Transpennine Upgrade : Manchester/Leeds

[peanuts]

On 18/11/2021 at 15:57, woodenhead said:

Given the actual logic being applied here to re-use old lines, I do also wonder if four tracking the route from Ardwick through past Guide Bridge may also be part of the plans for the Manchester to Standedge new route - that would have least impact on the city centre (which echos the reasons given for building a combined surface NPR/HS2 station).

 

And of course if you get to Stalybridge there is the old route to Standedge from there too  with a bit of bridge building, though I expect a new line may be more straightforward

 

Some might now be thinking, what about the rest of Woodhead, but I don't think that is still in anyone's plans.

If you are suggesting resurecting the micklhurst loop from stalybridge to diggle that would entail a lot more than a bit of bridge building ! At least three viaducts would need replacing several miles of embankment would need to be reinstated where it has been leveled for a bridleway. two tunnels would need digging out .a swimming pool an equestrian center and a very busy timber reclamation buisness would need removing .and Casey's have just put in a planning aplication for 194 houses and a visitors center for the millbrook yard site .nice easy job that lot 

[PenrithBeacon]

'woodenhead' did say that 'a new line may be more straightforward'.

[peanuts]

24 minutes ago, PenrithBeacon said:

'woodenhead' did say that 'a new line may be more straightforward'.

where ? due to the local topography there is nowhere to build it beyond stalybridge ? the current line occupies one side of a very narrow valley  the micklehurst loop the other its whole existence was there was no way the current route could be widened so the other side of the valley was used instead .other options are medlock valley through oldham and shaw  the calder valley or woodhead 

[Zomboid]

Just go all Sanyo Shinkansen style and have most of it in a tunnel. Or head for the Rochdale area, for what looks like a less twisty route into Victoria.

[woodenhead]

6 minutes ago, peanuts said:

where ? due to the local topography there is nowhere to build it beyond stalybridge ? the current line occupies one side of a very narrow valley  the micklehurst loop the other its whole existence was there was no way the current route could be widened so the other side of the valley was used instead .other options are medlock valley through oldham and shaw  the calder valley or woodhead 

They haven't said, hence all the thoughts as to what the plan might be, but they have mentioned the west portal of Standedge as the end of the new line so it clearly will terminate close to that point and therefore has to be along a route between Manchester and Standedge without too much wandering to make it uneconomic.

 

The question probably comes down to how much they plan on spending - the less tunnelling they do the cheaper it will likely be, if they need to find a new surface route that may be more expensive then re-using old alignments even if it means compulsory purchases of a number of businesses.  Larges swathes of Manchester will be being bought up for HS2, as has been done around Euston and Birmingham as well as along the route, so buildings being in the way is not a showstopper when it comes to primary transport routes.

[woodenhead]

4 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

Just go all Sanyo Shinkansen style and have most of it in a tunnel. Or head for the Rochdale area, for what looks like a less twisty route into Victoria.

Problem with the Rochdale route is stations - it's a stopping line so not suitable for upgrade, and Victoria is not going to be the station for higher speed services between Liverpool and Leeds, it will be within the HS2 hub alongside Piccadilly. 

 

Whatever the new route will be it will not be sharing with stoppers otherwise they could simply upgrade Chat Moss or the Warrington Central route.

[peanuts]

12 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

They haven't said, hence all the thoughts as to what the plan might be, but they have mentioned the west portal of Standedge as the end of the new line so it clearly will terminate close to that point and therefore has to be along a route between Manchester and Standedge without too much wandering to make it uneconomic.

 

The question probably comes down to how much they plan on spending - the less tunnelling they do the cheaper it will likely be, if they need to find a new surface route that may be more expensive then re-using old alignments even if it means compulsory purchases of a number of businesses.  Larges swathes of Manchester will be being bought up for HS2, as has been done around Euston and Birmingham as well as along the route, so buildings being in the way is not a showstopper when it comes to primary transport routes.

if the route is to goto standage tunnel west portal from Piccadilly the   current route or the micklehurst route are it there is no other surface route that would not require demolition of housing  and buisnesses in the thousands not hundreds the floor of the valley is virtualy completely occupied by housing . one option could be to follow the former OAGB route to oldham from guidebridge  then pick up the former lnwr route to green field via lees this  whilst back filled in many places is largely undeveloped  but would still have to problem of a bottleneck Greenfield to Diggle 

[Edwin_m]

I think they were talking about the east portal of Standedge, not the west.  

