Hope Valley: best use of capacity

[Killingworth]

Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/hope-valley-capacity-scheme-updates.168285/

Leisure use of Hope Valley stopping trains may be running close to, and in some cases higher than, pre-Covid levels. Skip stopping is as bad as ever as I discovered on Friday when wanting to walk from Bamford and found no direct train between Dore and Bamford between 11.21 and 14.21!

Westbound commuter traffic on the fast trains is very subdued, as it is to Manchester Airport. The need for a third hourly fast services may need review against a greater need for a second hourly semi-fast stopping service!

 

[Jozhua]

Yes. Earlier in this thread the possibility was raised of the lengthened Dore south curve being used to hold freights out of the way so that late running passengers could get by. This is a two way street. Even a train of aggregates can have a street value of £60,000-£120,000. The cost to industry of those aggregates not being available when required will be infinitely more.

When I see an on time freight being pushed out of the way to benefit a late running half empty DMU I am annoyed.

It doesn't really matter how long aggregates take to get there, just that they arrive consistently. Passengers however, are some of the most time sensitive cargo.

Our network ultimately needs to be able to provide capacity for freight and passengers. As passenger numbers recover pretty quickly from covid in the regions and the truck driver shortage continues to prove how long-distance trucking everything is unsustainable, it is clear the railway needs investment to step up to this mantle.

Hope Valley is more relevant now than it has ever been, it's time it gets the attention it deserves.

This stealth project is proceeding and Volker/Story jackets are being seen on the ground. Test drillings were due to start after 22nd June between the existing tracks for the new platform at Dore & Totley station, and at Westview Lane where the lengthened loop/chord will start. So far nothing has been drilled.

Meanwhile leisure use of Hope Valley stopping trains may be running close to, and in some cases higher than, pre-Covid levels. Skip stopping is as bad as ever as I discovered on Friday when wanting to walk from Bamford and found no direct train between Dore and Bamford between 11.21 and 14.21!

Westbound commuter traffic on the fast trains is very subdued, as it is to Manchester Airport. The need for a third hourly fast services may need review against a greater need for a second hourly semi-fast stopping service!

The express services are certainly filling up. TPE is coping better now they have got 6-car trains. EMR is obviously struggling with their ongoing rolling stock problems, but overall passenger numbers feel pretty close to pre-pandemic.

I would like to see a way of getting between the midlands/north west that doesn't involve a painfully slow crawl into Sheffield and back out again. That third path would be nice as a direct Midlands service

 

[Killingworth]

I would like to see a way of getting between the midlands/north west that doesn't involve a painfully slow crawl into Sheffield and back out again. That third path would be nice as a direct Midlands service

Maybe nice, but operationally the extended Dore chord is being built to provide more freight capacity. That will allow minimal scope for timetabled passenger services without removing the extra flexibility it's designed to give. Living beside it makes it easier to understand the difficulties of slotting heavy freight into late running passenger services on the connected two lines using a tight uphill curve!

5 or 6 walk through coaches on the current fast services would be helpful but 185s don't match that spec.

 

[Bald Rick]

It doesn't really matter how long aggregates take to get there, just that they arrive consistently.

It very much does matter. If they take too long, that needs more resource to shift the same quantity of material, which makes rail less competitive with road.

 

[furnessvale]

It very much does matter. If they take too long, that needs more resource to shift the same quantity of material, which makes rail less competitive with road.

+1

 

[BrianW]

It very much does matter. If they take too long, that needs more resource to shift the same quantity of material, which makes rail less competitive with road.

Agreeing with Furnessvale too. It DOES matter. So much freight is 'just in time'. It needs to leave when it's ready, and/or be ready at the time it's scheduled, and similarly with arrival. The alternatives involve stockpiling at one end or the other or some kind of loop/ siding/ offloading en route. All those things take time and space and resource as Bald Rick identifies all of which add cost without value.

 

[Dr Hoo]

It very much does matter. If they take too long, that needs more resource to shift the same quantity of material, which makes rail less competitive with road.

Absolutely so. Even back in BR's day the whole business model for aggregates over the relatively short distance from the Mendip quarries to the Solent area rested on two round trips per day for the hoppers (and locomotives).

 

[jfowkes]

What kind of delays can different forms of freight tolerate then? Are we talking minutes, hours, days?

