Transpennine Upgrade : Manchester/Leeds

[31A]

Might this line be an opportunity to revisit the idea of tilting trains, which seems to have gone out of favour having been 'flavour of the month' at the beginning of this century?  Maybe even just refurbish and re-allocate the Cross Country tilting Voyagers, which no longer do so where they're used at the moment.  Although there probably wouldn't be enough of them.

[jamie92208]

4 hours ago, mac1960 said:

I think it would be very difficult to increase line speeds on this route with out extensive re building due to its curvature on both sides of Pennine hills. It was always known for being a twisty route in steam days (Grandad was a driver on it) with much a battering being taken due to curves. The route down to Huddersfield from Marsden has had its speed increased due to the use of all the old 4 track right of way, and is probably at its maximum. The S turns on leaving Stanedge at Marsden have also always been a speed check as well. However I am skeptical that this, or indeed any other UK govt will undertake a new tunnel running from West of Diggle to East of Slaithwaite. There is work going on currently at the Eastern end of Stanedge with contractors cabins by the old single line tunnels, but I am not sure what this is to do with. I do know that the radius of the tunnel currently in use is very tight for electrification, and would probably have to have the track bed lowered considerably, with the corresponding issue of clearances on some freight wagons. As I say I just do not think there is the political will or indeed cash for such a development.     

The double track tunnel is built on top of the canal tunnel so track lowering is going to be very difficult. I suspect that the profile of the older single track bores would allow for the gauge clearance they want.  

 

Jamie

[jamie92208]

Can I correct my post above.  The double track tunnel is actually slightly north of and above the canal tunnel. The two single track bires are above and to the sputh of the canal. All four are connected by various adits and cross passages.  Historically the fastvlines, with the better approach were the single track ones.  This image is the best that I can come up with at the moment.

 

i do remember hearing a talk from the original  Trans Pennine Electrification team at which they stated that the tunnels were not a mojor problem.  It may well be gauge clearance to W12 for the upper corners of  containers that may be the problem.  Fortunately the tunnels are straight.

 

Jamie

Edited April 21, 2022 by jamie92208

[mac1960]

The  tunnels are not straight, at the eastern end there is the bend already discussed. I went through the canal tunnel when it was being refurbished and drained with an old friend who was PM on the job. We had a walk up into the old bores, and he said electrification would be difficult in the spaces in all tunnels, as the tunnels were not too high. Bearing in mind this was in the late 1980,s and electrification was wishful thinking. I think we will find that we will get some new or refurbished stock and  maybe some station alterations, but I am not convinced we will see much in the way of high speed rail though these valleys. Also with the Govt wanting us to use rail more, the local stations on the route will have to be accommodated along with any acceleration and indeed freight.

 

Cheers

Mac

[Mike Storey]

I guess you are all referring to the short term plan to fully electrify the route, as opposed to the apparent sanctioned plan for a new route between Manchester and east of Standedge.

 

On electrification, perhaps it would not need full clearance, as needed for Mark 3b, or Mark 4 (F7F) OLE. Perhaps the fixed bar system, as used in the Severn Tunnel for GWEP, may be adequate?

 

[mac1960]

Mike 

I have heard so many tales over the years of the impending electrification of this route that my scepticism is some what high. I frankly do not believe that there is the traffic or money to build a Stanedge  “ Base tunnel” , so fully expect to see some slight improvements, and maybe some more loops, but I am not sure that much else will be forthcoming, as in the end of the day it is a provincial rail route with little freight, and local services. Therefore you seem to believe we are going to build  a  tunnel of circa 6 - 9 miles, for the faster trains between NE and NW, but currently that is only circa 4 trains per hour. Not a good return on that type of investment.

 

Cheers

Mac

[Zomboid]

Rounded arched structures don't tend to be too problematic for electrification because they're taller in the middle where the wires go. It's flatter arches and flat girder structures which tend to be more of a problem, or situations like at Steventon where the wire height has to change rapidly because of the structure.

 

I don't know Standedge, but if it was built to have steam engines running though without suffocating the crew then it's probably not to bad for wires or a conductor beam system. I think it would be a beam in there anyway to avoid nonsense like needing tensioning equipment in such an inaccessible location, rather than clearances.

