Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[snowball]

Long before the "pause", Guide Bridge to Stalybridge, though technically remaining part of NW Phase 5, was already put back to 2 years after the rest of phase 5 (Victoria to Stalybridge and the Philips Park link). So in effect somebody decided that it isn't needed before TP East.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Guide Bridge-Stalybridge is only 2.1 miles. Will it not improve 25kV network resilience by providing a second connection to the Stalybridge National Grid feeder station?

I think it's back to the drawing board for everything to do with the TP upgrade.

 

[snowball]

I think it's back to the drawing board for everything to do with the TP upgrade.

I wouldn't include Victoria to Stalybridge in that statement. As evidence we have both the new bridgeworks and the word of Joseph Locke.

Though perhaps it would benefit from a pause to (re-)redesign the approach to Stalybridge for higher speed from the Vic direction.

 

[Senex]

Though perhaps it would benefit from a pause to (re-)redesign the approach to Stalybridge for higher speed from the Vic direction.

The Yorkshire lines at Stalybridge are a direct continuation of the branch from Guide Bridge into the original MS&L station whilst the Miles Platting lines terminated in the adjacent L&Y station and there was a double junction between the two double-line branches just short of the stations. That is the historical origin of the very low-speed approach from Victoria. For more than a century and a half, long after the Miles Platting line had become the main line, nothing was done to improve the layout to reflect the new situation. And then the diversion of the Yorkshire trains to Piccadilly meant that the old layout became the correct one ....

What is curious is that the complete re-design of the layout a couple of years ago was allowed to happen immediately before the principal service was diverted back to the Miles Platting line, at a time when discussions about that re-routing must surely already have been going on. The scheme itself, of course, had been in the planning for a long time before that. But it seems that the scheme acquired a life of its own and no-one was prepared to pause it (that nice term of the moment!) for a re-think when circumstances changed dramatically, with the result that we now have a brand-new layout not fit for purpose -- which will now presumably get frozen by being wired up. There's plenty of room for a re-design that would make the Miles Platting lines the "fast" through lines, but given the sad history of modernisation of this route west of the Pennines I doubt if anything will happen.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The Yorkshire lines at Stalybridge are a direct continuation of the branch from Guide Bridge into the original MS&L station whilst the Miles Platting lines terminated in the adjacent L&Y station and there was a double junction between the two double-line branches just short of the stations. That is the historical origin of the very low-speed approach from Victoria. For more than a century and a half, long after the Miles Platting line had become the main line, nothing was done to improve the layout to reflect the new situation. And then the diversion of the Yorkshire trains to Piccadilly meant that the old layout became the correct one ....

What is curious is that the complete re-design of the layout a couple of years ago was allowed to happen immediately before the principal service was diverted back to the Miles Platting line, at a time when discussions about that re-routing must surely already have been going on. The scheme itself, of course, had been in the planning for a long time before that. But it seems that the scheme acquired a life of its own and no-one was prepared to pause it (that nice term of the moment!) for a re-think when circumstances changed dramatically, with the result that we now have a brand-new layout not fit for purpose -- which will now presumably get frozen by being wired up. There's plenty of room for a re-design that would make the Miles Platting lines the "fast" through lines, but given the sad history of modernisation of this route west of the Pennines I doubt if anything will happen.

Too true.
What I can't believe is that they have paused the project east of Stalybridge and intend to let the Victoria wiring proceed as planned.
I just doesn't fit with the reasoning of "capacity and line speed improvements" and "a better project delivered in one go" for the TP route as the reason for pausing it.
NW electrification Phase 5 has not yet reached GRIP 3 yet, so anything can change (nor has Phase 3 for that matter - Preston-Blackpool).

 

[edwin_m]

Too true.
What I can't believe is that they have paused the project east of Stalybridge and intend to let the Victoria wiring proceed as planned.
I just doesn't fit with the reasoning of "capacity and line speed improvements" and "a better project delivered in one go" for the TP route as the reason for pausing it.
NW electrification Phase 5 has not yet reached GRIP 3 yet, so anything can change (nor has Phase 3 for that matter - Preston-Blackpool).

The wiring at Victoria itself is there already so I presume you are referring to that between the east end of Victoria and Stalybridge.

Several reasons have been given why it is sensible for this to go ahead. In addition I can't see much scope for realignment to increase speeds between Victoria and Stalybridge - any HS3 service would either have to run at the existing low speeds or bypass most of this section.

The junction west of Stalybridge joins the Metrolink tracks through Werneth tunnel as a local symbol of the wasteful short-term way we plan things. However the layout is only a couple of years old, and with money being short it's most unlikely it would be ripped out and replaced before life expiry in 20 years or so. With restrictions around Ashton and Stalybridge constraining speeds the gain from remodelling it probably isn't huge anyway - and who's to say at this stage whether HS3 might not run via Guide Bridge? It therefore follows that it might as well be electrified now.

