Transport for the North draft 30 year transport plan

[HSTEd]

Serving Bradford is not impossible, it might cost a packet but it can be done.
Even Tottenham Court Road Crossrail station only cost a billion pounds, and I doubt the subterranean environment below Bradford is anywhere near that crowded!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Serving Bradford is not impossible, it might cost a packet but it can be done.
Even Tottenham Court Road Crossrail station only cost a billion pounds, and I doubt the subterranean environment below Bradford is anywhere near that crowded!

One of my favorite sayings is “ everything is possible with a political will and time and money”

 

[MarkRedon]

I don't mean to be thick, but what is "NPR"?

Stands for:
"Northern Powerhouse Rail
Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR) is a major strategic rail programme, designed to transform connectivity between the key economic centres of the North. The programme promises radical changes in service patterns and target journey times."
See http://www.transportforthenorth.com/northern-powerhouse-rail/ and more recent proposals.

It's the putative partly or wholly new-build central element of a railway intended to link major Northern cities, with direct links suggested to Liverpool, Manchester, Bradford and Leeds.

Plans may change once the spectacular costs of linking Piccadilly to a station in central Bradford become clearer...

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Plans may change once the spectacular costs of linking Piccadilly to a station in central Bradford become clearer...

While you could be right in my view this is a case of either do it properly or don't do it at all. The North is in desperate need of additional track capacity and the most cost efficient way to do this is with new route mileage. So build a high-speed line to take away the longer-distance traffic from the current network thereby allowing room for much more frequent stopping services. Given that regeneration forms part of the raison d'etre going via Bradford ought to be a no-brainer; with the greatest respect to Huddersfield Bradford offers far greater potential in this respect. If cost-cutting leads to only "half a job" getting done then any generated new traffic simply gets dumped onto the existing network at some point(s) or other which defeats the whole point of the exercise!

 

[anti-pacer]

Stands for:
"Northern Powerhouse Rail
Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR) is a major strategic rail programme, designed to transform connectivity between the key economic centres of the North. The programme promises radical changes in service patterns and target journey times."
See http://www.transportforthenorth.com/northern-powerhouse-rail/ and more recent proposals.

It's the putative partly or wholly new-build central element of a railway intended to link major Northern cities, with direct links suggested to Liverpool, Manchester, Bradford and Leeds.

Plans may change once the spectacular costs of linking Piccadilly to a station in central Bradford become clearer...

Thanks Mark.

 

[edwin_m]

Whilst some people have suggested this is not possible, Why, if the 6' was increased to say around 7' (not sure of precise figure), wouldn't gauntletted track on oversized sleepers work, with the platform rails being thus far enough away from main running rails yet not fouling the TPWS etc. Please advise if I am wrong.

This part of the discussion started with the possibility of a narrower UK-gauge and a wider UIC gauge train calling at the same platform. This requires a fairly precise offset between the two sets of rail, which is smaller than can easily be achieved with conventional rails and fixings. If the offset was wider, the UIC gauge train would be too far from the platform.

 

[B&I]

While you could be right in my view this is a case of either do it properly or don't do it at all. The North is in desperate need of additional track capacity and the most cost efficient way to do this is with new route mileage. So build a high-speed line to take away the longer-distance traffic from the current network thereby allowing room for much more frequent stopping services. Given that regeneration forms part of the raison d'etre going via Bradford ought to be a no-brainer; with the greatest respect to Huddersfield Bradford offers far greater potential in this respect. If cost-cutting leads to only "half a job" getting done then any generated new traffic simply gets dumped onto the existing network at some point(s) or other which defeats the whole point of the exercise!

Quite. I suspect any central government cobtribution towards Crossrail 2 could be usefully re-directed to make up for any shortfall.

 

[Chester1]

I don't mean to be thick, but what is "NPR"?

Northern Powerhouse Rail. It is unbelievable that is actually the official name!

 

[B&I]

The existing route from Victoria via Rochdale to a point near Littleborough is already, in all basic respects, excellently aligned for high speed. But it needs some four-tracking, and a new long tunnel from somewhere near Littleborough to somewhere near Sowerby Bridge, plus thought given to how to approach Bradford and how to approach Leeds.

Fair enough re the stretch up to Littleborough, but the stretch beyond that has never struck me as the least bit high speed. Is it even expandandable to 4 tracks the whole way east of Sowerby Bridge?

 

[snowball]

NPR is what was previously known as HS3.

We now have two active threads about the same subject, this one and "HS3 Timeline and Ideas" in the "Future High Speed Rail" subforum.

 

[B&I]

Northern Powerhouse Rail. It is unbelievable that is actually the official name!

It is world-beatingly naff. And also inappropriate, because unlike the 'Northern Powerhouse' concept, it seems designed to properly serve most of the north's big cities, and not just to reformulate all public spending north of Edgbaston for the benefit of people who live in Tatton and commute to jobs at Spinningfields.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Quite. I suspect any central government cobtribution towards Crossrail 2 could be usefully re-directed to make up for any shortfall.

If central government is genuinely serious about rebalancing the economy there should be absolutely no question of not providing/enabling suitable funding for NPR/HS3, as well as many of the other TfN proposals, but equally those with a northern bias should avoid suggestions such as diverting funding from Crossrail 2: it's just as important to the efficient functioning of this country's economy. In short transport needs to be given a much higher priority, over the long-term as well as the short, than it has traditionally had. We should all resist the idea that Network Rail's recent shortcomings are a good reason to rein in such important investments in our future prosperity.

 

[YorkshireBear]

While you could be right in my view this is a case of either do it properly or don't do it at all. The North is in desperate need of additional track capacity and the most cost efficient way to do this is with new route mileage. So build a high-speed line to take away the longer-distance traffic from the current network thereby allowing room for much more frequent stopping services. Given that regeneration forms part of the raison d'etre going via Bradford ought to be a no-brainer; with the greatest respect to Huddersfield Bradford offers far greater potential in this respect. If cost-cutting leads to only "half a job" getting done then any generated new traffic simply gets dumped onto the existing network at some point(s) or other which defeats the whole point of the exercise!

I agree. I think serving Bradford is very intentionally aimed at massively regenerating Bradford which has suffered for a good number of years now.

 

[B&I]

If central government is genuinely serious about rebalancing the economy there should be absolutely no question of not providing/enabling suitable funding for NPR/HS3, as well as many of the other TfN proposals, but equally those with a northern bias should avoid suggestions such as diverting funding from Crossrail 2: it's just as important to the efficient functioning of this country's economy. In short transport needs to be given a much higher priority, over the long-term as well as the short, than it has traditionally had. We should all resist the idea that Network Rail's recent shortcomings are a good reason to rein in such important investments in our future prosperity.

That post was a touch mischevious. Even if not a single person more moves to London, it could still do with investment to relieve the nightmarish current conditions. My concern, though, is that this government will point to spending in and around London (always remembering that it cannot benefit solely Labour-voting Londoners, but must also benefit Tory voters in the Home Counties), and say 'that's your lot' railway-wise. Without the investment in improved infrastructure which will enable the north to attract economic development generally, it will never be able to become financially self-sufficient, and able to fund its own infrastructure in future.