Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Depends really on what the issues are, which the news article doesn't go into.

 

But more generally, the governments for the last 70 years?

 

While there perhaps is some blame on NR, the reality is that NR and the TOC are dealing with neglect of the network since WW2, and the last 20 years of major expenditures can only go so far in dealing with both the neglect and the growth in traffic.

 

As always, it is also worth remembering that a lot of NR stuff gets done each year without problems.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone, by the look of it. 

 

It's all very well taking franchises off TOCs . Who takes the network off NR when they screw up?

 

Amid all the talk about HS2 being cancelled or radically cut in favour of "upgrading existing railways" nobody mentions that we've already tried upgrading the MML - but the project has completely collapsed because NR proved incapable of delivering it....

 

More of the same, in a milder form, affecting the North West electrification  schemes seems to be part of the problem here

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the work required to make the 2018 Manchester timetable work was deferred by Calamity Chris aka Failing Grayling and his insistence that the Digital Railway would cure all of the capacity problems in the North without spending any money.

The current timetable has approximately 12 tph each way through Piccadilly platforms 13 and 14 at busy times. As some of these need to cross to the Ordsall Chord ar Castlefield, plus crossing up to 3 tph extra into and out of platform 5 at  Oxford Road there is no leeway for delay as all of the trains have numerous junction conflicts on their journeys let alone delays due to alighting and boarding overcriwded trains.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

Amid all the talk about HS2 being cancelled or radically cut in favour of "upgrading existing railways" nobody mentions that we've already tried upgrading the MML - but the project has completely collapsed because NR proved incapable of delivering it....

 

Not familiar with the MML, but these pages would seem to indicate that work progresses

 

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/our-routes/east-midlands/midland-main-line-upgrade/midland-main-line-upgrade-plan-bedford-to-kettering

 

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/our-routes/east-midlands/midland-main-line-upgrade

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally it was supposed to go all the way to Sheffield but is now a fraction of that. I suspect that's what was being referred to. Rather similar to the GW electrification... Oxford anyone?! 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Ravenser said:

Everyone, by the look of it. 

 

It's all very well taking franchises off TOCs . Who takes the network off NR when they screw up?

 

Amid all the talk about HS2 being cancelled or radically cut in favour of "upgrading existing railways" nobody mentions that we've already tried upgrading the MML - but the project has completely collapsed because NR proved incapable of delivering it....

 

More of the same, in a milder form, affecting the North West electrification  schemes seems to be part of the problem here

 

 

I fear that the order for bi-modes has knocked further wiring on the head despite bridges being raised and ready.

NR was asked to do too much, too quickly and believed its own hype over digital railway 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

The current timetable has approximately 12 tph each way through Piccadilly platforms 13 and 14 at busy times. As some of these need to cross to the Ordsall Chord ar Castlefield, plus crossing up to 3 tph extra into and out of platform 5 at  Oxford Road there is no leeway for delay as all of the trains have numerous junction conflicts on their journeys let alone delays due to alighting and boarding overcriwded trains.


Spot on.  The Ordsall curve would only work if there were four tracks between Deansgate and Piccadilly, which would have two new platforms, P15 and P16.  This has not been built and will all the new developments close to the railway is probably impossible (unless the two extra tracks are above the existing ones).  All the curve has achieved is to reduce the problem on the Stockport side of Piccadilly where trains from the NE had to cross right over to get to P13/14 and Manchester Airport. But improving that it has created a whole complex of flat crossings to the West of Piccadilly and Victoria with conflicting moves.  All it takes is one train to be late and everything is late.  I believe it is now recognised that the track simply does not have the capacity to carry the number of trains scheduled to run over if.  The only solution is to run fewer trains which will not be popular with the public and will impact on revenue for the train companies.