 

[billio]

I wouldn't include Victoria to Stalybridge in that statement. As evidence we have both the new bridgeworks and the word of Joseph Locke.

Though perhaps it would benefit from a pause to (re-)redesign the approach to Stalybridge for higher speed from the Vic direction.

Everytime I trundle through Stalybridge on the Newcastle - Liverpool, I am amazed that the need for a faster junction wasn't taken into account when the Stalybridge layout was redesigned. I sometimes get the impression NR does work in a way that means they soon have to go back and do it again.

It also intrigues me why the tram doesn't run right up to Ashton station and that there are not stops there for faster trains running east. Ashton looks quite a big place. Surely it would be a benefit for east Manchester, if not for the many Manchester City supporters coming over from Yorkshire.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The Yorkshire lines at Stalybridge are a direct continuation of the branch from Guide Bridge into the original MS&L station whilst the Miles Platting lines terminated in the adjacent L&Y station and there was a double junction between the two double-line branches just short of the stations. That is the historical origin of the very low-speed approach from Victoria. For more than a century and a half, long after the Miles Platting line had become the main line, nothing was done to improve the layout to reflect the new situation. And then the diversion of the Yorkshire trains to Piccadilly meant that the old layout became the correct one.

When making reference to the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway (and the original Manchester and Leeds Railway), their main line into Yorkshire was the one that passed through Rochdale, not Stalybridge.

 

[edwin_m]

Everytime I trundle through Stalybridge on the Newcastle - Liverpool, I am amazed that the need for a faster junction wasn't taken into account when the Stalybridge layout was redesigned. I sometimes get the impression NR does work in a way that means they soon have to go back and do it again.

It also intrigues me why the tram doesn't run right up to Ashton station and that there are not stops there for faster trains running east. Ashton looks quite a big place. Surely it would be a benefit for east Manchester, if not for the many Manchester City supporters coming over from Yorkshire.

If you look at the alignment through Stalybridge itself and the viaduct to the east, it is obvious that speeds here will always be limited unless the whole lot is swept away and replaced. There are also tight curves around Ashton that limit the speed. So although a faster junction would have some benefit it wouldn't be a huge.

The benefits of a Metrolink interchange at Ashton are quite limited - only really people travelling between intermediate tram stops on the Ashton line and stations at Stalybridge and beyond. This is a relatively small number of people, and probably didn't justify the extra cost of reaching the railway station which I believe is quite difficult technically. The current station is close to the bus station and if the area gets a proper integrated transport network there should be much more potential for interchange there.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The benefits of a Metrolink interchange at Ashton are quite limited - only really people travelling between intermediate tram stops on the Ashton line and stations at Stalybridge and beyond. This is a relatively small number of people, and probably didn't justify the extra cost of reaching the railway station which I believe is quite difficult technically. The current station is close to the bus station and if the area gets a proper integrated transport network there should be much more potential for interchange there.

Ashton bus station seems very well placed for the main shopping complex and both the indoor and outdoor markets. It has a considerable number of bus services to and from many settlements and the tram terminus was ideally placed to co-ordinate with these. The number of bus passengers far exceeds the number of rail passengers.

Ashton station seems to be less and less important to the area as a whole and the future rail plans do not exactly feature this station as one that will see a great upsurge in usage. The rail line from Manchester Victoria to Stalybridge via Ashton seems to be viewed as something of a secondary importance in the future rail plans for this area.

 

[PrinceBishop]

The rail line from Manchester Victoria to Stalybridge via Ashton seems to be viewed as something of a secondary importance in the future rail plans for this area.

I think actually the opposite is true. If the Ordsall chord and electrification to Stalybridge ever come to fruition this line will become much more important. Indeed, it already is more important since the re-routing of the Liverpool - Newcastle service.

However, I think it is precisely because this line is seeing an increase in traffic, especially fast services, that means Ashton station is not in a great position for a frequent service. It effectively gets in the way a bit.

The size of railway stations don't necessarily correlate to the size and importance of the towns they serve. Other factors such as geography and railway junctions or lines that happen to be in the area are often more important factors. Oldham is a good example. Being located on a large hill meant it ended up on a commuter loop line rather than an important main line despite far smaller settlements having much larger and more important railway stations. (Although originally Oldham was on a more important through route.)

Ashton is close to Stalybridge rail station which is located in a better position and as such acts as the main station for Tameside.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think actually the opposite is true. If the Ordsall chord and electrification to Stalybridge ever come to fruition this line will become much more important.

Surely electrification from Manchester to Stalybridge is seen as via Guide Bridge which only leaves the section from Guide Bridge to Stalybridge to electrify.

