Transpennine Upgrade : Manchester/Leeds

[woodbine]

What are the implications for the new canopy and the buffet bar then?

[TheSignalEngineer]

What are the implications for the new canopy and the buffet bar then?

 

Bigger beer garden to watch the trains from?

[SHMD]

Remember, it's just hear-say at the moment.

 

What do they do with a 'de-commissioned' plaform edge these days - especially one 5 to 10 feet from a running line?

(Will the Morris Men now be allowed to dance on it?)

 

I just don't understand why they don't just leave the line next to the platform! Or is this more 'Nanny State'?

 

Kev.

[TheSignalEngineer]

I doubt BR would have put up the money to provide electrification clearances when there was no electrification project agreed. However, if they needed to do something fairly drastic to the tunnel for other reasons then it might not be much extra work to create electrification clearances at the same time. For similar reasons pretty much any bridge replacement anywhere in the network is likely to create clearance for 25kV and probably W10/W12 as well,

 

On projects I was involved with it was usual to do any new or replacement bridges and structures to the current HMRI structure gauge requirements, which are at electrification clearance. It didn't matter whether there were no electrification plans in the pipeline.

[Edwin_m]

I understood that Stalybridge was to have three through platforms, the two existing ones plus the back of the island where the goods lines now are. The existing Up through platform would become easily accessible in both directions and used for fast trains overtaking slower ones, with the Down platform used as now and the new third platform mainly for Up trains. I agree on the bay on the station building side but I had the impression the other bay would stay as well. This was from a posting on another forum so may not be accurate.

 

Google found me this story, posted four hours ago, which is consistent with the above but does not fully confirm it.

 

Some sort of passenger overtaking facilty around Stalybridge is probably essential to the re-routing of Transpennine via Victoria, since (unless they plant to send the local to Piccadilly instead) the local will share the same tracks as the Transpennine for a longer distance so is more likely to be "caught up" by the following Transpennine.

[SHMD]

Edwin_m,

 

That scenario, you outlined above, was also the version I heard weeks ago. Certainly makes more sense.

 

Can the Down line, on Platform 1, be electrified and stay next to the recently refurbished canopy?

Or are clearances an issue here?

 

Kev.

[Edwin_m]

I don't know but I wonder if some or all three of the through platforms might be built out a bit, but perhaps not a full track's worth, with the tracks realigned accordingly. If they no longer need both tracks beyond the island, and they don't plan to put back the former centre roads, then there should be plenty of room to do this and it could sort of explain the comments made by the station staff.

 

As you say I think this would avoid the need to cut back the canopy on what is now platform 1, which is probably listed. It might also allow the new through platform to be continued behind the subway ramp, and perhaps also allow non-stopping trains to go through a bit faster. I think it would still be possible to fit the realigned tracks between the girders of the Rassbottom Street underbridge.

[62613]

Anyone seen the plans for Stalybridge yet?

 

I've spoken to two members of staff and I can't believe what they've said!

 

They were very guarded but:-

Platform 1, (as it is now), to go - line slewed over into where the old through roads were and to become the down relief, (Ithink he phrased it 'goods line'). Already pegged out - he said! (there are white pegs in the ground.),

Platform 3, (as it is now), to go - probably, see next,

Patform 2 to become Down and the wall on the other side removed. Whole platform, (both edges), to be aligned further over, (Northwards, where the old through lines were), and extended, (presumably where bay platform 3 is currently). New platform edge to be the line into Manchester,

Outer goods loop to be Up goods line' - as is,

New Bay Platform to be opened adjacent to (current) Platform 1, ending buffers right up to where the white fence is next to the Buffet Bar. (There used to be Bays here in the days of steam!).

 

 

So one island platform and one bay. Goods loops to be either side of island platform.

There was some confusion as to bi-directional running. Indication was that all 4 roads were to be bidirectional, but i interpreted it as only the two platform roads being bidirectional.

 

 

Why?

There just seems to be so many better solutions than this one.