 

So what it boils down to is NR saying they will deliver infrastructure improvements and the franchises bidding on the assumption that NR will deliver its promises.  NR then fail to deliver and the TOCs do not meet their revenue (profit) forecasts and punctuality slips below what is reasonable.  The TOCs themselves are failing too, for example Northern based everything on ordering new trains which they assumed would be delivered on time and assumed they would work out of the box with no contingency for when they didn’t.  History shows new trains arrive late and need lots of modifications before they work properly).

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ColinK said:

The TOCs themselves are failing too, for example Northern based everything on ordering new trains which they assumed would be delivered on time and assumed they would work out of the box with no contingency for when they didn’t.  History shows new trains arrive late and need lots of modifications before they work properly).

 

They have to believe something, though, and base their forecasts on that... Perhaps it would be more appropriate to blame the manufacturers for over-optimistic timescales, though no doubt they'd have some excuse up their sleeve...

 

It's always someone else fault, story of the world these days...

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/01/2020 at 11:32, ColinK said:


Spot on.  The Ordsall curve would only work if there were four tracks between Deansgate and Piccadilly, which would have two new platforms, P15 and P16.  This has not been built and will all the new developments close to the railway is probably impossible (unless the two extra tracks are above the existing ones).  All the curve has achieved is to reduce the problem on the Stockport side of Piccadilly where trains from the NE had to cross right over to get to P13/14 and Manchester Airport. But improving that it has created a whole complex of flat crossings to the West of Piccadilly and Victoria with conflicting moves.  All it takes is one train to be late and everything is late.  I believe it is now recognised that the track simply does not have the capacity to carry the number of trains scheduled to run over if.  The only solution is to run fewer trains which will not be popular with the public and will impact on revenue for the train companies.

 

So what it boils down to is NR saying they will deliver infrastructure improvements and the franchises bidding on the assumption that NR will deliver its promises.  NR then fail to deliver and the TOCs do not meet their revenue (profit) forecasts and punctuality slips below what is reasonable.  The TOCs themselves are failing too, for example Northern based everything on ordering new trains which they assumed would be delivered on time and assumed they would work out of the box with no contingency for when they didn’t.  History shows new trains arrive late and need lots of modifications before they work properly).

Didn't Manchester City Council refusing PP because of objections to the demolition of a certain pub have something to do with it? There has recently been a lot of demolition between Fairfield Street and the Mancunian Way anyway.

 

The other part that didn't go ahead was a proposed grade separated junction at Ardwick, which would have helped things along, no?

Edited by 62613
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 62613 said:

Didn't Manchester City Council refusing PP because of objections to the demolition of a certain pub have something to do with it? There has recently been a lot of demolition between Fairfield Street and the Mancunian Way anyway.

 

The other part that didn't go ahead was a proposed grade separated junction at Ardwick, which would have helped things along, no?

 

The plan was to leave the building in place: https://inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle/travel/star-garter-drawn-regeneration-plan-put-beloved-music-venue-jeopardy-520645

"The chosen option maintained the Star and Garter, but would still lead to its closure for the whole duration of the three year building project - the whole Mayfield area would be closed to traffic and pedestrians," explains Martin.

"To this end, the Star and Garter as a business would close, and the building sold - either by compulsory purchase order or an outright sale."

 

People I know who are associated with the Star and Garter have long believed that there was an agenda to make a discounted, compulsory purchase of the pub and redevelop it for a big profit. This view is somewhat backed up by the low figures offered: https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/star-and-garter-manchester-pictures-10595403

"There’s a two-bed flat with two parking spaces above a supermarket up for sale for £60k more than we have been offered."

  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 62613 said:

Didn't Manchester City Council refusing PP because of objections to the demolition of a certain pub have something to do with it? There has recently been a lot of demolition between Fairfield Street and the Mancunian Way anyway.

We looked at the options for four-tracking Oxford Road to Piccadilly in the 1990s. IIRC it required several buildings being demolished to fit in. 

