Manchester - Stalybridge Electrification

[Geeves]

Seems to be quite a few muddles. I thought that with out the feeder at Heyrod this system would be short on power, so there for they were going to wire to Stalybridge rather than going to the additional expense of burying a 25KV cable next to the railway and digging it up again in the future to string up?

 

[snowball]

Seems to be quite a few muddles. I thought that with out the feeder at Heyrod this system would be short on power, so there for they were going to wire to Stalybridge rather than going to the addition expense of burying a 25KV cable next to the railway and digging it up again in the future to string up?

Joseph Locke has posted about this a few times both on here and on SSC. On 19th May on SSC he said

At the risk of repeating myself, again:

There has always been a proposal for an interconnector cable from Heyrod FS to Ordsall Lane ATS



Phase 4 is intended to be fed via Ordsall Lane ATS and Phase 5 from Heyrod ATFS, but since Phase 4 is way ahead of 5 a feed cable is now also required to Ordsall ATS to supply 4.

Phase 4 is Manchester-Preston and Phase 5 was Stalybridge, but now seems to be just Miles Platting.

I don't think there's been any suggestion of burying a cable and digging it up again.

 

[Mollman]

Latest I heard this week is that if target times of 40 minute to Leeds and 62 minutes to York from Manchester can be achieved by diesel traction then there will be no wires saving £1.3b.

So where in the North is this money saved going to be spent? Doubt politically they will get away with saying we are no longer going to electrify Trans-Pennine oh and by the way we're building CrossRail 2.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

So where in the North is this money saved going to be spent? Doubt politically they will get away with saying we are no longer going to electrify Trans-Pennine oh and by the way we're building CrossRail 2.

I shouldn't be surprised if no money at all has been saved - it's all gone into previous NW electrification phases which have overrun in time and cost.

 

[snowball]

And/or GW.

 

[Greybeard33]

Why wire to Miles Platting area then?

Maybe they are considering wiring to Newton Heath? Or is that definitely remaining a diesel-only depot?

 

[coxxy]

Maybe they are considering wiring to Newton Heath? Or is that definitely remaining a diesel-only depot?

At the minute I would say Newton Heath is pretty much at capacity...

But in the future.. who knows.

 

[Hophead]

Well, I did point out a week back that the latest Network Rail press releases relating to Manchester - Stalybridge omitted all reference to electrification.... Now we know why.

 

[ajdunlop]

I'm confused what's the point of doing from Victoria to Miles Platting? Are there sidings electric trains can get to to get out of the way of Victoria's through platforms? Otherwise nothing would be using the wires.
Once the Ashton work is done what else needs to be done to bridges etc before they just have the overhead lines and their structures to do?

 

[snowball]

I'm confused what's the point of doing from Victoria to Miles Platting? Are there sidings electric trains can get to to get out of the way of Victoria's through platforms? Otherwise nothing would be using the wires.

My guess is to enable trains to exit the platforms eastward, use crossovers and re-enter different platforms (including the two east-facing bays which have not hitherto been wired). This would perhaps make it easier for trains from the west to terminate at Vic, as a substitute for the previous plan for electric trains to continue to Stalybridge.

Or as somebody said it could be to enable bi-modes to get up the bank on electric.

Once the Ashton work is done what else needs to be done to bridges etc before they just have the overhead lines and their structures to do?

All overbridge electrification clearance between Vic and Stalybridge was completed a year or two ago.

However there may now eventually be track realignments to increase the speed limits, which were not in the original electrification plan.

 

[Chris125]

However there may now eventually be track realignments to increase the speed limits, which were not in the original electrification plan.

I can't see how there wouldn't be, and it's why this has seemed inevitable for some time - putting up masts and wires before those upgrades have taken place really wouldn't be a sensible use of resources.

 

[deltic08]

That is indeed true.

They now are working on an Output and deciding the most cost effective way of meeting it. Said output is as you say.

