Transpennine Upgrade : Manchester/Leeds

[peanuts]

Agree re Southport to Manchester. Many years ago the usually Jubilee hauled non stop express, used the loop lines at Wallgate station, though in the 60's it started to call at Wigan Wallgate. I used the same service to go to tech in Manchester in the early 70's, then a 6 car "Calder Valley" DMU. Southport-Wigan-Salford-Man Vic

 

There are even today a lot of commuters between Southport & Manchester, though crammed usually into 2 cars - sometimes 4 if you are lucky.

 

Whats a tram-train ?. And how would it get under the proposed 25KV wires from Hindley Crows Nest Jcn to Wigan ? (unless it is proposed to terminate the tramtrain at Atherton / Daisy Hill).

 

Such a shame as you say. Manchester to Wigan was a 4 track superbly laid out FAST main line. Just a boring overgrown nodding donkey run today.

 

Tram Train - I am intrigued !!!!!!!!!!!

 

Brit15

there is still track bed for four lines of way betwix  manchester and wigan via atherton and crows nest seem to remember that the track bed to the left of the current rail line (heading west ) is clear and only used an access road now .could run the tram train along that then onto roads closer to wigan center and leave the heavy rail in place .tram trains manchester wigan via atherton calling all stops heavy rail semi fast from southport calling selected stops only (atherton & walkden ) similar to the old club trains 

[Fat Controller]

there is still track bed for four lines of way betwix  manchester and wigan via atherton and crows nest seem to remember that the track bed to the left of the current rail line (heading west ) is clear and only used an access road now .could run the tram train along that then onto roads closer to wigan center and leave the heavy rail in place .tram trains manchester wigan via atherton calling all stops heavy rail semi fast from southport calling selected stops only (atherton & walkden ) similar to the old club trains 

I wonder what the difference between Tyne and Wear Metro (sorry 'Nexus'..) and tram-train vehicles is? After all, they run between conventional 'Heavy Rail' freight and passenger services between Pelaw and Sunderland.

[Edwin_m]

there is still track bed for four lines of way betwix  manchester and wigan via atherton and crows nest seem to remember that the track bed to the left of the current rail line (heading west ) is clear and only used an access road now .could run the tram train along that then onto roads closer to wigan center and leave the heavy rail in place .tram trains manchester wigan via atherton calling all stops heavy rail semi fast from southport calling selected stops only (atherton & walkden ) similar to the old club trains 

It's not clear the whole way - for example the several bridges where the M60 and its various slip roads cross the railway are built for only double track. 

 

Tram-train on the Atherton line would probably convert the section between Windsor Bridge North (Salford Crescent) and Crow Nest to tramway operation, as through Southport trains could go via Bolton and there is no real reason for other trains to use this even on diversion.  The tram-trains would switch to 25kV and share the double track between Crow Nest and Wigan, where two of the original tracks formed the Wigan avoiding line so the last section into Wigan including a couple of major bridges would be very difficult to quadruple. 

 

While the announcement of Wigan-Bolton electrification means the tram-train would not have to pay for wires between Crow Nest and Wigan, it does cause problems at the Wigan end because it appears Wallgate will not be electrified and the electric trains will run to North Western.  This probably doesn't leave enough capacity to terminate tram-trains, unless the wires are extended through the very difficult overbridge of Wallgate (the street) and its flanking buildings to enter Wallgate (the station) - and to provide operational flexibility it might also be necessary to wire beyond the WCML at the other end, clearances here also looking quite difficult. 

 

Having said all that, Atherton line tram-train would still need an significant section of new route from Windsor Bridge North to connect with Metrolink in central Manchester, as there is not enough capacity to share tracks here, and other routes such as Marple have a much better case than Atherton.  So if tram-train happens at all in Greater Manchester it is likely to be elsewhere rather than Atherton. 

[Edwin_m]

I wonder what the difference between Tyne and Wear Metro (sorry 'Nexus'..) and tram-train vehicles is? After all, they run between conventional 'Heavy Rail' freight and passenger services between Pelaw and Sunderland.

The Metro Sunderland route has a lot of similarities with tram-train.  However a true tram-train also has the ability to run on street, including 750V power supply, shielding to reduce the risk to pedestrians, ability to cope with curves down to 25m or so and driver visibility, running lights etc compatible with street operation. 

[newbryford]

Not quite Trans-Pennine electrification, but the first electric Manchester Airport-Scotland service should run on December 30th.

 

Cheers,

Mick

[62613]

The route to Wigan via Atherton is scheduled for tramtrain operation along with:

Manchester - Glossop. Noooooooooo!

Manchester - Marple (via Bredbury) vis Hyde Central would be better if they did the above.

Manchester - East Didsbury - Hazel Grove. Interesting. How?

Stockport - Altrincham

Manchester - Sale - Altrincham - Hale - Knutsford

 

 

David

[Edwin_m]

East Didsbury to Hazel Grove involves re-connecting the former Midland route, now the Metrolink line, with the freight line to the south of the Mersey, then following this to a new terminus before it meets the chord up from the existing Hazel Grove station. 