 

(Does explain why (current) Platform 1 has just had its canopy renewed!)

 

 

See my post No.63 on this thread. I think it basically agrees with what Edwin_M put above. They'll have to move the location cabinet near Rassbottom Street bridge too, I think.

 

The last time I danced on Stalybridge Station (on the platform!) I ended up with a calf strain!

[Edwin_m]

They're re-signalling Stalybridge as well as remodelling it so the location cabinet will probably go in any case (no pun intended) .

[62613]

A contact of mine says that they are already laying in the cabling

[peanuts]

as an aside to all this whilst i was signaller at greenfield in the early 90s had a visit from a team from gmpte who were investigating the possibilty of reopaning the micklehurst loop .they were doing a an onthe ground visit and enquired as to where the line ran ?.

i

pointed out that it ran across the floor of the valley on a now demolished viaduct thats now a cyclepath also theres a swimming pool and sports centre at uppermill plus a factory at mossley blocking the route plus two of the tunnels had been filled in and the viaducts at millbrook and stalybrige had also been demolished !

at this point the leader of the group decided they had better head back to manchester and forget it

 

for those of you interested in buildings the goods shed at millbrook along with the engine shed and coaling stage may not have much longer left as the plans to build a park and housing have been published with a planning application submitted.

[Edwin_m]

Looking at Google/Bing I think there's another similar goods shed now forming part of the recycling place at Mossley. Totally inaccessible though.

[62613]

There's some resignalling going on between Stanedge and Staly now. On the Westbound line near Heyrod bridge, there's a new signal not yet in use, and another on the Scout tunnel side of Mossley station, clearly visible from Manchester Road. May be works in connection with raising the speed limit to 75mile/hour - different braking distances?

 

I think they could get two tracks past Uppermill baths - just, but there's Station Road and Church Road bridges to reinstate, as well as buying that bit of land back off Phil Liggett, and that three-arch viaduct near the school

[Edwin_m]

Micklehurst loop was mentioned in a recent Network Rail strategy as a long term candidate for reopening, but I've also looked at it recently I don't think there's any chance.

[peanuts]

There's some resignalling going on between Stanedge and Staly now. On the Westbound line near Heyrod bridge, there's a new signal not yet in use, and another on the Scout tunnel side of Mossley station, clearly visible from Manchester Road. May be works in connection with raising the speed limit to 75mile/hour - different braking distances?

 

I think they could get two tracks past Uppermill baths - just, but there's Station Road and Church Road bridges to reinstate, as well as buying that bit of land back off Phil Liggett, and that three-arch viaduct near the school

oh come on gordon theres the whole of the viaduct from carr lane to friezland thats near enough half a mile to rienstate plus the tunnels at royalgeorge and ryfields then you have all the problems in the micklehurst - millbrook area something like half a mile of bridges and viaducts to again reinstate plus cant see laings giving up the land around millbrook goods shed cheap .

would make abetter route tho gentler curves higher = line speed

[62613]

I wasn't mentioning those bits, but some things need to be done to increase capacity besides the works at Staly. Are there any loops that can be reinstated.

 

Was in the Diggle Hotel recently; the Digglers are trying to get their station reinstated again, via a petition this time. If the proposed reinstatement of the single-line tunnels went ahead, I suppose it could be done.

[peanuts]

room for a loop between moorgate and the viaduct maybe room around heyrod but other than the tunnels cant see where capacity could be increased ?

 

lots of room at diggle for a station island platform under either ward lane or sam road bridges just on the slow lines with the 184 turning there good conections for locals + room for a sizable car park make diggle THE station for the whole of saddleworth ot just another bloody halt

[Edwin_m]

Greenfield is a better bus interchange than Diggle, because it has reasonably frequent buses to all parts of Saddleworth. However I doubt many people make the change off the one train an hour at present, considering most of the buses carry on to/from Manchester. I agree there's not much room for parking at Greenfield though.