125mph running i think might be a red herring. I saw 100mph running. But i could be wrong of course. It included four tracking so i doubt the alignment would give you 125mph.

It was at a railway seminar addressed by a spokesperson from the DfT. He did say 125mph. Stalybridge to Marsden will be 85mph and Marden-Huddersfield 90mph.
The new arrangement at Heaton Lodge Junction was explained verbally but I couldn't follow it to understand fully.
Ravensthorpe station will be moved nearer to Mirfield so that the curve can be eased and Dewsbury station/viaduct will also see a speed increase.
Mirfield island platform will be removed in favour of four separate platforms on this requadrified section.

 

[Senex]

It was at a railway seminar addressed by a spokesperson from the DfT. He did say 125mph. Stalybridge to Marsden will be 85mph and Marden-Huddersfield 90mph.
The new arrangement at Heaton Lodge Junction was explained verbally but I couldn't follow it to understand fully.
Ravensthorpe station will be moved nearer to Mirfield so that the curve can be eased and Dewsbury station/viaduct will also see a speed increase.
Mirfield island platform will be removed in favour of four separate platforms on this requadrified section.

Was anyone else from here at that seminar, and if so, is there any of the detail they feel free to pass on? It sounds as though the speeds being cited were different from those in the document referenced to us by Gralistair that I mentioned in post #20. There it is 80 Stalybridge to Diggle (with a dip to 70 in the middle), 100 through the tunnel, and then 90/95 down to Huddersfield (with a very short dip to 85 between the 90 and the 95). After Huddersfield it goes up to 100 to Dewsbury, with no dip at Heaton Lodge — which implies quite a major change there. There's no 125 except between Church Fenton and York.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I'm confused what's the point of doing from Victoria to Miles Platting? Are there sidings electric trains can get to to get out of the way of Victoria's through platforms? Otherwise nothing would be using the wires.

One other half-sane plan would be to wire Victoria-Miles Platting and then via the Philips Park route to Ashburys on the Glossop route.
That would at least get you a loop round to the south Manchester wires.
It was intended as part of the original scheme.
Or maybe as far as Thorpes Bridge to access the loops and the Brewery Curve triangle.

 

[IanXC]

One other half-sane plan would be to wire Victoria-Miles Platting and then via the Philips Park route to Ashburys on the Glossop route.
That would at least get you a loop round to the south Manchester wires.

Is this the section that still has overhead wire structures in place? Would providing a low speed 'trolley' type system for ECS moves etc be a viable project?

 

[bluenoxid]

Is this the section that still has overhead wire structures in place? Would providing a low speed 'trolley' type system for ECS moves etc be a viable project?

Would there be any point considering that Ordsall Chord will be opening in six months!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Is this the section that still has overhead wire structures in place? Would providing a low speed 'trolley' type system for ECS moves etc be a viable project?

I don't think so, although I've never done the Philips Park route.
The old OHL (Woodhead) structures I am aware of start at Ashton Moss Jn and run towards Guide Bridge (but there is no through line any more).
I think the aim of the Philips Park wiring was to provide an ECS route from Ardwick depot, but EMUs don't seem to be going there any more.
The other option it would open up would be Glossop-Ashburys-Victoria, but that was not taken up in the Northern service proposals.

My guess is that they just want EMU siding/reversal access east of Victoria.
Bi-modes can switch in Victoria station.

 

[familyguy99]

I took some photo's of work going on at Ashton station today. With station been closed to public I can only take these photo's from Wellington Rd.

 

[Senex]

I took some photo's of work going on at Ashton station today. With station been closed to public I can only take these photo's from Wellington Rd.

Splendid pictures! Presumably the replacement bridge-spans will go in on a modified alignment if part of what is being done is an increase in speed. Some of what has been said by NR seems to indicate that the work extends over quite a distance of track, so is work also being done on the alignment eastwards towards Stalybridge?