 

 

 

30 minutes ago, 62613 said:

The other part that didn't go ahead was a proposed grade separated junction at Ardwick, which would have helped things along, no?

I looked at the idea of grade separation there during the abortive project to transpose lines ibetween Slade Lane and Stockport in the 1990s.

The Railtrack proposal at the time would have done nothing for the Longsight to Piccadilly problems and worsened the problems through Heaton Norris,  Stockport and Edegeley. 

I spent a while sitting on top of one of the signal gantries at Piccadilly one evening rush hour logging the moves and conflicts which caused trains to come to a stand. 90% involved crossing moves to and from platforms 13/14 or reversals of Trans-Pennine to Airport services in the station.

Again the problem was the line being on viaducts so there was not much space without building new tracks alongside

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 5
  • Friendly/supportive 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slade Lane flyover, I remember it well.  Of course the other thing we need is the Pic - Vic tunnel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

I looked at the idea of grade separation there during the abortive project to transpose lines ibetween Slade Lane and Stockport in the 1990s.

The Railtrack proposal at the time would have done nothing for the Longsight to Piccadilly problems and worsened the problems through Heaton Norris,  Stockport and Edegeley. 

I spent a while sitting on top of one of the signal gantries at Piccadilly one evening rush hour logging the moves and conflicts which caused trains to come to a stand. 90% involved crossing moves to and from platforms 13/14 or reversals of Trans-Pennine to Airport services in the station.

Again the problem was the line being on viaducts so there was not much space without building new tracks alongside

 

This in a way sums up the problem.

 

All the "easy" solutions have been done, leaving NR with the problem that any future solutions to the congestion/capacity issues on the UK rail network are going to be both very expensive and likely very disruptive during the work.

 

And as we have seen from HS2, the government and some of the public have no stomach for either no matter how necessary the work/projects might be.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, getting back to the point of this thread, apart from the delayed electrification in the NW, just what are the NR failings/delays that have generated this review?

 

The Northern TOC, and presumably Trans-Pennine, plus maybe others, have obviously complained that it is not just their fault that punctuality and cancellations have been so abysmal right up to the present. Surely this cannot just be about the delayed electrification, which was completed a couple of timetables ago. Surely it cannot be about not four-tracking the Oxford Road- Piccadilly section, which was on a hiding to nothing from both the planners and from the DfT (given the cost), would have likely moved problems further up the line, and would anyway have taken c.5 years to complete.

 

Does anyone know, or can have a decent guess??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ColinK said:

Slade Lane flyover, I remember it well.  Of course the other thing we need is the Pic - Vic tunnel.

The Slade Lane issue was different from the Piccadilly - Ardwick one. Removing the conflicts at Slade Lane meant introducing extra conflicts between Heaton Norris and Adswood Road. The platforms at Levenshulme and Heaton Chapel are on the outside lines, currently the Slows, but it would end up with the either major engineering works and some land take to put the platforms on the Slows or have trains stopping on the Up Fast which screwed the capacity and performance gains of the scheme twice over.

 

3 hours ago, ColinK said:

Of course the other thing we need is the Pic - Vic tunnel.

That would only help with a small number of trains, very expensive and as with the old Guardian Telephone Exchange tunnels would need continuous pumping. 

It would probably have to go underground near the Hyde Road at Longsight and emerge at Collyhurst. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mike Storey said:

But, getting back to the point of this thread, apart from the delayed electrification in the NW, just what are the NR failings/delays that have generated this review?

 

The Northern TOC, and presumably Trans-Pennine, plus maybe others, have obviously complained that it is not just their fault that punctuality and cancellations have been so abysmal right up to the present. Surely this cannot just be about the delayed electrification, which was completed a couple of timetables ago. Surely it cannot be about not four-tracking the Oxford Road- Piccadilly section, which was on a hiding to nothing from both the planners and from the DfT (given the cost), would have likely moved problems further up the line, and would anyway have taken c.5 years to complete.