 

[Revaulx]

It very much does matter. If they take too long, that needs more resource to shift the same quantity of material, which makes rail less competitive with road.

Very much so.

If the notion that it doesn’t matter has been shared by railway management and government officials over the past 70 years it’s not surprising that rail freight has declined so disastrously.

 

[Purple Orange]

Forgive me if I have missed it, but what capacity uplift will the Hope Valley upgrade bring? I.e. how many fasts, semi-fasts, stoppers, freights? What will the fastest journey time between Manchester & Sheffield be?

 

[Killingworth]

Forgive me if I have missed it, but what capacity uplift will the Hope Valley upgrade bring? I.e. how many fasts, semi-fasts, stoppers, freights? What will the fastest journey time between Manchester & Sheffield be?

The following is an extract from a letter sent by Network Rail to TOC's and interested parties on 7th October 2020 outlining the scheme.

"Reasons for proposed change

The Hope Valley Capacity scheme was generated through the Northern Hub proposal, which was put together in 2010. As part of the development of the Northern Hub, a North of England Project Board was formed. That board was chaired by the Department for Transport, and included representatives from Passenger Transport Authorities, Passenger Train Operating Companies, Freight Train Operating Companies and Network Rail. The Project Board considered the level of train service that would be both desirable and achievable across the North of England. This resulted in a series of Indicative Train Specifications (ITSS), the final one of which, ITSS7, was agreed in October 2013.

The Project Board had identified that the passenger service between Sheffield and Manchester was comparatively poor when compared to that between other similarly sized cities, and agreed on a desired train specification (in each direction) of:

• 3 fast passenger services per hour (compared to the existing 2 tph);
• An hourly stopping passenger service (compared to the 2-hourly service then operating off-peak);
• 3 freight services every 2 hours (unchanged)

Earlier versions of the ITSS had proposed 4 fast services per hour, without increasing the stopping service, but this proposal was dropped after it became apparent that it could only be achieved through “flighting” of services, thus reducing the benefit. The Project Board therefore remitted Network Rail to identify an infrastructure solution that would facilitate this level of service. In conjunction with this, Network Rail was asked to identify any low-cost options to improve linespeeds across the Hope Valley route."

Covid after effects will have to be taken into account before service patterns are finalised.

A further extract from the same letter says;

"The realisation of the full benefits of the scheme, specifically the additional fast passenger service (3tph), has not been confirmed through an updated modelling exercise at present. Timetable constraints and platform availability at Manchester Piccadilly and Sheffield may preclude the extra fast service per hour, but this will be looked at outside of the Hope Valley Capacity scheme."

I'd not hold my breath regarding significant improvements in end to end timings between Sheffield and Manchester. As far as I can tell maybe 2 or 3 minutes, but reliability should be improved. For passenger services congestion between Dore and Sheffield (and between Doncaster and Sheffield) are critical too. At the Manchester end delays between Chinley and Piccadilly via either route are also critical - and through from Liverpool.

What we should get is capacity for longer trains of stone and cement that can move forward more easily.

Provision of an extra passenger service is hampered by congestion as noted above and possible lack of available platform space at both Piccadilly and Sheffield. However passenger capacity can also be increased with longer trains.

The current Manchester consultation may help resolve matters there, or it might not. The stopper that currently terminates at New Mills might run 4 car semi-fast from there to Sheffield without requiring an extra path at that end. A 2 car stopper at all stations would fit into 2c at Sheffield.

It's probably too early to say what will emerge. Tracks may be available for use from July/September 2023. I suspect major timetable changes won't arrive until May 2024, with only minor changes in December 2023.

 

[Jozhua]

In terms of capacity into Manchester, that could possibly be resolved by starting the service at Stockport? Not ideal, but it's served very frequently from Piccadilly.

Also, easy to resolve capacity issues in Sheffield, just send a train southwards instead of going into/out of Sheffield ;¬)

It's just super painful to be so obviously wasting 15-20 minutes on an already pretty slow journey going into/out of Sheffield. It would be less bad if capacity issues there didn't mean you often crawl in the last couple miles at 5/10 MPH.

It's true Hope Valley is still going to be constrained by capacity on either side.
HS2 should improve both Sheffield MML and Manchester area rail capacity in 15 or so years, but it would be nice to have an intermediate solution. Sheffield needs doing it what Derby had done back in 2018, and Piccadilly needs 13/14.

