Hope Valley Capacity Scheme updates

[Killingworth]

Phase 2a was Lichfield to Crewe. Phase 2b was Crewe to Piccadilly. Its the latter that freed up tremendous capacity through Stockport and into the existing Piccadilly platforms. As things stand the only chance for a third Hope Valley express service is via Bredbury not Stockport. Its not just Stockport that is the issue, its Slade Lane where the Airport line joins / branches off from the WCML.

Easist way to get another hourly service is to extend the stopper to New Mills by skip stopping into Sheffield. Would probably only need one nore unit and crew. No extra path needed into or beyond Manchester. Extra path into Sheffield and a platform space is still a difficulty.

 

[Llandudno]

Easist way to get another hourly service is to extend the stopper to New Mills by skip stopping into Sheffield. Would probably only need one nore unit and crew. No extra path needed into or beyond Manchester. Extra path into Sheffield and a platform space is still a difficulty.

Perhaps the the third train will extend to Stocksbridge….!!!

 

[Killingworth]

Perhaps the the third train will extend to Stocksbridge….!!!

Running round the Dore freight chord and reversing at Chesterfield.

 

[Jozhua]

Electrification of Hope Valley is probably possible, but probably one of the more challenging routes given how much of the line is in long, deep tunnels.

It would probably have a lot of benefit to the services given the reasonably steep gradients and future fairly intensive service pattern.

Of course, this project took many years (probably at least 5 more than it should) before spades were in the ground!

 

[Killingworth]

Electrification of Hope Valley is probably possible, but probably one of the more challenging routes given how much of the line is in long, deep tunnels.

It would probably have a lot of benefit to the services given the reasonably steep gradients and future fairly intensive service pattern.

Of course, this project took many years (probably at least 5 more than it should) before spades were in the ground!

Originally in Railtrack's plans in 2001 to deliver redoubled Dore & Totley station 2003-4. 2013 public consultation gave 2018 completion date for bigger scheme with a loop at Chinley for 4 fast passenger paths. Further 2 consultations in 2015. Public inquiry 2016.

Where should the 5 years start running from?

Given that experience and noting progress on TRU I doubt Hope Valley will be electrified by 2040. Much easier to tackle Hull - Selby.

 

[zwk500]

Electrification of Hope Valley is probably possible, but probably one of the more challenging routes given how much of the line is in long, deep tunnels.

It would probably have a lot of benefit to the services given the reasonably steep gradients and future fairly intensive service pattern.

Of course, this project took many years (probably at least 5 more than it should) before spades were in the ground!

One of the problems (caused by previous inaction it must be noted) is that electrifying only as far as Sheffield doesn't get you very much as the trains run on further. As can't just cascade EMUs you would need brand new bi-modes building. It all adds up when the business case is being assessed by the DfT. It's somewhat maddening how the cases all need to wait for each other so there's excuses to do nothing but that's where we are and it would take significant political interest to change that system (I have hopes for the next government but not overly high ones).

 

[Class 170101]

Given that experience and noting progress on TRU I doubt Hope Valley will be electrified by 2040. Much easier to tackle Hull - Selby.

And in terms of services currently operating a better return I would have thought for number of services swapped from diesel to electric operation than Hope Valley.

 

[Jozhua]

Originally in Railtrack's plans in 2001 to deliver redoubled Dore & Totley station 2003-4. 2013 public consultation gave 2018 completion date for bigger scheme with a loop at Chinley for 4 fast passenger paths. Further 2 consultations in 2015. Public inquiry 2016.

Where should the 5 years start running from?

Given that experience and noting progress on TRU I doubt Hope Valley will be electrified by 2040. Much easier to tackle Hull - Selby.

- at least 15 then!

One of the problems (caused by previous inaction it must be noted) is that electrifying only as far as Sheffield doesn't get you very much as the trains run on further. As can't just cascade EMUs you would need brand new bi-modes building. It all adds up when the business case is being assessed by the DfT. It's somewhat maddening how the cases all need to wait for each other so there's excuses to do nothing but that's where we are and it would take significant political interest to change that system (I have hopes for the next government but not overly high ones).

Good point.

IMO Erewash Valley line has some real potential and I'm very keen on transitioning it to a slow/slow/fast/fast layout with electrification and the lot, although you'd need even more to get the EMR service electric - even if it was split in two at Nottingham.

Northern stopper should be fairly self contained and probably would have a lot of benefit if it could get out the way quicker! 331 would be perfectly suited for the route. Sheffield to Donnygrad would be ideal for electrification, but again, even more needed.

But then I've probably put more thought into this post than went to the whole of Network North...

 

[QueensCurve]

Phase 2a was Lichfield to Crewe. Phase 2b was Crewe to Piccadilly. Its the latter that freed up tremendous capacity through Stockport and into the existing Piccadilly platforms. As things stand the only chance for a third Hope Valley express service is via Bredbury not Stockport. Its not just Stockport that is the issue, its Slade Lane where the Airport line joins / branches off from the WCML.