 

Does anyone know, or can have a decent guess??

 

It's been getting gradually worse since about 2014 and seems to have got quite a lot worse more recently.  I could say they shouldn't have let me retire in 2014, but I think it's got more to do with running more and more trains on the network without enhancing the infrastructure to allow for them, resulting in less resilience in the timetable.  Not just in the north of England, but generally.

 

Re. the Manchester problem, I'm surprised it hasn't been seriously suggested that the Trans Pennine Manchester Airport services revert to their previous route via Guide Bridge to Piccadilly (reverse).  Apart from loss of face, it would mean they wouldn't serve Victoria, but the Trans Pennine Liverpool route trains still would, and I suppose it might mean re-jigging the Huddersfield-Man Picc stoppers.

 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mike Storey said:

But, getting back to the point of this thread, apart from the delayed electrification in the NW, just what are the NR failings/delays that have generated this review?

 

The Northern TOC, and presumably Trans-Pennine, plus maybe others, have obviously complained that it is not just their fault that punctuality and cancellations have been so abysmal right up to the present. Surely this cannot just be about the delayed electrification, which was completed a couple of timetables ago. Surely it cannot be about not four-tracking the Oxford Road- Piccadilly section, which was on a hiding to nothing from both the planners and from the DfT (given the cost), would have likely moved problems further up the line, and would anyway have taken c.5 years to complete.

 

Does anyone know, or can have a decent guess??

When I was doing some work on LNW North lines proposals c2014 I was given by Network Rail lots of info on CP5 proposals for Northern Hub and other schemes. It is worth looking at what was proposed for CP5 which finished nearly 12 months ago. Timetabling and franchise bids were based on these proposals together with the new rolling stock.

 

These are items proposed in Northern Hub taken from documents in the public domain

 

Scope of Works

a) Committed Pre-HLOS
- Works announced in advance of HLOS by the Chancellor in March 2011 and March 2012:-.

 

  • Ordsall Chord - New railway line in west Manchester providing a direct route, for the first time, between Manchester Victoria and Manchester Piccadilly
  • Manchester Victoria - To address the increased passenger numbers a provision of £1m has been agreed towards the Manchester Victoria redevelopment project for delivery in 2014
  • Huyton and Roby Capacity Stage 1 - First stage of four tracking at this location. Stage 1 delivers the third track for an interim layout. Stage 2 is delivered later
  • Preston JTI (Journey Time Improvements) - Infrastructure improvements between Salford Crescent and Euxton Junction via Bolton to reduce journey times.
  • Chinley Capacity - Provision of overtaking and turnback facilities
  • Dore & Grindleford Capacity - Doubling of the single line between Dore West & Dore Station Jct and provision of freight recessing facilities
  • Marple JTI - Infrastructure improvements between New Mills and Ashburys to provide journey time savings
  • Hope Valley JTI - Infrastructure improvements between Dore and New Mills South Junction to provide journey time savings
  • Calder Valley JTI - Infrastructure improvements between Manchester and Bradford to provide journey time savings


b) HLOS scope
- The HLOS in July 2012 covered the scope detailed below:-

  • Manchester Oxford Road station - Remodelling to provide capacity to accommodate longer, more frequent trains
  • Manchester Piccadilly station - Provision of two additional through platforms (15 & 16)
  • Manchester Airport 4th platform - Additional capacity to accommodate extra services from Manchester city centre in CP5
  • Manchester Victoria Capacity - Layout alterations to provide capacity and flexibility
  • Core Manchester Performance - Castlefield corridor and Ordsall Lane junction capacity and performance improvements
  • Chat Moss Capacity  - Headway improvements to provide additional capacity between Liverpool to Manchester via Newton-le-Willows
  • Huyton & Roby Capacity Stage 2 - Completion of the four tracking between these stations. Stage 1 delivered a third track and was announced pre-HLOS
  • Chester JTI - Infrastructure improvements between Earlestown and Chester to provide journey time savings.
  • Rochdale Capacity - Provision of an overtaking and turnback facility


