Transpennine Upgrade : Manchester/Leeds

[Titan]

You also have to remember that you can't always put a feeder station in the ideal place for the railway.  A big consideration is where you can connect to the national grid.  No good having a feeder station in the ideal location if you then have to spend £££ building miles of pylons to get to a useful bit of grid....

[4630]

Public consultation on Network Rail's proposed improvements between Huddersfield and Dewsbury is now underway.

 

A number of local events have been arranged and the public consultation is open until 25th October.

 

Details available from this Network Rail consultation page - https://consultations.networkrail.co.uk/communications/huddersfield-to-westtown-dewsbury/

[jamie92208]

There's some obvious good work gone into that. It gives several things that point towards a full Leeds to Manchester  electrification scheme. From a quick look at some of the pdf's three things have caught my eye.

1) A new grid supply point on the old Thornhill power station site. This makes sense as there is still a grid switching station there.

 

2)  some modification of the Huddersfield tunnels to allow electrification includi g sewer works. That removes one of the big 6 problems between York and Leeds so makes future extensions easier.

 

3) a proper set of fast lines between Thornhill Lees and Huddersfield.   That will allow some proper service improvements.  

 

All in all a good scheme.

 

Jamie

 

[Mallard60022]

Apologies if this is way back as I don't have time to search through that much. If the electrification takes place is that when the TPE sets get a Driving car to replace the Class 68?

Thanks

Phil

[jamie92208]

Just now, Mallard60022 said:

Apologies if this is way back as I don't have time to search through that much. If the electrification takes place is that when the TPE sets get a Driving car to replace the Class 68?

Thanks

Phil

The class 88's were mentioned originally though thay wouldn't do to well on the York Scarborough section or the Huddersfield  to Stalybridge section until that is wired.

 

Jamie

[4630]

3 minutes ago, Mallard60022 said:

Apologies if this is way back as I don't have time to search through that much. If the electrification takes place is that when the TPE sets get a Driving car to replace the Class 68?

Thanks

Phil

 

1 minute ago, jamie92208 said:

The class 88's were mentioned originally though thay wouldn't do to well on the York Scarborough section or the Huddersfield  to Stalybridge section until that is wired.

 

Jamie

 

Also the stretch between Neville Hill East Junction and Colton Junction isn't, so far, in any electrification plans.  

 

[Mallard60022]

I just had this weird thought that I had read about Bi Mode Driving car for these eventually? Could have been a dream of course!

P

[4630]

27 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

There's some obvious good work gone into that.

 

 

 

All in all a good scheme.

 

Jamie

 

 

Not that this will impact on Network Rail's plans, but replacing the A62 Leeds Road bridge in Huddersfield, as indicated on the Deighton to Bradley pdf, should be 'entertaining' for the locals!

[jamie92208]

1 minute ago, Mallard60022 said:

I just had this weird thought that I had read about Bi Mode Driving car for these eventually? Could have been a dream of course!

P

I think that there are some bi mode 800's testi g at the moment.

 

Jamie

[woodenhead]

33 minutes ago, Mallard60022 said:

Apologies if this is way back as I don't have time to search through that much. If the electrification takes place is that when the TPE sets get a Driving car to replace the Class 68?

Thanks

Phil

Underfloor motors tend to be spread through the train - not sure a heavy coach set would be driven from a single underfloor set of motors even electric.

[jamie92208]

6 minutes ago, 4630 said:

 

Not that this will impact on Network Rail's plans, but replacing the A62 Leeds Road bridge in Huddersfield, as indicated on the Deighton to Bradley pdf, should be 'entertaining' for the locals!

I've had chance to look at that pdf. It looks as if they might be goi g for an underbridge.  This would allow the main works to be done with only limited traffic disruption.  

 

The Heaton Lodge ju ction map is interesting. The single track underpasses were another of the 6 big problems. It looks as if they will be building a new single track underpass with the necessary clearances. The othe slow line will occupy the existing Huddersfield  bound line location.  The new fast lines should allow a good increase in speed limits.

 

I will be very interested when the plans for the Leeds Dewsbury stretch are published to see if any of the tight curves on  that stretch are going to be eased.

 

Jamie

[62613]

9 minutes ago, 4630 said:

 

Not that this will impact on Network Rail's plans, but replacing the A62 Leeds Road bridge in Huddersfield, as indicated on the Deighton to Bradley pdf, should be 'entertaining' for the locals!

Bridge replacement through Ashton-under-Lyne was done two or three years ago. There was a fair amount of disruption (one of the bridges was that carrying Oldham Road), but proper precautions were taken, so the disruption wasn't too bad.

 

On another note, I noticed, around Ashton station,  what look like survey points marked on the pavements. I'll attempt a photo tomorrow.

 

[62613]

16 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

I've had chance to look at that pdf. It looks as if they might be goi g for an underbridge.  This would allow the main works to be done with only limited traffic disruption.  

 

The Heaton Lodge ju ction map is interesting. The single track underpasses were another of the 6 big problems. It looks as if they will be building a new single track underpass with the necessary clearances. The othe slow line will occupy the existing Huddersfield  bound line location.  The new fast lines should allow a good increase in speed limits.

 

I will be very interested when the plans for the Leeds Dewsbury stretch are published to see if any of the tight curves on  that stretch are going to be eased.

 

Jamie

I'm pretty sure the Heaton Lodge underpass originally had two tracks?

