HS2 - Stafford Bypass

[Palmerston]

A letter in the FT this week https://on.ft.com/40VwK3v (possibly not paywalled) proposed a Stafford bypass and 4-tracking Crewe to Preston as a cheaper/better option than extending HS2 to Crewe.

People here know far more than I about whether things like this would work. Is it a sensible suggestion or would it be a bad idea?

 

[Metrolink]

Doesn’t seem horrible in theory.

Surely 4 tracking Crewe to Stockport aswell isn’t a bad idea too. The only obvious difference to HS2 Phase 2a is linespeed, but of course that goes back to the argument on whether capacity or speed from London to the North is more useful.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Before the massive cut-backs in HS2b, investigations were in progress for Crewe-Preston improvements to compensate for the dropping of the Golborne link.
That was a result of the Hendy Union Connectivity review which said there were better ways of reaching Preston than the Golborne link.
But all that went in the bin when Rishi Sunak cancelled the lot, including improvements at Crewe, Preston and Carlisle (400m platforms etc).

 

[Dspatula]

Ah yes the "straight and flat" west coast main line so long as we ignore all the bits that aren't, best to forget about the existence of Winsford, Hartford, Newton-le-Willows and Wigan while we're at it.
It's almost like somebody looked at all this and realised that best way to add two additional tracks was to build them somewhere else.

 

[6Gman]

Ah yes the "straight and flat" west coast main line so long as we ignore all the bits that aren't, best to forget about the existence of Winsford, Hartford, Newton-le-Willows and Wigan while we're at it.
It's almost like somebody looked at all this and realised that best way to add two additional tracks was to build them somewhere else.

Indeed.

Dutton Viaduct and Preston Brook tunnel say Hi!

 

[A S Leib]

How much benefit would four-tracking Wigan to Preston give, given that it wasn't part of the Golborne plans? Would that be necessary and sufficient for e.g. an hourly Liverpool – Lancaster service on top of 2-3 London – Scotland tph, or would that need more capacity at Lime Street or be possible by four-tracking as far north as Wigan?

I know that it was cancelled earlier and that the WCML has the most urgent capacity issues, and that this isn't a formal proposal by somebody with power over such things, but more attention on improving East Midlands – Leeds / North East services would be welcome as well, especially given the CrossCountry issues being discussed elsewhere. It would also seem strange to leave Sheffield – Wakefield / Doncaster unelectrified once Kettering – Sheffield and Manchester – Leeds are done.

 

[SynthD]

It depends where the second set of tracks are. If they are beside the existing pair, it will be relatively slow. If it takes a different path that looks more like the rest of HS2, then it is worth doing. The path through High Legh is good, and there are already detailed plans for it.

Supply in excess of demand?

 

[The Planner]

Winsford Weaver on its own would open up a load of opportunities.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

A letter in the FT this week https://on.ft.com/40VwK3v (possibly not paywalled) proposed a Stafford bypass and 4-tracking Crewe to Preston as a cheaper/better option than extending HS2 to Crewe.

People here know far more than I about whether things like this would work. Is it a sensible suggestion or would it be a bad idea?

The proposal is for a bit more than that. From the FT letter you linked to:

There are alternatives which will serve the region better: a bypass of Stafford, the one bottleneck, using in part an existing line, for which options were costed by consultants in 2007 at between £452mn and £568mn; speeding up the straight and flat West Coast main line through Cheshire to 140mph, which was pre-privatisation British Rail’s planned intercity speed; widening remaining two-track lengths between Crewe and Preston to the line’s general four-track standard; and linking Manchester airport station with the railway to Chester and North Wales by a short tunnel under the airport runway. These together we estimate at £2.5bn to £3bn at 2024 prices, a 10th of HS2 Phase 2’s cost when cancelled. If Louise Haigh, the transport secretary, commissions them soon, they could be opened with the rump HS2, due in service in 2033.

Presumably the increase in WCML line speed would slightly address the concerns in other posts that it would still be a slow route.

Personally I've long thought that 4-tracking the WCML as far as Preston in order to allow decent commuter services would be a great thing to do anyway (but obviously does depend on an intention to actually provide those services. Amongst other things, it would allow a useful station at Golborne to be built.)