 

The three-tracking through the tunnel would provide some overtaking facilities with the advantage of being level so freights can restart more quickly if they have to stop. You could extend this at the Diggle end as far as the old divergence of the Micklehurst line as well as joining to the existing three-track at Marsden. Another idea might be to create a bay platform at Diggle and increase the local service to half-hourly with half the trains terminating there.

 

You could perhaps create some loops at Greenfield where the goods yard and branch platform used to be, but they might not be long enough.

[SHMD]

There used to be a loop between Heyrod and Scout Tunnel but on the Up line (travelling down hill, that is, towards Manchester!).

Being so close to Stalybridge, I'm not sure that it would be that benifitial.

 

If they did want to re-instate the Micklehurst Loop again then another viaduct would have to be rebuilt at Stalybridge over the Canal, the River Tame and then straight into the Tunnel.

 

I always thought that the viaduct straight into a Tunnel would look particularly good in model form.

 

Kev.

[coachmann]

There isn't much room on the hillside between Stalybridge and Saddleworth to provide loops, which is why the Micklehurst loop line was built. However, I cannot help thinking it would not have been built 20 years later seeing as the railway had by then lost its monopoly. There is room to put a goods lay-bye from Royal George to the station in Greenfield, and one can spread out beyond Saddleworth with a 4-track section all the way to Huddersfield, I think!

 

Of course, reinstatement of Park Bridge Viaduct and the demolition of parts of Oldham and Lees would provide space for a relief loop from Ashton via Oldham to Greenfield....

Edited April 26, 2012 by coachmann

[Andy C]

Of course, reinstatement of Park Bridge Viaduct and the demolition of parts of Oldham and Lees would provide space for a relief loop from Ashton via Oldham to Greenfield....

 

Quite right Larry, and obliterate most of Glodwick and its environs when it goes through as well please!

 

I suspect there would be more chance of the local light rail enterprise doing that though - especially the Mumps - Greenfield section and whos not to say on to Delph to get some of the traffic off Lees Road in a morning/evening rush hours. The Electric Donkey? now there is a thought!!

Edited April 26, 2012 by Andy C

[Andy C]

As for the reinstatement of the Micklehurst loop just think of all the compensation to be paid to local home owners - the house that have been built along and around the line in Greenfield / Uppermill since the line closed, I suspect there may be a few objections, but a rumour maybe worth starting tonight in the (Boarshurst) band club to see how local tongues wag

 

Speaking of which I think id object myself, I'd be constantly looking out of my music pad to watch out of the club windows whatever is going over the (new) viaduct. I can just hear the diatribe from our MD now - "thats in 4/4 time." "No it was definately a 66"

Edited April 26, 2012 by Andy C

[Edwin_m]

From a recent visit between Oldham and Greenfield:

 

Most of Glodwick Road to Lees is a landfill site complete with methane vents. From Lydgate Tunnel right down almost to Greenfield has been built over with housing. Plus there's no easy way of connecting to Metrolink once the route through Mumps station is replaced by one through the town centre in a couple of years time.

 

If you really wanted to you might be able to rebuild to Grotton but no further.

[62613]

Nice avatar there Andy! There haven't been that many new houses built in Greenfield/Uppermill since the loop closed that adjoin it. Even the new houses on Grove Road were mostly there before it closed; we moved into no. 54 new in November 1966. The others back towards the council part had been there for at least two years before that, as the developer was only building them when he had the money.

 

I agree though that a huge amount of money would have to be spent to reopen it.

 

I'm sure I've seen a photo of a train at Heyrod bridge overtaking a goods in a loop going towards Stanedge.

[peanuts]

as i said theres space for a loop between moorgate crossing and saddleworth viaduct where the formation of the Delph branch ran along side the mainlines

 

or heres a radical thought run through stalybridge no2 tunnel then curve around on a new embankment to reconect near printworks road bridge ? tunnels in good condition

http://www.nwex.co.uk/showthread.php?t=6918&highlight=stalybridge