The line from Manchester Victoria to Stalybridge via Miles Platting is not what one could view as a well laid out line from Miles Platting junction onwards with good foundations with items such as Ashton Moss to cross. What speed limits do currently apply in certain sections and how is it proposed to upgrade to improve on that position. What would eventually happen to the existing road crossing of the line in the Clayton Bridge area?

 

[edwin_m]

Surely electrification from Manchester to Stalybridge is seen as via Guide Bridge which only leaves the section from Guide Bridge to Stalybridge to electrify.

The line from Manchester Victoria to Stalybridge via Miles Platting is not what one could view as a well laid out line from Miles Platting junction onwards with good foundations with items such as Ashton Moss to cross. What speed limits do currently apply in certain sections and how is it proposed to upgrade to improve on that position. What would eventually happen to the existing road crossing of the line in the Clayton Bridge area?

As I posted previously, via Miles Platting is a fairly slow route. However it will become the preferred route for Transpennine services under the Northern Hub scheme. The Guide Bridge route isn't particularly fast either and has more intermediate stations - these could be bypassed by reinstating the third and fourth tracks, but there would still be the problem of having to cross all tracks at Piccadilly to continue towards Liverpool or the Airport.

The acceleration of Transpennine services through Manchester under the Hub is mostly down to less padding for recovery from delays* and only one station stop, rather than any actual faster running.

*though, as also posted previously, I suspect some of the padding will need to go back in to make the multiple flat junctions west of Victoria workable.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

(Although originally Oldham was on a more important through route.)

Oldham has never been on a through route of any importance.

The Ashton and Greenfield routes joined end-on between Glodwick Road and Clegg Street but most trains on both routes terminated at one of these stations and the few that ran through were occasional locals or specials that couldn't be accommodated via Stalybridge. The Greenfield route could have been linked to either the Ashton or the Hollinwood route to provide an alternative Transpennine service, giving Oldham trains towards Leeds and non-stop ones to Manchester. But instead it was simply seen as a continuation of the Delph branch and both were closed due to the intermediate communities being served much better by bus.

The Hollinwood and Werneth Incline routes mostly ran through to Middleton or Rochdale but this wasn't particularly useful as a through route as Manchester to Rochdale was always quicker via Castleton. It wasn't even much good for diversions, as trains from Manchester via Oldham would arrive at Rochdale facing back towards Manchester.

 

[Senex]

When making reference to the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway (and the original Manchester and Leeds Railway), their main line into Yorkshire was the one that passed through Rochdale, not Stalybridge.

Indeed. I should really have explained that the Victoria to Stalybridge M&L/L&Y branch became a part of the London & North Western's main line between Liverpool and Leeds, with that company at first using Victoria but later departing to its own establishment at Exchange.

 

[billio]

If you look at the alignment through Stalybridge itself and the viaduct to the east, it is obvious that speeds here will always be limited unless the whole lot is swept away and replaced. There are also tight curves around Ashton that limit the speed. So although a faster junction would have some benefit it wouldn't be a huge.

The benefits of a Metrolink interchange at Ashton are quite limited - only really people travelling between intermediate tram stops on the Ashton line and stations at Stalybridge and beyond. This is a relatively small number of people, and probably didn't justify the extra cost of reaching the railway station which I believe is quite difficult technically. The current station is close to the bus station and if the area gets a proper integrated transport network there should be much more potential for interchange there.

I wasn't expecting very fast speeds, but its obvious at present there is no direct link from the line into Stalybridge and the route out to Victoria as the train slows down to move across a ladder of tracks.

Possibly a small number of people because the connection is not there, but if the connection was there the custom would build up. If I were planning transport in Greater Manchester I would do much more to build a network of services with links such as this.

 

[PrinceBishop]

Oldham has never been on a through route of any importance.

The Ashton and Greenfield routes joined end-on between Glodwick Road and Clegg Street but most trains on both routes terminated at one of these stations and the few that ran through were occasional locals or specials that couldn't be accommodated via Stalybridge. The Greenfield route could have been linked to either the Ashton or the Hollinwood route to provide an alternative Transpennine service, giving Oldham trains towards Leeds and non-stop ones to Manchester. But instead it was simply seen as a continuation of the Delph branch and both were closed due to the intermediate communities being served much better by bus.

True. I should have worded that better. I suppose I was trying to make the point that Oldham was once on more than just the loop line. Either way, as you point out, it was always somewhat out on a limb as far as the railway network was concerned.

 

[Philip C]

True. I should have worded that better. I suppose I was trying to make the point that Oldham was once on more than just the loop line. Either way, as you point out, it was always somewhat out on a limb as far as the railway network was concerned.

Was Oldham isolated because it had got Mumps?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

True. I should have worded that better. I suppose I was trying to make the point that Oldham was once on more than just the loop line. Either way, as you point out, it was always somewhat out on a limb as far as the railway network was concerned.

