GhostManDN91
Member
Hi all, not sure if it's been asked previously. I was wondering how come there is EPS on the Stoke-on-Trent to Cheadle Hulme via Macclesfield line but not from Crewe to Cheadle Hulme via Wilmslow?
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Wilmslow to Crewe: Enhanced Permitted Speed (EPS)?
- Thread starter GhostManDN91
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Because it’s 110 to Crewe for anything, no tilt required. It’s pretty straight, unlike the line via Macclesfield. Used to be 100 from Edgeley Junction No. 2 so just got upgraded over most of the length to 110. The entire line via Macclesfield used to be 85 maximum back at the same time.
If you mean EPS more than 110, it probably wasn’t thought worth the extra expense. 20 miles at 125mph is just over a minute faster than at 110mph.
If you mean EPS more than 110, it probably wasn’t thought worth the extra expense. 20 miles at 125mph is just over a minute faster than at 110mph.
Last edited:
The via Macclesfield line is also much busier with tilting stock.
I don't know what the services were like back when EPS was being installed, but at present you have 2x Avanti and 2x XC via Macclesfield Vs 1x Avanti via Wilmslow. (XC originally having tilt on the 221s)
Is it also worth noting that via Wilmslow, you have much more local services and freight to get around. (Were TFW possibly using 15x when EPS was being installed on the Manchesters?) 2x northern stoppers and at least 1tph freight. 125mph would have made pathing these harder
Last edited by a moderator:
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
The Manchester-Crewe line got bi-di signalling between Cheadle Hulme and Sandbach instead, all for improving freight capacity and resilience.
This was before HS2 was planned.
The nightmare scenario for NR was the prospect of pathing more fast trains via Crewe under Phase 2a (there would have been fewer via Stoke).
With HS2 now down to Phase 1, the current split via Stoke/Crewe can be maintained.
Nevertheless, it is odd that EPS wasn't implemented, as the cost would have been peanuts compared to that of the renewal/upgrade work actually done.
The speed/capacity issue is still prevalent on the Stoke route too, limiting more freight and stopper paths being offered.
This was before HS2 was planned.
The nightmare scenario for NR was the prospect of pathing more fast trains via Crewe under Phase 2a (there would have been fewer via Stoke).
With HS2 now down to Phase 1, the current split via Stoke/Crewe can be maintained.
Nevertheless, it is odd that EPS wasn't implemented, as the cost would have been peanuts compared to that of the renewal/upgrade work actually done.
The speed/capacity issue is still prevalent on the Stoke route too, limiting more freight and stopper paths being offered.