-In regards to journey time improvements:
It is indeed not the fastest bit of line! Not the slowest, but there could definitely be some speed improvements. It seems like the Chinley curve will be straightened out a bit?

Curves aren't too bad until Grindleford, especially around Edale. The Grindleford curve seems like a candidate for straightening at some point? Especially as it's right before a very long, straight tunnel.

Electrification would appear to deliver the best journey time improvements out of any potential technology. Faster acceleration would absolutely be useful, especially in threading an extra local service in there and having those local services act as useful intercity services during reduced operating times (late night, Sundays, Bank Holidays). I know I've used the stoppers to cross a few times, purely because the next express wasn't for an hour!

 

[yorksrob]

The most eye-catching of the improvements is the fourth passenger train.

There's no reason why this couldn't be a semi-fast to provide additional capacity to some of the busier intermediate stations - particularly as the hourly stopper begins to fill up.

 

[Purple Orange]

The following is an extract from a letter sent by Network Rail to TOC's and interested parties on 7th October 2020 outlining the scheme.



Covid after effects will have to be taken into account before service patterns are finalised.

A further extract from the same letter says;



I'd not hold my breath regarding significant improvements in end to end timings between Sheffield and Manchester. As far as I can tell maybe 2 or 3 minutes, but reliability should be improved. For passenger services congestion between Dore and Sheffield (and between Doncaster and Sheffield) are critical too. At the Manchester end delays between Chinley and Piccadilly via either route are also critical - and through from Liverpool.

What we should get is capacity for longer trains of stone and cement that can move forward more easily.

Provision of an extra passenger service is hampered by congestion as noted above and possible lack of available platform space at both Piccadilly and Sheffield. However passenger capacity can also be increased with longer trains.

The current Manchester consultation may help resolve matters there, or it might not. The stopper that currently terminates at New Mills might run 4 car semi-fast from there to Sheffield without requiring an extra path at that end. A 2 car stopper at all stations would fit into 2c at Sheffield.

It's probably too early to say what will emerge. Tracks may be available for use from July/September 2023. I suspect major timetable changes won't arrive until May 2024, with only minor changes in December 2023.

Thanks for the response. In effect it seems rather disingenuous for this scheme to be badged as NPR, given that NPR is intended to be rather transformational.

 

[Killingworth]

There is regular capacity and emergency capacity that maybe should also be considered.

It was mayhem this afternoon between Manchester and Sheffield. TPE cancellations were part of it. I can't be sure of how it started but the first of the delays seems to have been Northern's 13.49 from Piccadilly, 2S70, that was terminated at Bamford, formed by 195022. It seems it may have returned as ECS to New Mills at 16.24. To do that it would probably have run wrong line to the crossover at Earles Sidings.

That was the only apparently active eastbound train along the Hope Valley until Northern's 16.49 from Piccadilly passed Bamford at 18.11. Westbound traffic was held up after Northern's 14.14 out of Sheffield until East Midlands 17.40. Coaches from New Mills were provided before order was restored.

Cancellations by TPE and Northern and massive delays for EMR.

Come the Bamford loop (2023) it might have been possible to get a failing unit off the mainline. The Hope Valley line is not well suited to wrong line working and there are no bi-directional sections signalled. To by-pass an eastbound broken down train at Bamford would need a reversal at Earles or crossing over at Chinley North and running wrong line to Grindleford.

It looks as though TPE were having their own problems which means both they and Northern were unable to run services due to stock trapped at various points along their routes.

A crossover west of Earles for eastbound traffic would assist freight to run straight in from the west without reversing and might have allowed a wrong line possibility for continuing services this afternoon.

The 3 passenger services and freights are very vulnerable to any incidents between Totley and Cowburn Tunnels. Once the current scheme is completed there remains more to be done to improve resilience.

 

[The Planner]

As you will know though, that resilience comes at a cost, and is the first thing value managed out. If you think its bad now wait until any schemes get developed going forward, and that's if they even do!

 

[Jozhua]

There is regular capacity and emergency capacity that maybe should also be considered.

