East Coast Mainline Blockade for Werrington Junction diveunder

[Ken.W]

11 hours ago, melmerby said:

A question about the signalling during the work

Earlier it was stated that the signals at Tallington Jn. had be modified to allow southbound movements onto to the down slow and then via Helpston Jn. onto the Up Stamford.

Has that meant any extra bi-directional signalling between Tallington Jn. & Helpston Jn. on the down slow, or is it just being used on some emergency rule basis?

 

 

Yes, I'd heard from a former colleague that for this work bi-directional signaling had been installed in the Up direction from Tallington onto the Down Slow and through onto the Up Stamford at Helpston.

 

I did actually make this move once on a previous occasion, I think probably the time that the wires were down actually at Werrington Jn, but that of course was under Pilotman's working and with an HST.

 

7 hours ago, melmerby said:

When I looked at RTT and compared to the signal berths on Railcam there was a difference.

 

Railcam diagrams showed southbound LNER  trains crossing to the down slow at Tallington, then running onto the up Stamford via Helpston Jn. (presumably on diesel), into Peterborough.*

Northbound on Down Stamford/Slow then crossing through Helpston Jn. to the Down fast at Tallington.

 All KX services were via Cambridge as most of the ECML is closed between KX and Posh.

 

Grantham is being used as the start/finish for some trains, presumably to reduce the congestion at Tallington that would arise with the bi-directional single line working on the down slow between Tallington Jn. & Helpston Jn.

 

*EDIT

Can't be any other way as two trains have just passed on the Stamford lines with the Northbound waiting for the Southbound to run on to the Up Stamford before proceeding through Helpston Jn.

 

You can see a Southbound LNER Class 80x on the Up Stamford in the last of Trackside ECML's pictures posted by Mick

 

 

 

Yes, that's the only way the track layout allows this to be done, effectively a single line between Helpston and Tallington, there's no other connection with other lines in between.

[Crun]

New track ready to be put in place:

 

[Crun]

From Railfreight.com

 

Engineering first for freight tunnel:

 

https://www.railfreight.com/corridors/2021/01/14/engineering-first-for-freight-tunnel/

 

Edited January 17, 2021 by Crun

[jamie92208]

This may have been covered before, but for less than £230 million couldn't they havecrebuilt March to Spalding.

 

Jamie

[Richard E]

Just a heads up, apparently Cock Lane footbridge is being closed from 25th January 2021 to 24th January 2022 according to the local rag.

 

https://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/transport/latest-peterborough-roads-and-footpaths-close-works-3102763

 

I can't find anything about this elsewhere so I am taking it with a large pinch of salt ...

Edited January 17, 2021 by Richard E

[Donington Road]

5 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

This may have been covered before, but for less than £230 million couldn't they havecrebuilt March to Spalding.

 

Jamie

 

The same question has arised many times Jamie.  Basically, too much of the old railway has been built upon.  Prison at Whitemoor, new roads in the Spalding area and substantial housing at Spalding.  There are also many road crossings and farm access crossings to consider, bridges across waterways that are in disrepair or missing, etc., etc.

 

Lost Line March to Spalding.pdf

[Donington Road]

31 minutes ago, Richard E said:

Just a heads up, apparently Cock Lane footbridge is being closed from 25th January 2021 to 24th January 2022 according to the local rag.

 

https://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/transport/latest-peterborough-roads-and-footpaths-close-works-3102763

 

I can't find anything about this elsewhere so I am taking it with a large pinch of salt ...

 

Local rag, it must be true.

Perhaps they are going to fit lifts to the bridge.

[melmerby]

58 minutes ago, Richard E said:

Just a heads up, apparently Cock Lane footbridge is being closed from 25th January 2021 to 24th January 2022 according to the local rag.

 

https://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/transport/latest-peterborough-roads-and-footpaths-close-works-3102763

 

I can't find anything about this elsewhere so I am taking it with a large pinch of salt ...

To stop people using it as a camera vantage point?

[melmerby]

28 minutes ago, Donington Road said:

 

The same question has arised many times Jamie.  Basically, too much of the old railway has been built upon.  Prison at Whitemoor, new roads in the Spalding area and substantial housing at Spalding.  There are also many road crossings and farm access crossings to consider, bridges across waterways that are in disrepair or missing, etc., etc.