It doesn't help that, at Slade Lane Junction the pairing of the track changes with the Up Slow having to cross the Fast lines. There was a proposal to change the pairing of the tracks from their to Cheadle Hulme some years ago but that came to nothing. Perhaps a flyover or diveunder would help?

 

[BrianW]

It doesn't help that, at Slade Lane Junction the pairing of the track changes with the Up Slow having to cross the Fast lines. There was a proposal to change the pairing of the tracks from their to Cheadle Hulme some years ago but that came to nothing. Perhaps a flyover or diveunder would help?

If land nor £££ were no problem

 

[Baxenden Bank]

It doesn't help that, at Slade Lane Junction the pairing of the track changes with the Up Slow having to cross the Fast lines. There was a proposal to change the pairing of the tracks from their to Cheadle Hulme some years ago but that came to nothing. Perhaps a flyover or diveunder would help?

The difficulty being those pesky local stations for local people at Heaton Chapel and Levenshulme. In one direction the platforms were on the fast lines.

 

[adamedwards]

if only PiccVic had been built the flyover would have been constructed in the 1970s. Another wasted opportunity.

 

[BrianW]

if only PiccVic had been built the flyover would have been constructed in the 1970s. Another wasted opportunity.

How many people actually want or need to travel between Pic and Vic? The unasked question?

 

[quantinghome]

How many people actually want or need to travel between Pic and Vic? The unasked question?

That's not the point of cross-city rail schemes.

How many people want to travel between Paddington and Liverpool Street? Probably not that many. How much more capacity do you provide on the connected lines and free up at the terminals? Rather a lot.

 

[adamedwards]

PiccVic was of course a much bigger network and would have seen trains running from Alderley Edge to Bolton via Whitefield. If the route existed now, you'd probably have a Bolton or Bury - Whitefield - Victoria - Central - Piccadilly - Airport service and much less pressure on the Castlefield Corridor.

But of course the 1970s was an era of high inflation and cost cutting to save government spending. How times haven't changed!

 

[BrianW]

That's not the point of cross-city rail schemes.

How many people want to travel between Paddington and Liverpool Street? Probably not that many. How much more capacity do you provide on the connected lines and free up at the terminals? Rather a lot.

Thank you for making that point. I was seeing that few trains travel between Picc and Vic at present; few people interchanging?

PiccVic was of course a much bigger network and would have seen trains running from Alderley Edge to Bolton via Whitefield. If the route existed now, you'd probably have a Bolton or Bury - Whitefield - Victoria - Central - Piccadilly - Airport service and much less pressure on the Castlefield Corridor.

But of course the 1970s was an era of high inflation and cost cutting to save government spending. How times haven't changed!

I take these points too.
- Who cancelled it? Akin to TSR2?
- Where was London's Crossrail at the time? Might Pic-Vic be presented as 'Great Northern Crossrail?
- Well before Northern Powerhouse; and 'Levelling up'.
- Was Castlefield full then?
- Opportunity yet?

 

[snowball]

Thank you for making that point. I was seeing that few trains travel between Picc and Vic at present; few people interchanging?

I take these points too.
- Who cancelled it? Akin to TSR2?
- Where was London's Crossrail at the time? Might Pic-Vic be presented as 'Great Northern Crossrail?
- Well before Northern Powerhouse; and 'Levelling up'.
- Was Castlefield full then?
- Opportunity yet?

Picc-Vic as then planned enabled trains from the Stockport/Styal direction to run through to the Bury/Oldham/Rochdale (and Bolton via Radcliffe) direction. The latter is now Metrolink. So any future version would have to be completely different.

 

[Killingworth]

We're straying a bit off topic here, although Piccadilly platforms 15/16 were at the heart of the Manchester Hub project (that morphed into the Northern Hub) that included the Hope Valley Scheme and that controversial chord - that would all have worked a lot better if all were done in full.

Delays are nothing new, the Dore station redoubling was originally scheduled by Railtrack for 2003-4. Re-signalling of the entire Hope Valley route has been on the cards since 1988 but west from Earle's Sidings remains to be done, no longer a priority it seems. Electrification is unlikely before operations cease at the Hope Valley cement works about 2042 so one complication removed. Electrification from Dore into Sheffield is supposed to happen by 2030, so said Grant Shapps in December 2021 when speaking to the Sheffield Star;

Grant Shapps MP said he was ‘aware of the history’ but insisted he ‘absolutely, fully’ intends to complete electrification of the Midland Main Line to the city by 2030.

A lot of work has gone into HS2 creating masses of paperwork and computer files to trawl through. I'm looking at the October 2018 Working Draft Environmental Statement Volume 2 for the Unstone Green to Sheffield Station section. Most, probably all, of that work will be needed for MML electrification. Para 2.2.3 Allows for a 1 km overrun at Dore junction, effectively through Dore & Totley station. (Power supply near Chesterfield in the Danesmoor to Brierley Bridge area and switching station at Dore.) Timescale envisaged - between 2023 and 2033. I'd now estimate an earliest date of nearer 2035 for the current MML bit, including Dore & Totley station.