It was mayhem this afternoon between Manchester and Sheffield. TPE cancellations were part of it. I can't be sure of how it started but the first of the delays seems to have been Northern's 13.49 from Piccadilly, 2S70, that was terminated at Bamford, formed by 195022. It seems it may have returned as ECS to New Mills at 16.24. To do that it would probably have run wrong line to the crossover at Earles Sidings.

That was the only apparently active eastbound train along the Hope Valley until Northern's 16.49 from Piccadilly passed Bamford at 18.11. Westbound traffic was held up after Northern's 14.14 out of Sheffield until East Midlands 17.40. Coaches from New Mills were provided before order was restored.

Cancellations by TPE and Northern and massive delays for EMR.

Come the Bamford loop (2023) it might have been possible to get a failing unit off the mainline. The Hope Valley line is not well suited to wrong line working and there are no bi-directional sections signalled. To by-pass an eastbound broken down train at Bamford would need a reversal at Earles or crossing over at Chinley North and running wrong line to Grindleford.

It looks as though TPE were having their own problems which means both they and Northern were unable to run services due to stock trapped at various points along their routes.

A crossover west of Earles for eastbound traffic would assist freight to run straight in from the west without reversing and might have allowed a wrong line possibility for continuing services this afternoon.

The 3 passenger services and freights are very vulnerable to any incidents between Totley and Cowburn Tunnels. Once the current scheme is completed there remains more to be done to improve resilience.

As you will know though, that resilience comes at a cost, and is the first thing value managed out. If you think its bad now wait until any schemes get developed going forward, and that's if they even do!

As the world's 5th richest country, we can't afford the kind of gold plating associated with adding an extra passing loop on a railway between some of the UK's most populated regions and it is ridiculous to suggest so. How dare you suggest such a thing when our NHS is in dire need of funding!!!!!!!!

I'm fed up with this forum's fall to communist ideology. Perhaps if the trains were able to pull themselves along by their bootstraps, then this issue wouldn't occur in the first place...

 

[HSTEd]

Let's be honest, the railways in the Hope Valley are a mess and noone would have designed them the way they are.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Let's be honest, the railways in the Hope Valley are a mess and noone would have designed them the way they are.

I know what you mean but arguably British Rail created the current situation in terms of rationalising the route, single-tracking Dore, building the Hazel Grove Chord, introducing regular Nottingham-Liverpool services via Sheffield and so on.

(I fully appreciate that further increases in numbers of trains of all types, incompatible couplings, etc. have made things even more difficult in recent years.)

 

[Jozhua]

Honestly, the future plan would just be to ideally bypass the hope valley, by utilising HS2 and NPR, especially for passengers from the East Midlands.

Unfortunately, the eastern leg of HS2 looks like it will be cancelled, despite it being the part with the most drastic improvements to the largest amount of people and the most journeys, the hope valley and to a lesser extent Huddersfield/Guide Bridge Transpennine route, both being part of that.

Treasury still drags it's heels over hope valley upgrades as well, can't decide if it wants upgrades to the existing network, HS2 or neither (it probably wants neither)

 

[HSTEd]

I know what you mean but arguably British Rail created the current situation in terms of rationalising the route, single-tracking Dore, building the Hazel Grove Chord, introducing regular Nottingham-Liverpool services via Sheffield and so on.

(I fully appreciate that further increases in numbers of trains of all types, incompatible couplings, etc. have made things even more difficult in recent years.)

I was primarily referring to the annoying presence of the Buxton line, which is close enough to make significant service duplication an economic issue but not close enough to allow any sort of simple rationalisation!

 

[ohgoditsjames]

It's completely inadequate for such an important connection between two large cities. NPR haven't made it clear how they plan to improve it either.

 

[D365]

I was primarily referring to the annoying presence of the Buxton line, which is close enough to make significant service duplication an economic issue but not close enough to allow any sort of simple rationalisation!

What is it duplicating?

It's completely inadequate for such an important connection between two large cities. NPR haven't made it clear how they plan to improve it either.

Wouldn’t hold your breath.

 

[Jozhua]

NPR would resolve it basically by having trains use the NPR Transpennine route to Leeds and then going down to Sheffield/Midlands on HS2

Worth noting that fully built, HS2 provides a much quicker connection to the east Midlands going via Birmingham.

I still think that re-opening the leg of the Buxton line between Buxton and Matlock would provide both a great service for local people, but also a viable intercity alternative - at least for those who would otherwise travel from Manchester/Northwest via Derby, if they don't live on the route.