 

 

I had a look on the last edition OS 1" maps and there were quite a few level crossings, which I assume wouldn't be allowed on what would effectively be a new railway.

[John Tomlinson]

1 hour ago, Richard E said:

Just a heads up, apparently Cock Lane footbridge is being closed from 25th January 2021 to 24th January 2022 according to the local rag.

 

https://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/transport/latest-peterborough-roads-and-footpaths-close-works-3102763

 

I can't find anything about this elsewhere so I am taking it with a large pinch of salt ...

A bit strange that the date space is exactly one year.

 

I wonder if this is simply an administrative or regulatory thing to do with footpath closures, and maybe it will just reopen when they're ready.

 

Something I've picked up elsewhere is that so called "trainspotters" were removed by Police this week from Acton Bridge station in Cheshire, for being in violation of Lockdown rules, so worth remembering that our observations in the coming weeks are only being made in the course of daily exercise.

 

John.

Edited January 17, 2021 by John Tomlinson
clarity

[John Tomlinson]

23 minutes ago, melmerby said:

I had a look on the last edition OS 1" maps and there were quite a few level crossings, which I assume wouldn't be allowed on what would effectively be a new railway.

Presumably that's exactly the point, if it had remained open there wouldn't be an issue!

 

Completely academic now, but it is a question as to whether the costs of basic upkeep over the last few decades would have been less than the £230 million referred to, plus there would have been the benefit of a more direct railway, albeit little used for much of the time.

 

John.

[Crun]

Sunday 17th January, views from Cock Lane bridge:

 

 

Edited January 17, 2021 by Crun

[caradoc]

Questions regarding whether retaining March-Spalding might have been better/cheaper; Does all the freight traffic planned to use the new diveunder come from/go to the Ely direction, or are there flows from/to the ECML south of Peterborough which will also benefit ? 

And is the Peterborough/Spalding passenger service a major issue; IIRC they at present run via the Up Slow thus avoiding conflict with the ECML Fast Lines (although the flyover will of course provide platforming flexibility at Peterborough) ?

 

[Ken.W]

45 minutes ago, caradoc said:

Questions regarding whether retaining March-Spalding might have been better/cheaper; Does all the freight traffic planned to use the new diveunder come from/go to the Ely direction, or are there flows from/to the ECML south of Peterborough which will also benefit ? 

And is the Peterborough/Spalding passenger service a major issue; IIRC they at present run via the Up Slow thus avoiding conflict with the ECML Fast Lines (although the flyover will of course provide platforming flexibility at Peterborough) ?

 

 

The only remaining regular freight service on the ECML south of Peterborough that I can recall's the Great Heck - Biggleswade breeze blocks.

 

And yes, during the last major remodelling of Peterborough station bi-directional signaling was installed on the Up Slow to Werrington, so the Spalding service doesn't conflict with the main line in either direction.

 

Regarding platform flexibility, generally no real need. The Spalding, on the Up Slow feeds straight into Pl.1 without conflict with other platforms*, and where it can remain until its time to return, again on the Up Slow. It's also long enough to share with terminating GN/TL services. This leaves 2 & 3 for southbound ML services.

On the Down side, 4 & 5 are regularly both used for northbound ML services, and the new island, 6 & 7 for Stamford / Ely services in either direction.

The only regular conflict in the present arrangement is that terminating GN/TL services must cross over into one of the Up side platforms if turning back south

 

*Pl.1 is the Up Slow and to access any other platform from US you first of all cross onto the Up Fast

Edited January 17, 2021 by Ken.W

[Donington Road]

29 minutes ago, caradoc said:

Questions regarding whether retaining March-Spalding might have been better/cheaper; Does all the freight traffic planned to use the new diveunder come from/go to the Ely direction, or are there flows from/to the ECML south of Peterborough which will also benefit ? 

 

Quite a bit comes and goes on the ECML from the south, London Gateway. Tilbury, Bow, Willesden, Ripple Lane, Tonbridge, Bow, to name some of them.