 

[BrianW]

Picc-Vic as then planned enabled trains from the Stockport/Styal direction to run through to the Bury/Oldham/Rochdale (and Bolton via Radcliffe) direction. The latter is now Metrolink. So any future version would have to be completely different.

Mods- taking Killingworth's point- perhaps the Pic-Vic conversation should be moved to another thread- to which I would be happy to continue to add thoughts

 

[WesternBiker]

But of course the 1970s was an era of high inflation and cost cutting to save government spending. How times haven't changed!

Indeed. Thank goodness the Merseyrail loop-link went ahead...

 

[Killingworth]

Indeed. Thank goodness the Merseyrail loop-link went ahead...

The "New Merseyrail Link and Loop" and the Tyne & Wear Metro were both 1970s creations. The Metro tied the old Tyneside electric lines into an underground system that crosses below Newcastle city centre and runs out across the Tyne to go underground again through central Gateshead. But that's more appropriate for the thread How should Northern Powerhouse Rail get through Manchester? Expensive tunnels.

To get back on track, those who know Dore & Totley station may be interested to see Network Rail's illustrations of how it will look when finished.

 

[Mag_seven]

Just a reminder that the topic of this thread is Hope Valley Capacity Scheme updates. If anyone wants to discuss anything else such as possible infrastructure arrangements elsewhere then they are welcome to start a new thread in the appropriate forum section.

thanks

 

[Mat17]

Why do they always go for lifts instead of ramps? Surely ramps are more reliable and require much less maintenance? Just a thought.

 

[syorksdeano]

Why do they always go for lifts instead of ramps? Surely ramps are more reliable and require much less maintenance? Just a thought.

I maybe wrong but I think the steepness or where the new platform might be a problem.

Full speed rolling down that and you could be in Manchester quicker than the train

 

[Killingworth]

I maybe wrong but I think the steepness or where the new platform might be a problem.

Full speed rolling down that and you could be in Manchester quicker than the train

There have been some amazing zig-zag and long ramps built in recent decades to comply with accessibility requirements. They generally look awful. Around South Yorkshire and Derbyshire there are many examples which would support a separate thread without going further afield.

They're open invitations for skateboarders and a long slog to walk up and down. Many are already deteriorating with rust very apparent. They take up a lot of space. Ilkeston has two good examples of long fast runways. I've seen them being demonstrated!

 

[edwin_m]

Some people with foot impairments find it difficult to walk on a sloping surface. Also lifts might actually be cheaper to build, though not necessarily to operate, and with the risk of them going out of order, vandalism or people getting trapped.

 

[Llandudno]

There have been some amazing zig-zag and long ramps built in recent decades to comply with accessibility requirements. They generally look awful. Around South Yorkshire and Derbyshire there are many examples which would support a separate thread without going further afield.

They're open invitations for skateboarders and a long slog to walk up and down. Many are already deteriorating with rust very apparent. They take up a lot of space. Ilkeston has two good examples of long fast runways. I've seen them being demonstrated!

Agreed, the one at Prestatyn is a monstrous carbuncle!

Sorry not got a photo to post!

 

[BrianW]

Agreed, the one at Prestatyn is a monstrous carbuncle!

Sorry not got a photo to post!

Ramps can be hugely long (plenty of time in which to miss the train!). They are generally not roofed and can provide opportunity to slip and slide.

Googled on <Prestatyn Station> : https://www.google.com/maps/uv?pb=!...=2ahUKEwiqh9j2tvWBAxXwVUEAHQC2DzcQpx96BAhfEA0

 

[Class 170101]

Noted in the design posted above that there doesn't look to be much canopy cover for Dore Station

 

[Killingworth]

Ramps can be hugely long (plenty of time in which to miss the train!). They are generally not roofed and can provide opportunity to slip and slide.

Googled on <Prestatyn Station> : https://www.google.com/maps/uv?pb=!1s0x48652a0427290945:0xa9e19abd87daef93!3m1!7e115!4s/maps/place/prestatyn+station/@53.3359988,-3.4070027,3a,75y,316.31h,90t/data=*213m4*211e1*213m2*211sqnbLHj5Zit_lD5hj16CrTg*212e0*214m2*213m1*211s0x48652a0427290945:0xa9e19abd87daef93?sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiqh9j2tvWBAxXwVUEAHQC2DzcQpx96BAhEEAA!5sprestatyn station - Google Search!15sCgIgAQ&imagekey=!1e2!2sqnbLHj5Zit_lD5hj16CrTg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiqh9j2tvWBAxXwVUEAHQC2DzcQpx96BAhfEA0

I've started a new thread to discuss and illustrate some footbridges, ramps, lifts etc at Accessible railway footbridges - long ramps, zig zags and lifts, see; https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/accessible-railway-footbridges-long-ramps-zig-zags-and-lifts.256161/