Significant interfaces included the following

  • Northern Urban Centres
  • Manchester Victoria redevelopment
  • Strategic Freight Network
  • North West Electrification Programme
  • Trans Pennine Electrification - Target completion Manchester - Leeds - York / Selby available for through electric running of passenger and freight by December 2018
  • Manchester Rail Operating Centre (S&C and Cumbrian Coast should have been on it around now.)
  • Leeds to Liverpool JTI
  • DfT Rolling Stock strategy
  • CP5 renewals plans
  • HS2


Key assumptions included the following

  • Delivery of Manchester Victoria station redevelopment is achieved during 2014.
  • That the Journey Time Improvements between Manchester Victoria and Stalybridge are delivered through the CP4 Leeds to Liverpool scheme with delivery deferred to CP5.
  • Huyton Stage 1 will be completed in time for the planned timetable change in December 2014.
  • The Ordsall Chord, Huyton Stage 2, Rochdale, Calder Valley JTI, Chat Moss Capacity, Preston JTI, Manchester Airport 4th platform and Manchester Victoria infrastructure will be available for use for the December 2016 timetable change.
  • The remaining works will be available for use for the December 2018 timetable change.

 

For a bit of amusement here is a flyer issued by Network Rail

Northern Hub factsheet June 2013.pdf

  • Informative/Useful 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

Surely it cannot be about not four-tracking the Oxford Road- Piccadilly section,

I did some risk assessments on the proposed Manchester Control Area a few years ago. The two-track section through Deansgate towards Oxford Road was the busiest line on the whole of the area. Since then the number of train movements through there in 24 hours has increased by about 20%. It carries more than twice the traffic of some of the four-track routes. The next busiest routes in the north-west were the Styal lines between Slade Lane and Heald Green and the old GC line through Ashburys East Junction. The next busiest was the multi-track section from Salford Central to Collyhurst.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

When I was doing some work on LNW North lines proposals c2014 I was given by Network Rail lots of info on CP5 proposals for Northern Hub and other schemes. It is worth looking at what was proposed for CP5 which finished nearly 12 months ago. Timetabling and franchise bids were based on these proposals together with the new rolling stock.

 

These are items proposed in Northern Hub taken from documents in the public domain

 

Scope of Works

a) Committed Pre-HLOS
- Works announced in advance of HLOS by the Chancellor in March 2011 and March 2012:-.

 

  • Ordsall Chord - New railway line in west Manchester providing a direct route, for the first time, between Manchester Victoria and Manchester Piccadilly
  • Manchester Victoria - To address the increased passenger numbers a provision of £1m has been agreed towards the Manchester Victoria redevelopment project for delivery in 2014
  • Huyton and Roby Capacity Stage 1 - First stage of four tracking at this location. Stage 1 delivers the third track for an interim layout. Stage 2 is delivered later
  • Preston JTI (Journey Time Improvements) - Infrastructure improvements between Salford Crescent and Euxton Junction via Bolton to reduce journey times.
  • Chinley Capacity - Provision of overtaking and turnback facilities
  • Dore & Grindleford Capacity - Doubling of the single line between Dore West & Dore Station Jct and provision of freight recessing facilities
  • Marple JTI - Infrastructure improvements between New Mills and Ashburys to provide journey time savings
  • Hope Valley JTI - Infrastructure improvements between Dore and New Mills South Junction to provide journey time savings
  • Calder Valley JTI - Infrastructure improvements between Manchester and Bradford to provide journey time savings