 

[eastwestdivide]

20 minutes ago, 62613 said:

I'm pretty sure the Heaton Lodge underpass originally had two tracks?

 

Yes, according to the 25-inch OS map at NLS: https://maps.nls.uk/view/125646056 

Whether it's still got clearance for today's standards and for electrification is another thing

[62613]

17 minutes ago, eastwestdivide said:

Yes, according to the 25-inch OS map at NLS: https://maps.nls.uk/view/125646056 

Whether it's still got clearance for today's standards and for electrification is another thing

True! I've just looked at the 1956 signal diagram on The Signal Box. No sign of the underpass; indeed, all four lines to Huddersfield diverge on the flat. Nor is there any sign of the New Line. When were the underpasses constructed? Or was there another junction for that somewhere else.

 

Update; just looked at the map; the underpasses were constructed for the New Line. Never knew about the sidings at all.

 

 

Edited September 11, 2019 by 62613

[jamie92208]

As far as I know the underpasses were built at the same time as the Leeds New Line. They definitely  consist of two parallel single track tunnels and are quite tight. When I lived in Huddersfield in 1972/3 both tracks were in use. However the Huddersfield bound trains now go via the direct route to Colne Bridge.  The underpass bores do appear to be tight. I referred to 6 big problems. These were outlined a few years ago at a presentation that I went to. A team from York had been over the route and identifued 6 major difficulties to electrification.  The Sewer that crosses the entrance to Huddersfield  tunnel was one. The underpass was another. The only other one that I can now remember was the ring Road bridge at Cross Gates where there isn't enough clearance under the sides of the arch for wires.

 

Jamie

Edited September 11, 2019 by jamie92208

[Mallard60022]

3 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

I think that there are some bi mode 800's testi g at the moment.

 

Jamie

Umm, maybe that's what I have got fixed in my noggin and the loco hauled sets are just stop gaps?

Thanks all, I shall leave you to it now rather than distract.

ATB

Phil

[woodenhead]

46 minutes ago, Mallard60022 said:

Umm, maybe that's what I have got fixed in my noggin and the loco hauled sets are just stop gaps?

Thanks all, I shall leave you to it now rather than distract.

ATB

Phil

I think they will last the franchise, the electric and bi mode Nova 1 and Nova 2 are all designed for hammering the WCML and ECML, whereas the NOVA 3 also do Scarborough which I don't think is on anyone's short term wiring wish list.

[Zomboid]

If diesel is out of the question, then electrification of the core route is essential, and the quieter branches should probably be battery operated, so long as the technology develops adequately.

[woodenhead]

7 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

With all the hoo ha going on about sustainable energy, what do you all see as the answer for Scarborough as diesel wont be around forever and just what propulsion could be used? 

But it will be around to the end of the TPE franchise and probably beyond the next franchise 

[APOLLO]

Diesel will last longer than most think -despite the silly recent government statement.

 

Quite simply diesel (as well as petrol & kerosene / jet fuel) powers a high percentage our modern world. Ain't going away anytime soon despite electrification of railways (a recent disaster story in the UK), electric cars etc.

 

Anyway - we will see.

 

Brit15

 

 

 

[Covkid]

9 hours ago, 4630 said:

 

 

Also the stretch between Neville Hill East Junction and Colton Junction isn't, so far, in any electrification plans.  

 

 

That is the bit that amazes me to be honest.  Apart from offering a contingency if the main ECML falls down, there is also scope for semi fast KGX-NCL services via LDS as well as much local traffic. 

 

Proves what a fragmented railway we now have IMHO.  

[newbryford]

3 minutes ago, Covkid said:

 

That is the bit that amazes me to be honest.  Apart from offering a contingency if the main ECML falls down, there is also scope for semi fast KGX-NCL services via LDS as well as much local traffic. 

 

Proves what a fragmented railway we now have IMHO.  

 

But wasn't the electrification of the ECML carried out under BR's tenure?

 

So not a fault of privatisation, but cost cutting at the time?

 

Cheers,

Mick

 

 

[Covkid]

I had a ride from Piccadilly to Leeds yesterday and really could not remember my last journey over there.  Probably early 1980s with a peak I reckon.  The three car 185 just about provided enough seats although a handful chose to stand.  I was surprised a a few nasty bumps in the track between Stalybridge and around Dewsbury which I think was the track rather than the unit. 

 

It is clear the three car 185s are barely coping off peak so I dread to think how they might be in rush hour. Seriously needs electrification - provided enough trains can take advantage.  Clearly the Liverpool Scarboroughs will remain diesel.  

[Covkid]

23 minutes ago, newbryford said:

 

But wasn't the electrification of the ECML carried out under BR's tenure?

 

So not a fault of privatisation, but cost cutting at the time?

 

Cheers,

Mick

 

 

Oh yes.  1986ish springs to mind, but that doesn't stop subsequent developments. The railway ridership was on the slide into around 1990, then the decline reversed, but the railway shouldn't have been set in aspic as it was.

We have similar in the West Midlands with the cheapo Cross city electrification.  Even though they spent a lot of budget extending from Barnt Green to Bromsgrove, it is still only those two tracks through Kings Norton, and when the West Suburban is tied up, nothing on the X City corridor can run via Camp Hill because of a lack of OLE.  Logic would say retain the "Bromsgrove gang" and electrify the Camp Hill, but presumably Moseley Tunnel would be an issue. 

    

Edited September 11, 2019 by Covkid