I don't for a moment believe the £2.5 Bn to £3 Bn price tag the letter suggests for all that work though.

 

[david l]

In terms of 4 tracking WCML, Standish Junc (2miles n of Wigan) to Balshaw Lane would simply be re-instating the slow lines removed in 1972, whilst between Wigan NW and Standish Junc there is enough land still in railway ownership on the west side of the line (going back to 1838 when the line was originally built!!) and indeed most overbridges have abutments for 4 track. Bigger problem is Golborne Junc to Winwick Junc and south of Warrington.

 

[nuneatonmark]

Maybe if they'd invested in in in-cab signalling, grade separating Colwich, a 4th track between Nuneaton and Rugby and running Pendos at 140mph, 15 years ago, we might be enjoying those benefits now and HS2 would have never been?

 

[Efini92]

In terms of 4 tracking WCML, Standish Junc (2miles n of Wigan) to Balshaw Lane would simply be re-instating the slow lines removed in 1972, whilst between Wigan NW and Standish Junc there is enough land still in railway ownership on the west side of the line (going back to 1838 when the line was originally built!!) and indeed most overbridges have abutments for 4 track. Bigger problem is Golborne Junc to Winwick Junc and south of Warrington.

They are massive pinch points though and would definitely benefit from having 4 tracks.
I would love to see an estimate for widening the cutting between golborne and winwick.

 

[Grimsby town]

The proposal is for a bit more than that. From the FT letter you linked to:



Presumably the increase in WCML line speed would slightly address the concerns in other posts that it would still be a slow route.

Personally I've long thought that 4-tracking the WCML as far as Preston in order to allow decent commuter services would be a great thing to do anyway (but obviously does depend on an intention to actually provide those services. Amongst other things, it would allow a useful station at Golborne to be built.)

I don't for a moment believe the £2.5 Bn to £3 Bn price tag the letter suggests for all that work though.

At best £3 billion would get you a Stafford bypass. It won't get you Manchester Airport western connection or 4 tracking on the WCML. I don't understand the logic either. Stafford Bypass is still going to take land from farmers they'll just be farmers who weren't impacted before. Why put more people through the experience? I assume its because they're hoping it won't go though. Straying from the HS2 alignment is pointless at this point.

I'm also sick of opponents making out that services are going to be worse on the classic line. Stoke will have HS2 services and likely more services running down the WCML than currently. Wilmslow will probably lose London services but is next to Manchester Airport. Stockport is 9 minutes from Piccadilly so would get faster London services and will more local services.

 

[a_c_skinner]

We don't need new ideas. We have a project that is largely worked up and ready to build if I understand correctly. A new idea will go through the mill of proposal, consultation, outline busness case, consultation, changes, consultation, business case, consultation, detailed design and planning permission with consultations, public inquiry and so on. Even if build is quicker changing horses in mid stream (actually on the river bank of course) will just waste a load of time and spend a deal of money. I may have been a little satirical, but the key to humour is believeability.

 

[The Planner]

The proposal is for a bit more than that. From the FT letter you linked to:



Presumably the increase in WCML line speed would slightly address the concerns in other posts that it would still be a slow route.

Personally I've long thought that 4-tracking the WCML as far as Preston in order to allow decent commuter services would be a great thing to do anyway (but obviously does depend on an intention to actually provide those services. Amongst other things, it would allow a useful station at Golborne to be built.)

I don't for a moment believe the £2.5 Bn to £3 Bn price tag the letter suggests for all that work though.

Golborne is being built anyway. It doesnt need anything.

Maybe if they'd invested in in in-cab signalling, grade separating Colwich, a 4th track between Nuneaton and Rugby and running Pendos at 140mph, 15 years ago, we might be enjoying those benefits now and HS2 would have never been?

No, south of Rugby would still be full.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Golborne is being built anyway. It doesnt need anything.

Nice to hear it's going ahead, but without 4-tracking or service improvements, what's going to be able to sensibly stop there?

 

[The Planner]

Nice to hear it's going ahead, but without 4-tracking or service improvements, what's going to be able to sensibly stop there?

A Wigan to Manchester service via the Chat Moss. Golborne is already 4 tracked.