[Grovenor]

44 minutes ago, mac1960 said:

Mike 

I have heard so many tales over the years of the impending electrification of this route that my scepticism is some what high. I frankly do not believe that there is the traffic or money to build a Stanedge  “ Base tunnel” , so fully expect to see some slight improvements, and maybe some more loops, but I am not sure that much else will be forthcoming, as in the end of the day it is a provincial rail route with little freight, and local services. Therefore you seem to believe we are going to build  a  tunnel of circa 6 - 9 miles, for the faster trains between NE and NW, but currently that is only circa 4 trains per hour. Not a good return on that type of investment.

 

Cheers

Mac

Its nothing to do with the current traffic or even money, this is a plan fo a high speed line to cater for the next 100 years. The proposal is to do a bit of improving and electrifying on the existing route to cover the 20 years while the high speed route is designed and built.

Will it happen, well I am pretty sure I won't live to see it, but those under 50 may have a chance.

[SHMD]

10 hours ago, 62613 said:

There is through Dukinfield!

 

Relatively few.

 

Today, in the pouring rain, the dog took me round "Countess St. Depot" for a nosey.

This view is from atop Granville St. Bridge looking West towards Manchester.

It shows the "Countess St. Depot" and the recent earth works, ( where the digger is in the distance).

The Guide Bridge "avoiding line" was to the left of the current "original lines".

 

Looking East, from the same vantage point, you can see that "half the vans" would have to go.

(Not many "Mills" left in Stalybridge these days!)

 

One soggy doggy!

 

 

Kev.

 

 

 

 

StalyGuideBridge1.png

[SHMD]

The old Guide Bridge "avoiding line" route would make a good improvement to the current alignment - if you wanted to double-up to four tracks, increase line speeds, whilst impacting (spending more) on local businesses.

 

Here is the current situation between Guide Bridge, (on the lower left), and Stalybridge, (just off view at the upper right).

The old "avoiding line alignment is remarkably clear - if you know where to look.

 

To clarify my thoughts, I have added some "finger painting" to the view!

Whilst a few (5 to 10 small unit based businesses) would be moved/lost, re-instating thew original alignment "looks" much better.

(Actually, I think I have drawn the route of the former LNWR Guide Bridge avoiding line wrong - below my No. 3. I think it should be west of the River Tame from that point onwards.)

 

The "current route", in yellow, has a distinct "kink" to the north to accommodate a station as close as possible to the centre of Ashton.

The legacy is many many decades of slow running since the station closed. (Don't make the same "compromise" mistake on HS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5....)

 

This is the view looking west, at Wharf St. Bridge, towards Manchester.

It is very typical of the area.

 

 

Kev.

 

 

[PenrithBeacon]

Wet and cold

[Titan]

1 hour ago, Zomboid said:

Rounded arched structures don't tend to be too problematic for electrification because they're taller in the middle where the wires go. It's flatter arches and flat girder structures which tend to be more of a problem, or situations like at Steventon where the wire height has to change rapidly because of the structure.

 

I don't know Standedge, but if it was built to have steam engines running though without suffocating the crew then it's probably not to bad for wires or a conductor beam system. I think it would be a beam in there anyway to avoid nonsense like needing tensioning equipment in such an inaccessible location, rather than clearances.

 

Very much so, tunnels are rarely a problem due to plenty of space above, although sometimes in extreme cases you have to start worrying about the passing pantograph getting a bit close on the corners, which may mean the wires have to be a bit low to keep it clear, despite the OLE having plenty of clearance electrically!  The modern tensioning devices are very compact and allegedly low maintenance (guess we will find out how true that is in a few years} so tunnel installation is not a problem.

[mac1960]

Grovenor

I am not sure even in 100 years if  there will be a  “ Base tunnel” in the Colne Valley  As for traffic flows I think rail freight in the UK, with the exception of certain block and liner trains is declining rapidly from an already low base, even if you include infrastructure movements, due the declining coal haul. The passenger traffic is already, as I said earlier irelatively small on this route , when you strike out local services, which would still use the existing route. As for cost you have not obviously been involved in large infrastructure projects which both I, and indeed my wife have, some even rail related, and the dealings with the Treasury this involves. The electrification might well happen, but do not expect much higher line speeds or any form of HS3.
As for HS2 I am already a regular commuter to London, and have been for many years, and drive to Wakefield to board my trains south with the Yorkshire Pullman 07.10 service getting me into London for around 9.00am,which is quite fast and early enough for my day’s work there. Saving 15 min is just not that vital to me, or indeed many others on that route as we have to drive to board the service. I would like to go back to the old First Class GNER service though.
As a comparison I work for a German company and live part of the time in Munich, and can compare the rail services in both countries, and the German travel experience is better, as is there continuing use of rail freight, but this is partly decreed by Govt, as it is in Austria and Switzerland, and I havre yet to sense  any political lobbying to put trucks on trains as there is in the aforementioned countries in the UK. The fact being that the UK is not that big a country, and the logistics just do not add up. 
 