b) HLOS scope
- The HLOS in July 2012 covered the scope detailed below:-

  • Manchester Oxford Road station - Remodelling to provide capacity to accommodate longer, more frequent trains
  • Manchester Piccadilly station - Provision of two additional through platforms (15 & 16)
  • Manchester Airport 4th platform - Additional capacity to accommodate extra services from Manchester city centre in CP5
  • Manchester Victoria Capacity - Layout alterations to provide capacity and flexibility
  • Core Manchester Performance - Castlefield corridor and Ordsall Lane junction capacity and performance improvements
  • Chat Moss Capacity  - Headway improvements to provide additional capacity between Liverpool to Manchester via Newton-le-Willows
  • Huyton & Roby Capacity Stage 2 - Completion of the four tracking between these stations. Stage 1 delivered a third track and was announced pre-HLOS
  • Chester JTI - Infrastructure improvements between Earlestown and Chester to provide journey time savings.
  • Rochdale Capacity - Provision of an overtaking and turnback facility


Significant interfaces included the following

  • Northern Urban Centres
  • Manchester Victoria redevelopment
  • Strategic Freight Network
  • North West Electrification Programme
  • Trans Pennine Electrification - Target completion Manchester - Leeds - York / Selby available for through electric running of passenger and freight by December 2018
  • Manchester Rail Operating Centre (S&C and Cumbrian Coast should have been on it around now.)
  • Leeds to Liverpool JTI
  • DfT Rolling Stock strategy
  • CP5 renewals plans
  • HS2


Key assumptions included the following

  • Delivery of Manchester Victoria station redevelopment is achieved during 2014.
  • That the Journey Time Improvements between Manchester Victoria and Stalybridge are delivered through the CP4 Leeds to Liverpool scheme with delivery deferred to CP5.
  • Huyton Stage 1 will be completed in time for the planned timetable change in December 2014.
  • The Ordsall Chord, Huyton Stage 2, Rochdale, Calder Valley JTI, Chat Moss Capacity, Preston JTI, Manchester Airport 4th platform and Manchester Victoria infrastructure will be available for use for the December 2016 timetable change.
  • The remaining works will be available for use for the December 2018 timetable change.

 

For a bit of amusement here is a flyer issued by Network Rail

Northern Hub factsheet June 2013.pdf 84.55 kB · 1 download

 

Many thanks for this, but, apart from several, well known delays and the non-completion of Piccadilly 15 and 16, what others on this list never got done (or are still being done)? (It is hard to pluck these out from the NR website or any other website. Excuse my ignorance).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Network Rail don't seem to want to tell anyone what they have and haven't achieved in CP5 across the northwest and transpennine routes.

I'm out of the loop now except as an occasional passenger, even with a Silvertop I avoid train travel in the Manchester area wherever possible. Yes it is that bad.

 

Going through the list there are a few obvious things that I have seen but without tracking through the Notices it's a bit difficult to be specific.

This is my personal perception of achievements 

 