[phil-b259]

It's not clear the whole way - for example the several bridges where the M60 and its various slip roads cross the railway are built for only double track. 

 

Tram-train on the Atherton line would probably convert the section between Windsor Bridge North (Salford Crescent) and Crow Nest to tramway operation, as through Southport trains could go via Bolton and there is no real reason for other trains to use this even on diversion.  The tram-trains would switch to 25kV and share the double track between Crow Nest and Wigan, where two of the original tracks formed the Wigan avoiding line so the last section into Wigan including a couple of major bridges would be very difficult to quadruple. 

 

While the announcement of Wigan-Bolton electrification means the tram-train would not have to pay for wires between Crow Nest and Wigan, it does cause problems at the Wigan end because it appears Wallgate will not be electrified and the electric trains will run to North Western.  This probably doesn't leave enough capacity to terminate tram-trains, unless the wires are extended through the very difficult overbridge of Wallgate (the street) and its flanking buildings to enter Wallgate (the station) - and to provide operational flexibility it might also be necessary to wire beyond the WCML at the other end, clearances here also looking quite difficult. 

 

Having said all that, Atherton line tram-train would still need an significant section of new route from Windsor Bridge North to connect with Metrolink in central Manchester, as there is not enough capacity to share tracks here, and other routes such as Marple have a much better case than Atherton.  So if tram-train happens at all in Greater Manchester it is likely to be elsewhere rather than Atherton. 

 

Why not divert on to the streets of Wigan if terminating facilities are likely to be a problem - the clue is in the name (TRAM - train)

 

Also I don't think NR would appreciate having to send everything via Bolton - having diversionary possibilities is always useful in this day and age

[peanuts]

one thought i had was would it be worth wirering manchester liverpool via warrington central  then using the 319 through to southport  that way instead  of reversing at  huntscross ? would open up capacity at limestreet and possibley give southport a better quicker service to from the airport  plus would directly link john lennon and mia ?

[Edwin_m]

Unfortunately VT built a multi-storey car park on the formerly practical route onto the streets of Wigan, although there may be room for a tram-train terminus alongside it.  The Atherton line has no through traffic except Southport services, and if these ran via Bolton a diversionary route would still exist via Parkside. 

Why not divert on to the streets of Wigan if terminating facilities are likely to be a problem - the clue is in the name (TRAM - train)

 

Also I don't think NR would appreciate having to send everything via Bolton - having diversionary possibilities is always useful in this day and age

Edited December 15, 2013 by Edwin_m

[Michael Delamar]

A nice shot on Flickr of tree felling in Olive mount cutting before the wires go up.

 

Olive Mount Junction, DRS 47805 (11.08 Crewe - Hellifield) Northern Belle. 18/12/13. by DigitAL46232, on Flickr

[jamie92208]

Well over a year since a post on this topic but I just happened to see this on the BBC website this afternoon.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-33066581

 

Not unexpected as it has gone very quiet for a while but at least it is being kept in the public eye.

 

Jamie

[woodenhead]

So that's HS3 then into the mix and delaying the wiring whilst they look at the other enhancements required to deliver the promises of HS3.

 

On the one hand this is laudable because there is no point putting in all that knitting if there is then a major route reconstruction not long afterwards to further enchance the route.  But that assumes HS3 is a given, is it or was it just pre-election bluster, I hope not.

[SHMD]

For some reason I still can't imagine the wires being put up between Stalybridge and Mossley, (where currently I reside), but the quote " ...as more work is needed and the plans for the new, bigger scheme are currently under way." is rather tantalising...

 

 

Kev.

[woodenhead]

Perhaps the tunnel boring in Bolton will continue all the way to Leeds and we'll have a Northern Crossrail.

[locoholic]

Last week the subject of the "Northern Powerhouse" re-surfaced in the media, with one of the more memorable proposals being a 30-mile road tunnel under the Pennines to link Sheffield and Manchester.

 

As the GWML electrification is taking far longer and costing far more than expected, the prospects for electrification of Manchester to Leeds must now be even poorer. It struck me that this situation is similar to that on the ECML in the late 1950s. The Modernisation Plan included ECML electrification, but this was "postponed". The EE Type 4s they got instead weren't powerful enough to enable rail to compete with road and air, so a stop-gap solution was required - the Deltics.

 

Is it now time to develop a similar high-powered stop-gap solution for Trans-Pennine rail services? Or will the Northern Powerhouse prove to be just a load of hot air?

Edited February 27, 2016 by locoholic

[Joseph_Pestell]

Steering clear of politics, I don't think that the country can afford for the "Northern Powerhouse" to be just a "lot of hot air". Unless the whole economy of the North can be improved, too much pressure is put on London and the South East where living conditions are getting fairly awful e.g. all those back gardens sheds in Newham being used as "bijou" studio flats. But the Pennines are a big physical obstruction and it is probably more realistic to accept that there will be two Northern economic hubs.