Cheers

Mac

[62613]

12 hours ago, SHMD said:

The old Guide Bridge "avoiding line" route would make a good improvement to the current alignment - if you wanted to double-up to four tracks, increase line speeds, whilst impacting (spending more) on local businesses.

 

Here is the current situation between Guide Bridge, (on the lower left), and Stalybridge, (just off view at the upper right).

The old "avoiding line alignment is remarkably clear - if you know where to look.

 

To clarify my thoughts, I have added some "finger painting" to the view!

Whilst a few (5 to 10 small unit based businesses) would be moved/lost, re-instating thew original alignment "looks" much better.

(Actually, I think I have drawn the route of the former LNWR Guide Bridge avoiding line wrong - below my No. 3. I think it should be west of the River Tame from that point onwards.)

 

The "current route", in yellow, has a distinct "kink" to the north to accommodate a station as close as possible to the centre of Ashton.

The legacy is many many decades of slow running since the station closed. (Don't make the same "compromise" mistake on HS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5....)

 

This is the view looking west, at Wharf St. Bridge, towards Manchester.

It is very typical of the area.

 

 

Kev.

 

 

Kev. 

That route looks very plausible, but I think the bacon factory might have to relocate their car park; and I'm sure it can be aligned to miss the former bus depot. Neither does it seem to take out much else in the way of businesses, if you plan correctly. I always thought the avoiding line ran more or less parallel with Wharf Street, but turned  left around Furnace Street. I can remember John Taylor putting up a load of photos from somewhere, showing views of the bypass line. Still doesn't solve the problem of getting over to Marsden. I cannot obviously see how it can be done without massive property demolition and/or tunnelling.

Edited December 5, 2021 by 62613

[APOLLO]

12 hours ago, PenrithBeacon said:

Wet and cold

 

The palm trees and bright sunny skies start south of Watford !!!!!!

 

Brit15

[Edwin_m]

11 hours ago, mac1960 said:

I am not sure even in 100 years if  there will be a  “ Base tunnel” in the Colne Valley  As for traffic flows I think rail freight in the UK, with the exception of certain block and liner trains is declining rapidly from an already low base, even if you include infrastructure movements, due the declining coal haul. The passenger traffic is already, as I said earlier irelatively small on this route , when you strike out local services, which would still use the existing route. As for cost you have not obviously been involved in large infrastructure projects which both I, and indeed my wife have, some even rail related, and the dealings with the Treasury this involves. The electrification might well happen, but do not expect much higher line speeds or any form of HS3.

We can't know this, but construction is well under way over most of the route of HS2 London to Birmingham so it is possible to get something started eventually.  

 

As to rail freight, coal has largely disappeared but intermodal traffic has increased, including the likes of Tesco doing trunk hauls between distribution depots in England and Scotland.  This tends to be long-distance, so the total tonne-kilometres of freight hasn't changed that much.  Shorter distance goods still goes by road, but a fairly small change in circumstances (such as gauge clearance to Southampton a few years ago) can lead to the break-even point moving and a quite big increase in rail freight assuming the relevant capacity is available.  Gauge and capacity enhancement could produce something similar for Transpennine, although as distances are shorter than Midlands to Scotland it's not a certainty that the economics will work out.  Another development is at least two companies converting surplus EMUs to carry parcels traffic - not yet proven viable but one to watch.  

 

Coal traffic was unsurprisingly between coal mines or ports and power stations, so didn't overlap much with the trunk passenger routes, and providing alternative routes for passenger trains would only have allowed extra coal traffic in a few places.  Intermodal tends to run to major centres of population, so has much more need to use the same routes as intercity passenger, and should benefit that much more from capacity released by high speed lines.   

[62613]

5 minutes ago, Edwin_m said:

 

Coal traffic was unsurprisingly between coal mines or ports and power stations, so didn't overlap much with the trunk passenger routes, and providing alternative routes for passenger trains would only have allowed extra coal traffic in a few places.  Intermodal tends to run to major centres of population, so has much more need to use the same routes as intercity passenger, and should benefit that much more from capacity released by high speed lines.   

...and a fair chunk of MGR coal was on relatively short runs; but the nature of the traffic allowed that to be reasonably worth doing

[peanuts]

18 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

Can I correct my post above.  The double track tunnel is actually slightly north of and above the canal tunnel. The two single track bires are above and to the sputh of the canal. All four are connected by various adits and cross passages.  Historically the fastvlines, with the better approach were the single track ones.  This image is the best that I can come up with at the moment.