 

Neither the Micklehurst Loop nor the route via Lees nor any other existing/disused route in the area would offer any journey time benefit.  

[woodenhead]

34 minutes ago, Edwin_m said:

I think they were talking about the east portal of Standedge, not the west.  

 

Neither the Micklehurst Loop nor the route via Lees nor any other existing/disused route in the area would offer any journey time benefit.  

I must be having problems reading, I had it clear in my head it was to the west of Standedge as new line and upgrades from the eastern portal.

 

But this reads as you state - new line to the east of Standedge.

[PenrithBeacon]

3 hours ago, peanuts said:

where ? due to the local topography there is nowhere to build it beyond stalybridge ? the current line occupies one side of a very narrow valley  the micklehurst loop the other its whole existence was there was no way the current route could be widened so the other side of the valley was used instead .other options are medlock valley through oldham and shaw  the calder valley or woodhead 

Compulsory purchase orders are your friend. 

[jamie92208]

1 hour ago, Edwin_m said:

I think they were talking about the east portal of Standedge, not the west.  

 

Neither the Micklehurst Loop nor the route via Lees nor any other existing/disused route in the area would offer any journey time benefit.  

I strongly suggest that it will be a longish new tunnel that comes out part way down the vally, probably somewhere near Slowit, aka Slaithwaite. As posted above it just says east of Standedge tunnel.

 

Jamie

Edited December 3, 2021 by jamie92208

[Railpassion]

No plans to electrify the existing route between Stalybridge and Huddersfield. 

[4630]

15 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

I strongly suggest that it will be a longish new tunnel that comes out part wsy down the vally, probably so ewhere nere Slowit, aka Slaithwaite. As posted above it just says eadt of Standedge tunnel.

 

Jamie

 

Yes and as I know that you know Jamie, the Colne Valley is a little wider at that point and even more rural than Marsden which is just a mile or so further west.  There'd be more room for the portal and junction for the new line there, with less impact on the industry and residential communities which mostly clusters along the parallel A62 and river Colne. 

[jamie92208]

46 minutes ago, Railpassion said:

No plans to electrify the existing route between Stalybridge and Huddersfield. 

That has been promised in the IRP as quoted by Woodenhead above. The expensive and difficult bit, which is the grid connection, has already been done at Heyrod. IIRC that was sized to include elevtrically hauled freight.  I think that amother is going in at Thornhill.

 

Jamie

 

 

[Railpassion]

5 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

That has been promised in the IRP as quoted by Woodenhead above. The expensive and difficult bit, which is the grid connection, has already been done at Heyrod. IIRC that was sized to include elevtrically hauled freight.  I think that amother is going in at Thornhill.

 

Jamie

 

 

Read it carefully and between the lines. There is no positive assertion and the phasing diagram does not include it. The words refer to the new line providing full electrification, not the existing one.

 

It's a rushed piece of work, we know this as it was still being edited by Gillighan the night before. It's also a complete shambles.

Edited December 3, 2021 by Railpassion
Context?

[jamie92208]

35 minutes ago, 4630 said:

 

Yes and as I know that you know Jamie, the Colne Valley is a little wider at that point and even more rural than Marsden which is just a mile or so further west.  There'd be more room for the portal and junction for the new line there, with less impact on the industry and residential communities which mostly clusters along the parallel A62 and river Colne. 

Yes, i worked in the area in the 90's,  and also lodged at Linthwzite in the early 70's so know it quite well. I'm a long  way away now in a place where 1930's electrification equipment powers most freights as well as TGV's, but remain an interested observer.

 

Jamie

 

 

[Edwin_m]

51 minutes ago, 4630 said:

 

Yes and as I know that you know Jamie, the Colne Valley is a little wider at that point and even more rural than Marsden which is just a mile or so further west.  There'd be more room for the portal and junction for the new line there, with less impact on the industry and residential communities which mostly clusters along the parallel A62 and river Colne. 