 

[johnnychips]

I still think that re-opening the leg of the Buxton line between Buxton and Matlock would provide both a great service for local people, but also a viable intercity alternative - at least for those who would otherwise travel from Manchester/Northwest via Derby, if they don't live on the route.

No it wouldn’t. There have been many threads on this but briefly
- it would remove an incredibly popular leisure facility (Mondale Trail)
- The route is very sinuous. The extant bit between Matlock and Ambergate is very slow
- it hasn’t been used since c.1970. It would cost a fortune to rebuild

There are many other reasons, but no doubt we could be redirected to an appropriate thread.

 

[Killingworth]

The last fortnight reinforces the need to improve services between Manchester and Sheffield, but the supposedly congested Hope Valley doesn't seem to be at the root of most of the current delays.

See how awful the current service has been over the last 2 weeks, Monday - Friday, here the Manchester - Sheffield performance from Recent Train Times, spot the trains that ran to time; https://www.recenttraintimes.co.uk/Home/Search?Op=Srch&Fr=Manchester+Piccadilly+(MAN)&To=Sheffield+(SHF)&TimTyp=A&TimDay=A&Days=Wk&TimPer=2w&dtFr=&dtTo=&ShwTim=AvAr&MxArCl=10&TOC=All&ArrSta=5&MetAvg=Mea&MetSpr=RT&MxScDu=&MxSvAg=10&MnScCt=2

It's not helped by EMR's strike action and their withdrawn and short formed services due to shortage of available rolling stock. That throws pressure on the TPE and Northern services, The weather hasn't helped either. However the biggest problems appear to be beyond Sheffield and Manchester feeding through to delay the stopping services leaving Hope Valley stations at the bottom of punctuality league tables, see here for Hathersage for the last 3 months from On Time Trains - 2486th out of 2614 stations nationwide; https://www.ontimetrains.co.uk/stations/HSG

Whatever happens in the valley it seems that adding any more services through Sheffield or Manchester would be unwise, certainly until it can be demonstrated that the 2022 Manchester timetable changes actually work. Longer trains would be a better way to add capacity in the near future, particularly to a fully restored EMR service.

 

[yorksrob]

Just get them the length they need to be.

Mind you, the EMR's I saw around Sheffield and Edale last Friday appeared to be four carriage, so maybe things are getting better !

 

[modernrail]

Is there any reason why the EMR can’t run 6 carriage? It is absolutely crazy to be staring down the barrel of years to improve the infrastructure when 1 of the 2 fast trains is 4 carriages. 4 carriages. Just say that to yourself again. An intercity train connecting all the cities of the East Midlands with all the cities of the North West. 4 carriages. Just because it used to be 2 does not mean 4 is the right answer.

I can imagine that 6 carriages twice an hour would work okay in terms of capacity. There is probably an argument to make the EMT service a TPE service with 8 car 802 and curtail before is plods to Norwich and have that as a separate thing.

It is a similar story on the north TPE. Why have 6 trains an hour and constant delays from constraints. Have 5 longer trains and hour through the core.

I can’t believe the DfT are applying that much brain power to any of this.

 

[yorksrob]

Is there any reason why the EMR can’t run 6 carriage? It is absolutely crazy to be staring down the barrel of years to improve the infrastructure when 1 of the 2 fast trains is 4 carriages. Just because it used to be 2 does not mean 4 is the right answer.

I can imagine that 6 carriages twice an hour would work okay in terms of capacity. There is probably an argument to make the EMT service a TPE service with 8 car 802 and curtail before is plods to Norwich and have that as a separate thing.

It is a similar story on the north TPE. Why have 6 trains an hour and constant delays from constraints. Have 5 longer trains and hour through the core.

I can’t believe the DfT are applying that much brain power to any of this.

They did (or might have been EMT) run a six carriage 158 on the route during the Northern strike a couple of years ago. I think there may have been an issue with platform lengths at Warrington central, however it would seem a quick win to get sorted out.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Just get them the length they need to be.

Mind you, the EMR's I saw around Sheffield and Edale last Friday appeared to be four carriage, so maybe things are getting better !

Yep, this. Proper long trains before any frequency increases. Because of HS2 and NPR, 200m needs to become the standard length.