 

i do remember hearing a talk from the original  Trans Pennine Electrification team at which they stated that the tunnels were not a mojor problem.  It may well be gauge clearance to W12 for the upper corners of  containers that may be the problem.  Fortunately the tunnels are straight.

 

Jamie

This may be of some use showing the layout of the four tunnels as can be seen they ain't strait but are level 

[Suzie]

10 hours ago, mac1960 said:

...As for traffic flows I think rail freight in the UK, with the exception of certain block and liner trains is declining rapidly from an already low base, even if you include infrastructure movements, due the declining coal haul...

...as is there continuing use of rail freight, but this is partly decreed by Govt, as it is in Austria and Switzerland, and I have yet to sense  any political lobbying to put trucks on trains as there is in the aforementioned countries in the UK. The fact being that the UK is not that big a country, and the logistics just do not add up...

 

Trucks on trains does not make much sense over short distances, but shipping containers to inland ports does, and there must be lots of scope for moving containers across the Pennines both east from Liverpool and west from the Humber and Felixstowe. Lack of infrastructure is all that is stifling this, all the government needs to do is increase capacity and be believed when it makes a plan that it will actually be done. Shortage and cost of truck drivers is very motivational to freight operators - and that motivation is already there if an alternative can be made available.

[PenrithBeacon]

1 hour ago, APOLLO said:

 

The palm trees and bright sunny skies start south of Watford !!!!!!

 

Brit15

I live about 7 miles south west of Watford and I also spent the first 28 years of my life in Manchester. I think I can compare the two!

[peanuts]

18 minutes ago, Suzie said:

 

Trucks on trains does not make much sense over short distances, but shipping containers to inland ports does, and there must be lots of scope for moving containers across the Pennines both east from Liverpool and west from the Humber and Felixstowe. Lack of infrastructure is all that is stifling this, all the government needs to do is increase capacity and be believed when it makes a plan that it will actually be done. Shortage and cost of truck drivers is very motivational to freight operators - and that motivation is already there if an alternative can be made available.

there used to be a Traffordpark - leeds flt  & return  ran via the fallowfield loop line  Guidebrige standage to leeds  in the 70/80s dont know when it ceased 

[Fat Controller]

8 minutes ago, peanuts said:

there used to be a Traffordpark - leeds flt  & return  ran via the fallowfield loop line  Guidebrige standage to leeds  in the 70/80s dont know when it ceased 

Probably when Freightliner pulled out of the domestic flows to concentrate on flows from container ports to inland centres; around 1982? At least both terminals are still open, unlike many of the 'first generation', such as Follingsby, Edinburgh, Dudley and Swansea.

[APOLLO]

This are interesting videos re Standedge tunnels. As Penrith beacon said, Wet and cold !!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

Also this

 

 

Brit15

[Mike Storey]

3 hours ago, Suzie said:

 

Trucks on trains does not make much sense over short distances, but shipping containers to inland ports does, and there must be lots of scope for moving containers across the Pennines both east from Liverpool and west from the Humber and Felixstowe. Lack of infrastructure is all that is stifling this, all the government needs to do is increase capacity and be believed when it makes a plan that it will actually be done. Shortage and cost of truck drivers is very motivational to freight operators - and that motivation is already there if an alternative can be made available.

 

Agreed. That motivation has already caused Sainsbury (and thus also Argos) to switch to rail for long hauls, and has increased Tesco's use of rail. A news item about DIRFT (Daventry Intermodal Rail Freight Terminal) recently clearly demonstrated that capacity is key, as they are running out of it. It was not that long ago that many people were saying how these inland ports would never get used by rail..... so Trans Pennine gauge enhancements for freight would be extremely useful, not just for new flows, but to divert many existing flows which take up so much pathing space up the WCML. The issue then becomes additional capacity, both on the route and at the feeders. 

 

[Mike Storey]

Just to let all of you (those who do not follow the HS2 thread) know that, at the request of the HS2 thread followers, I have created a new thread:

 

 

that should allow discussion to be separated out from this thread and HS2, as that develops.

 

It has also been agreed that all comments concerning Northern Powerhouse Rail should appear on the Trans Pennine Electrification thread, and not on the HS2 thread.

 

There is a thread for the Integrated Rail Plan (IRP) but I guess we need to see how that develops.

 

Thanks.