 

29 minutes ago, caradoc said:

And is the Peterborough/Spalding passenger service a major issue; IIRC they at present run via the Up Slow thus avoiding conflict with the ECML Fast Lines (although the flyover will of course provide platforming flexibility at Peterborough) ?

 

 

Passenger services will still use the old Werrington Junction bi-directionally via the Up Slow.  There are about 20 services a day operated by EMR that go to and from Spalding plus others that go to Lincoln and beyond.  Sometimes these services are routed from Peterborough via the Down Fast to Werrington Junction if there is spare capacity so as to allow 'waiting' freight to come out of the junction on to the Up Slow.

[Crun]

With the East Coast Main Line tracks at #Werrington removed, our #EastCoastUpgrade teams are making good progress excavating earth from in front of our 155 metre, 11,000 tonne tunnel so it can be pushed forward.

A limited train service is able to use the tracks to the side. https://t.co/ChyK58AtiA

[Richard E]

Some more pictures from Twitter. The attached comment remarked upon the work to say that good progress was being made. In current circumstances and taking into account local topography I think these are going to be the best pictures we will get.

 

Soil coming out from in front of the box.

 

 

Viewed from the joint line direction. Interesting to see that the OHLE masts which were replaced early on in the project are spaced such that they do not have to be removed.

 

 

From the south.

 

 

[melmerby]

I wonder what the stringing between some of the masts is for?

Is it to stop the masts being pulled back by still attached OHLE?

 

[Richard E]

8 minutes ago, melmerby said:

I wonder what the stringing between some of the masts is for?

Is it to stop the masts being pulled back by still attached OHLE?

 

 

Looking at the pictures again I'd say that assumption is spot on.

[iands]

Not so sure it's to stop any "pull back" of the masts. Given that the "stringing" is only above the immediate work site (excavators etc.), to me it just looks like the wires have been covered with some sort of "tubing" to make them more visible to the workforce working below them, simply to heighten the wires visibility, in an effort to avoid accidentally hitting the wires with any "plant" and bringing them down. Of course, I could be completely wrong.

[melmerby]

1 hour ago, iands said:

Not so sure it's to stop any "pull back" of the masts. Given that the "stringing" is only above the immediate work site (excavators etc.), to me it just looks like the wires have been covered with some sort of "tubing"

Blowing up the images suggests that this could well be the case.

The wires have been disconnected from the arms (which have been rotated 90 degrees) and lifted up to the steelwork:

 

 

[Ken.W]

Agreed, it looked to me that the wires are still up, just tied up to the structures to give extra height and covered for visibility. Just noticed this is shown more clearly in the first photo (posted by Richard E) at the top of this page.

They couldn't, I'm sure, just take out a short section of wire like the length of this worksite, a typical cable run's I believe about a mile in length and they're run off and tensioned at each end, not jointed. Any sort of edge in a jointed wire would cause damage to the carbon contact strip of the pans.

[Jaggzuk]

Similar OLE contact wire protection used at Kings Cross.
https://twitter.com/RealJohnWynne/status/1343886590150660096/photo/2

 

A better view of the wire slew and rasing of the contact droper hanger posts in this tweet

https://twitter.com/ECMLupgrade/status/1350483394757537795/photo/1

All to give better safe construction working clearance for all the excvators.

 

 

 

Edited January 18, 2021 by Jaggzuk
additional link

[rodent279]

2 hours ago, Ken.W said:

Agreed, it looked to me that the wires are still up, just tied up to the structures to give extra height and covered for visibility. Just noticed this is shown more clearly in the first photo (posted by Richard E) at the top of this page.

They couldn't, I'm sure, just take out a short section of wire like the length of this worksite, a typical cable run's I believe about a mile in length and they're run off and tensioned at each end, not jointed. Any sort of edge in a jointed wire would cause damage to the carbon contact strip of the pans.

Contact wire can be joined with a splice, at least it could in the original southern section of the WCML electrification. My dad was given one, polished up and mounted on a piece of wood when he retired. Whether it's still done or not I don't know. Maybe it's frowned upon where line speeds are high.

[Crun]

The latest photographs: