

There is some scope for cascading intercity stock to inter regional routes.

27x 222 could cascade:
- 25x 158s from Liverpool-Norwich, ensuring all services are at least 4 cars
- 9x 170s from TPE, with remaining 185s use for strengthening elsewhere in TPE. Presumably RA2 222s would be a suitable 170 replacement for Hull services.

13x HST sets could cascade:
- (guestimate warning!) 18x 220s from core XC to 'Turbostar XC' (presumably theres some double formed diagrams that could be demised)
- 15x 2car 170s + 4x 3car 170/6s are then displaced.

This gives:
- 25x 158s
- 24x 2car 170s
- 4x 3car 170s

so thats 53 units vs 98 Pacers with Northern. Which coupled with the North West electrification and services which would be EMU following electrification around Sheffield could just about eliminate Pacers?

I agree with using 22x units on Turbostar XC and perhaps Liverpool-Norwich, but Cardiff - Portsmouth needs extra 158s, so releasing 158s from Liverpool-Norwich helps there but doesn't kill Pacers. If you electrified the MML to Corby and Nottingham and kept the IC125s on the rest of EMT's Intercity runs would you release enough 222s to take over all of Turbostar XC?