 

[Starmill]

Nice to hear it's going ahead, but without 4-tracking or service improvements, what's going to be able to sensibly stop there?

The Taskforce originally suggested a Wigan North Western - Hazel Grove service (peak only to start with) and two Southport - Bolton - Stalybridge services. This was later replaced with the mess we have now so that Southport could keep direct trains to Manchester Oxford Road. The former would have been a better deal than a Wigan North Western - Stalybridge (or Manchester Victoria) service but probably not as workable.

 

[dangie]

As you can see from my profile I live in Rugeley.

I often cycle past Handsacre near Lichfield where HS2 was due to join the WCML. I've noticed that all construction work appears to have stopped. I thought that even with the cancellation of the northern leg of HS2 the joining of the first phase to Birmingham would still be extended to Handsacre.

Has this been cancelled as well?

 

[david l]

A Wigan to Manchester service via the Chat Moss. Golborne is already 4 tracked.

And has been since about 1895.

 

[Bald Rick]

As you can see from my profile I live in Rugeley.

I often cycle past Handsacre near Lichfield where HS2 was due to join the WCML. I've noticed that all construction work appears to have stopped. I thought that even with the cancellation of the northern leg of HS2 the joining of the first phase to Birmingham would still be extended to Handsacre.

Has this been cancelled as well?

No.

 

[futureA]

Doesn’t seem horrible in theory.

Surely 4 tracking Crewe to Stockport aswell isn’t a bad idea too. The only obvious difference to HS2 Phase 2a is linespeed, but of course that goes back to the argument on whether capacity or speed from London to the North is more useful.

This would be pointless without increasing number of platforms at Piccadilly surely?

 

[hwl]

As you can see from my profile I live in Rugeley.

I often cycle past Handsacre near Lichfield where HS2 was due to join the WCML. I've noticed that all construction work appears to have stopped. I thought that even with the cancellation of the northern leg of HS2 the joining of the first phase to Birmingham would still be extended to Handsacre.

Has this been cancelled as well?

The priority is to get OOC to Birmingham completed hence focusing staff and resources there hence why it appears there is slower progress elsewhere.

 

[Elecman]

They also need to decide exactly what the want to do at Handsacre ire join onto the WCML Fast or Slow l8nes

 

[The Planner]

They also need to decide exactly what the want to do at Handsacre ire join onto the WCML Fast or Slow l8nes

It will be the slows.

 

[Efini92]

A Wigan to Manchester service via the Chat Moss. Golborne is already 4 tracked.

And if you believe what mr Burnham says, the platforms are still there…

 

[Pinus contorta]

And if you believe what mr Burnham says, the platforms are still there…

They weren't there yesterday

 

[DynamicSpirit]

A Wigan to Manchester service via the Chat Moss. Golborne is already 4 tracked.

Ah yes, found the BBC report and I see what you mean.

Plans have been submitted to build a £32m train station in the hopes to connect a town to a rail network for the first time in more than 60 years.

The proposals for a station in Golborne, Wigan, which has no train or tram services to Manchester, would mean journey times to the city centre would reduce by up to 30 minutes.

If the plans are approved, work on site should begin in 2026 with the new station scheduled to open in 2027.

Nice that there will be a new service.

I wonder though how it will cope with the 2-track section South of Golborne and the flat junction where the new service will leave the WCML. I've noticed a few times that when I've been on the Manchester - Scotland TPE, the train has waited quite a while at that junction, from which I'm inferring that it's already a bottleneck. So maybe 4-tracking is still a good idea.

 

[The Planner]

Ah yes, found the BBC report and I see what you mean.



Nice that there will be a new service.

I wonder though how it will cope with the 2-track section South of Golborne and the flat junction where the new service will leave the WCML. I've noticed a few times that when I've been on the Manchester - Scotland TPE, the train has waited quite a while at that junction, from which I'm inferring that it's already a bottleneck. So maybe 4-tracking is still a good idea.

Its an incredibly short section and if it has to wait on the Lowton curvre so be it, ideal place to hide a train. Its not going to be 4 tracked.

 

[Metrolink]

This would be pointless without increasing number of platforms at Piccadilly surely?

Yeah sorry implied just forgot to mention it. Can Mayfield still be feasibly built upon despite development below?