Not forgetting the very steep line from Oldham Werneth to Middleton Junction that was the eventual raison d'etre for the newer line via Dean Lane, Failsworth and Hollinwood which was on a much easier gradient to Oldham Werneth.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Was Oldham isolated because it had got Mumps?

OMG - groan

 

[IanXC]

I have moved discussion of the interplays between TP electrification and High Speed Rail to its own thread in the Future High Speed Rail sub forum, the thread is here http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=118743

 

[davetheguard]

With Transpennine electrification "paused" what does that mean, if anything, for Manchester Victoria to Stalybridge electrification?

Is it still under way; or is it too, de facto, on hold, at least until the autumn statement when Network Rail/ORR will announce which projects it can still complete within its budget?

And what's the status of Guide Bridge to Stalybridge electrification?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

With Transpennine electrification "paused" what does that mean, if anything, for Manchester Victoria to Stalybridge electrification?
Is it still under way; or is it too, de facto, on hold, at least until the autumn statement when Network Rail/ORR will announce which projects it can still complete within its budget?
And what's the status of Guide Bridge to Stalybridge electrification?

See several posts about 20 up the thread, starting about #325.
A variety of opinions!

 

[davetheguard]

See several posts about 20 up the thread, starting about #325.
A variety of opinions!

Thanks, not sure how I missed those. As you say, a variety of opinions........

 

[northwichcat]

DfT have said the following about Selby-Hull electrification today

We have plans to electrify the line between the East Coast Main Line, Selby and Hull by 2024 as promoted by First Hull Trains, subject to confirmation of the business case and an acceptable contribution from First Hull Trains.

http://maps.dft.gov.uk/northern-powerhouse/index.html

First Hull Trains recently said the following to Network Rail in their application to extend their track access contract.

The proposed Selby to Hull electrification scheme is likely to be delivered in or after Control Period 6,
depending on Network Rail’s wider electrification programme. Uncertainty over the timing means it is
not sustainable for the region to wait until electrification is complete to order Electrical Multiple Units.
Our introduction of new bi-mode trains is not reliant on electrification of this route and will ensure
customers can benefit from new high-quality rolling stock earlier and provide additional capacity
enabling continued development of the business, benefitting the region and growing the overall
demand for rail.
The current fleet of Class 180s is expensive to operate and maintain, and would require a refit by
2019. Without investment in new trains Hull Trains’ customers face a potential dis-benefit from
comparatively slower journey times and relatively older stock.
We are seeking a term of 10 years to provide the certainty to enable investment in a fleet of new bimode
trains to operate these services and associated maintenance arrangements. We have also
made provision for the costs of operating the new trains on the infrastructure, for example, route
clearance between Hull and Beverley.
The new contract will start from the date of expiry of the current ORR approved Track Access
Agreement for Hull Trains (01:59 hours on the Principle Change Date in 2019). We are seeking
access rights for 10 years to 01:59 hours on the Principle Change Date in 2029.
We expect to introduce the trains from January 2020, and will make the rights contingent on
introducing the full fleet by December 2021.

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse...ses 28 august 2015/hull trains form-p v2a.pdf

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

If everybody buys bi-modes, the incentive for electrification will disappear.
The idea of Hull Trains fully funding Selby-Hull as a standalone scheme has evidently disappeared.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

If everybody buys bi-modes, the incentive for electrification will disappear.
The idea of Hull Trains fully funding Selby-Hull as a standalone scheme has evidently disappeared.

This needs posting (not allowed I know) in every single electrification thread. The cynic in me suggests this is why the DfT/Treasury have been keen for bi-modes all along.

 

[Haydn1971]

The cynic in me suggests this is why the DfT/Treasury have been keen for bi-modes all along.

The realist in me suggests that the aspirations to electrify too much too quickly have slapped the DfT in the face and bi-modes are the best choice moving forward to cascade onto semi wired lines as more wire goes up.

 

[WatcherZero]

If everybody buys bi-modes, the incentive for electrification will disappear.
The idea of Hull Trains fully funding Selby-Hull as a standalone scheme has evidently disappeared.

It disappeared quite early, I understand their proposal was that the Government took out a loan for the scheme and Hull Trains would pay the interest payments on the loan, which of course left the Government on the hook if Hull Trains folded. They also wanted an exemption from track access charges to reflect their contribution to the improvement of the network.

 

[snowball]

Recent pictures on the Northern Programme Twitter feed include one of Granville Street bridge, Ashton-under-Lyne, being demolished.

https://twitter.com/networkrailnp

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Recent pictures on the Northern Programme Twitter feed include one of Granville Street bridge, Ashton-under-Lyne, being demolished.

https://twitter.com/networkrailnp

According to Tameside Council, the project time schedule for this Granville Street bridge project runs from end-July to December 2015. That bridge has indeed seen very many years of usage.