There's also a nasty reverse curve going round a hill just east of the eastern portal, which would probably impose a speed restriction compared to the straighter alignment further east.  So I'd expect it to tunnel through that hill, and if it was me* I'd put the junction about where Ordance Survey shows Slaithwaite Hall.  Depending on the topography and the alignment needed to head towards Manchester, there might even be a very short surface section crossing the Colne Valley near the existing portal.  

 

*I've been involved in high speed line design projects, but have no inside knowledge on this one.  

[4630]

21 minutes ago, Edwin_m said:

There's also a nasty reverse curve going round a hill just east of the eastern portal, which would probably impose a speed restriction compared to the straighter alignment further east. 

 

Yes, the existing Up and Down Huddersfield lines at that point have a 45mph speed restriction between Marsden station and the east portal of the Standedge Tunnel.

[jamie92208]

32 minutes ago, 4630 said:

 

Yes, the existing Up and Down Huddersfield lines at that point have a 45mph speed restriction between Marsden station and the east portal of the Standedge Tunnel.

That is one of the major speed restrictions on the exusting route, along with the eastern entrance to Morley tunnel and the route through Batley.

 

Jamie

[SHMD]

A small update on the current electrification between Stalybridge and Manchester...

 

OHL piles / mast bases continue to be installed on the remaining small percentage of the Manchester Vic' to Stalybridge (ex-L&Y) line still to be done.

(I think they are nearly up to Ashton station now but with some small patches still to be filled in en-route. Nothing between Stalybridge and Ashton yet though.)

 

Earth Works (digging out / down) at the former ex-LNWR junction (immediately west of Stalybridge for the old LNWR Guide Bridge avoiding line to Denton Junction), has just started - but I have no idea what it is for.

I thought this area had been cleared for a works-access pound as it does have road access.

 

The mast bases are all still marked out in wood, but I thought Stalybridge to Guide Bridge WAS NOT going to be electrified!

At Guide Bridge, at the new Freightliner Wagon Repair facility, several OHL mast bases (including the caps where the masts bolt on), have been installed.

(Although I am not sure if these are part of the Stalybridge-Guide Bridge scheme or they are just electrifying the two loops at the side of the Wagon Repair facility.)

 

 

Kev.

[SHMD]

As for the routing options out of east Manchester, i thought they could re-instate the four tracks between Ardwick to Guide Bridge. Leave the existing double track to Stalybridge but have a new double track pick up the former LNWR Guide Bridge avoiding line to Stalybridge.

 

If the Micklehurst Loop is re-built - and I agree with Peanuts on all his points of difficulty - that would give (back) four tracks between Manchester and Marsden.

(There is very little development between Guide Bridge and Stalybridge on the old avoiding line.)

 

...but this option would only "increase speeds" by freeing up pathing and NOT straightening any of the sharp curves!

 

Kev.

[62613]

19 hours ago, Railpassion said:

No plans to electrify the existing route between Stalybridge and Huddersfield. 

There were! We should have had a fully - electrified railway between Manchester and York by the start of the Decenber 2019 timetable, but it was binned after the GWML electrification fiasco. Any four - tracking down the Colne Valley is likely to lower line speeds, relatively. The only reason you can do 85 mile/hour down is because, when the line was de - quadrified, the remaining pair were slewed to ease the curves. Even tunnelling under Pule hill leaves the problem of getting past Marsden to join the existing line. The problems re - building in the upper Tame Valley are mirrored in the Colne Valley

 

[62613]

16 minutes ago, SHMD said:

As for the routing options out of east Manchester, i thought they could re-instate the four tracks between Ardwick to Guide Bridge. Leave the existing double track to Stalybridge but have a new double track pick up the former LNWR Guide Bridge avoiding line to Stalybridge.

 

If the Micklehurst Loop is re-built - and I agree with Peanuts on all his points of difficulty - that would give (back) four tracks between Manchester and Marsden.

(There is very little development between Guide Bridge and Stalybridge on the old avoiding line.)

 

...but this option would only "increase speeds" by freeing up pathing and NOT straightening any of the sharp curves!

 

Kev.

There is through Dukinfield!

 

[mac1960]

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.     

[62613]

2 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.     

I know that, under the original Northern Hub plan, one of the single - line bores was going to be reopened. Aren't all the cabins at the Eastern end for the tunnel maintence gangs?