  • Ordsall Chord - Done
  • Manchester Victoria - Whatever done doesn't seem to have improved things much, Operation seems as chaotic as ever. Ordsall Chord connections around Deal Street / Salford Central may have enhanced flexibility a bit
  • Huyton and Roby Capacity Stage 1 - Done
  • Preston JTI (Journey Time Improvements) - Some infrastructure improvements between Salford Crescent and Euxton Junction done but how much it has improved other than performance of electric trains ???
  • Chinley Capacity - Provision of overtaking and turnback facilities nothing done
  • Dore & Grindleford Capacity - Doubling of the single line between Dore West & Dore Station Jct and provision of freight recessing facilities nothing done
  • Marple JTI - Infrastructure improvements between New Mills and Ashburys not seen anything done except abolition of a couple of Block Posts without providing any more signals
  • Hope Valley JTI - Infrastructure improvements between Dore and New Mills South Junction nothing done
  • Calder Valley JTI - Infrastructure improvements between Manchester and Bradford ?????
  • Manchester Oxford Road station - Remodelling to provide capacity to accommodate longer, more frequent trains nothing done
  • Manchester Piccadilly station - Provision of two additional through platforms (15 & 16) nothing done
  • Manchester Airport 4th platform - Done
  • Manchester Victoria Capacity - Layout alterations to provide capacity and flexibility Don't think anyting has changed except at junction to Ordsall Chord
  • Core Manchester Performance - Castlefield corridor and Ordsall Lane junction capacity and performance improvements Can't see that anything has changed. 
  • Chat Moss Capacity  - Headway improvements to provide additional capacity between Liverpool to Manchester via Newton-le-Willows ?????
  • Huyton & Roby Capacity Stage 2 - Done Now four tracks through Huyton and Roby stations to junction of Chat Moss and St Helens lines
  • Chester JTI - Infrastructure improvements between Earlestown and Chester to provide journey time savings. ?????
  • Rochdale Capacity - Turnback done but no overtaking facility yet.
  • North West Electrification Programme - Mostly done
  • Trans Pennine Electrification - Nothing much has happened east of Manchester
  • Manchester Rail Operating Centre -  ???? Will it ever get finished, considering that 29 years ago I was designated Signalling Project Engineer for the even numbered stages of the proposed Manchester South IECC (located at Ashburys strangely enough). The last of 10 stages IIRC was the Hope Valley resignalling and improvement works due for completion in 2008.
  • Leeds to Liverpool JTI - ????? My recent trip Manchester to York started late going and got later. Coming back right time from York, 5 late from Leeds, 20 late at Piccadilly.
  • DfT Rolling Stock strategy:lol:

Anyone in the know able to expand on any of this please?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

 

  • Calder Valley JTI - Infrastructure improvements between Manchester and Bradford ?????

 

Bradford Interchange - Rochdale was resignalled recently which removed the intermediate signal boxes, and I believe the signal spacing was altered to improve performance and increase capacity.  As a passenger on it fairly frequently, it certainly seems that 'fasts' (York-Blackpool) are no longer checked for catching up with the preceding stopper at the IB signals in the Luddendenfoot area (between Sowerby Bridge & Mytholmroyd) which used to be quite regular.

 

Also, (I think not covered by your list) the layout at Bradford Interchange was remodelled (again) as part of the resignalling to reduce conflicts.

 

Otherwise, also from a 'no longer involved' perspective, as far as I know I agree with what you've said above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, 31A said:

 

Bradford Interchange - Rochdale was resignalled recently which removed the intermediate signal boxes,

Thanks, I've only travelled up there once recently as far as Hebden to ride the towpath back to Manchester but remember one of my old staff members saying he was working at Hebden Bridge about a year or so ago. The only thing I noticed was the work for the Rochdale turnback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know nothing about the specifics, but who holds Network Rail and its staff to account ?

 

Why is the rolling stock delayed?

 

These are two factors out of the hands of the train operator, could they have done something to reduce the effects of issues with both Network rail and the rolling stock providers, ? Then have they done all they can to ensure all their existing assets (staff, rolling stock ect) could be used to minimise the effects these other issues have caused.

 

All well and good criticising MP's but surely the issues are with these 3 companies and some of their staff failing to do what they have committed to

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 31A said:

 

Bradford Interchange - Rochdale was resignalled recently which removed the intermediate signal boxes, and I believe the signal spacing was altered to improve performance and increase capacity.  As a passenger on it fairly frequently, it certainly seems that 'fasts' (York-Blackpool) are no longer checked for catching up with the preceding stopper at the IB signals in the Luddendenfoot area (between Sowerby Bridge & Mytholmroyd) which used to be quite regular.

 

Also, (I think not covered by your list) the layout at Bradford Interchange was remodelled (again) as part of the resignalling to reduce conflicts.

 

Otherwise, also from a 'no longer involved' perspective, as far as I know I agree with what you've said above.

 

The entire Calder Valley has now been re-signalled (although some delays to commissioning), with improved headways and closure of several boxes (including Hebden).

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.