 

Electrification of the main Transpennine route (Standedge) really should not be that difficult given that much of it is a four-track route with currently only two tracks. Some parts where the trackbed for the second pair of tracks may need some lavish expenditure to get that facility back again.

[woodenhead]

They've already solved it, the TPE franchise will have bi-mode hitachi trains and Northern is ordering new diesels.

[jonny777]

Last week the subject of the "Northern Powerhouse" re-surfaced in the media, with one of the more memorable proposals being a 30-mile road tunnel under the Pennines to link Sheffield and Manchester.

 

 

This appears to be an obsession of Jonathan Reynolds, MP for Stalybridge and Hyde.

 

He seems very enthusiastic about spending a projected £6 billion (which would inevitably rise to about £20 billion by completion, as with most of these projects) but seems to be less forthcoming in his comments when confronted with the prospect of anyone breaking down or having a road accident in his pet tunnel; and the consequences of a 15 mile tailback of traffic preventing access by emergency vehicles.

 

Mr Reynolds was born only a year before the Woodhead Tunnel rail route closed, and so has no recollection of the usefulness of that line, which may be why is wedded to more and more roads.

 

I am just waiting for some 'bright spark' to take a look at the completed Crossrail tunnels, and propose that the tracks be ripped up and road traffic allowed in there instead.

[locoholic]

They've already solved it, the TPE franchise will have bi-mode hitachi trains and Northern is ordering new diesels.

Is the anticipated pattern of services that these new trains will deliver set down somewhere, please?

[Edwin_m]

Is it now time to develop a similar high-powered stop-gap solution for Trans-Pennine rail services? Or will the Northern Powerhouse prove to be just a load of hot air?

I think the existing 185 units are about at the limit for a high-performance diesel solution.  The engine in each coach is the same as that on a 125mph Voyager and the coach itself is I believe even heavier.  Try to install more power and it gets into a vicious circle where the engine, fuel tank and structure to support them gets heavier, so more power is needed, and so on.  Meanwhile one engine out of three is shut down on the less hilly sections because of the amount of fuel they use when running at less than their optimum efficiency rating. 

 

As mentioned above, TPE is now ordering bi-mode units, which although they will still have to carry heavy diesel engines will at least be able to use electric power west/south of Manchester and north of York, and on more and more of the section in between as electrification finally happens (we hope).  There will be a journey time saving north of York from 125mph running.

[jamie92208]

I think that the reason we haven't heard anything is because we are waiting for a report stating what needs to be done to the track to speed up journey times. Quite rightly it's pointless electrifying the existing layout without trying to speed it up in places as once the wires go up things get set in stone. I believe that there is some sort of report due very soon giving the options and that things will start happening once the fonal option is selected.

Jamie

Edited March 1, 2016 by jamie92208

[Grovenor]

 

I am just waiting for some 'bright spark' to take a look at the completed Crossrail tunnels, and propose that the tracks be ripped up and road traffic allowed in there instead.

Boris has now proposed a parallel road tunnel now he only has a couple of months left in the job!

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/feb/04/boris-johnson-london-road-tunnels-congestion-air-quality

 

I assume he has forgotten about the proposal he made about 2 years ago!

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/mayor-sets-out-plan-for-22-mile-ring-road-tunnel-under-london-9354896.html

Regards

Edited February 27, 2016 by Grovenor

[Reorte]

I think that the reason we haven't herd anything is because we are waiting for a report stating what needs to be done to the track to speed up journey times. Quite rightly it's pointless electrifying the existing layout without trying to speed it up in places as once the wires go up things get et in stone. I believe that there is some sort of report due very soon giving the options and that things will start happening once the fonal option is selected.

I thought that that had already been looked into. At any rate I'm sure I remember reading something about remodelling at Marsden, although it could've just been  "these are the awkward points" without putting forward any definite solutions. And might've just been some random chat rather than anything official.

[62613]

This appears to be an obsession of Jonathan Reynolds, MP for Stalybridge and Hyde.

 

He seems very enthusiastic about spending a projected £6 billion (which would inevitably rise to about £20 billion by completion, as with most of these projects) but seems to be less forthcoming in his comments when confronted with the prospect of anyone breaking down or having a road accident in his pet tunnel; and the consequences of a 15 mile tailback of traffic preventing access by emergency vehicles.

 

Mr Reynolds was born only a year before the Woodhead Tunnel rail route closed, and so has no recollection of the usefulness of that line, which may be why is wedded to more and more roads.

 

I am just waiting for some 'bright spark' to take a look at the completed Crossrail tunnels, and propose that the tracks be ripped up and road traffic allowed in there instead.

News to  me. I've been to most Stalybridge  Hyde CLP meetings for the last 5 years, and he's hardly mentioned it. The Mottram -Tintwistle bypass, however is a different kettle of fish.