 

[snowball]

More pictures of the work at Ashton posted on SSC by Freel07:

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=141097071&postcount=3585

 

[YorkshireBear]

Was anyone else from here at that seminar, and if so, is there any of the detail they feel free to pass on? It sounds as though the speeds being cited were different from those in the document referenced to us by Gralistair that I mentioned in post #20. There it is 80 Stalybridge to Diggle (with a dip to 70 in the middle), 100 through the tunnel, and then 90/95 down to Huddersfield (with a very short dip to 85 between the 90 and the 95). After Huddersfield it goes up to 100 to Dewsbury, with no dip at Heaton Lodge — which implies quite a major change there. There's no 125 except between Church Fenton and York.

That is my understanding too. I think the Dft spokesman may be wrong. And talked about 125mph for TPE in terms of units that can now use it on the ECML.

From what i understand once you get above 100 mph the position of stopping trains pretty much becomes untenable so they don't see value for money.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

That is my understanding too. I think the Dft spokesman may be wrong. And talked about 125mph for TPE in terms of units that can now use it on the ECML.

From what i understand once you get above 100 mph the position of stopping trains pretty much becomes untenable so they don't see value for money.

That same presentation specifically said "There is no need to go fast, just avoid going slow". 125 mph is just not on the cards in my opinion.

 

[YorkshireBear]

That same presentation specifically said "There is no need to go fast, just avoid going slow". 125 mph is just not on the cards in my opinion.

Exactly. The main focus is on removing those short sections where you drop 20mph - 40mph below general line speed. Those are generally smaller and cheaper schemes and achieve way more than 10s of miles of 125mph running would. Especially on TPE.

 

[Senex]

Exactly. The main focus is on removing those short sections where you drop 20mph - 40mph below general line speed. Those are generally smaller and cheaper schemes and achieve way more than 10s of miles of 125mph running would. Especially on TPE.

The presentation spelled the point out in some detail and included a diagram. But it's pretty obvious, isn't it? Going up from 100 to 125 saves you just 7.2 seconds per sustained mile, so on the distances on the TP route that the higher speed might be possible the saving is tiny. But getting up from 20 to 40 saves 1½ minutes a mile. There's also an advantage to a smooth speed-profile rather than a very jagged one.

One thing that does surprise me on the TP route is the new junction at Micklefield, where according to that same presentation it will be the only 100 blip in a lengthy section of 110-mph route.

On the same general subject, I'm sure I seem to recall that when the Leeds layout was modernised it was originally intended for speeds of 25 both in and out, but now it is 25 out but 15 in on all routes, with a significant loss of seconds as a result. Is my memory playing tricks with me?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I posted this in the MML thread somehow - meant to post it here. Did my own spreadsheet.

 

[edwin_m]

As well as a simple speed=distance/time calculation, there are other effects to be taken into account. In particular even the best performing train has less acceleration near the top of its speed range so will take longer to get from 80mph to 100mph than from 20mph to 40mph. And of course as it is going faster to start/finish with it will travel further during the acceleration and braking, meaning that more of the higher-speed track can't actually be used at the higher speed.

 

[Class 170101]

More trains benefit at the minimum speeds compared to the maximum speeds.

 

[jonesy3001]

There's pics on this link of the latest goings on at ashton railway station,
https://tamesidereporter.com/2017/07/picture-perfect-tameside/

 

[InOban]

I am pleased to see that they seem to be concentrating on improving line speeds etc rather than rushing to electrify. Masts and wires virtually freeze the layout because it becomes so much more expensive to upgrade it.

The whole Liverpool to Hull network should be like the Netherlands with hills. 100mph line speed, stations at sensible distances, high frequency. Build that, then electrify.

 

[Chester1]

I am pleased to see that they seem to be concentrating on improving line speeds etc rather than rushing to electrify. Masts and wires virtually freeze the layout because it becomes so much more expensive to upgrade it.

The whole Liverpool to Hull network should be like the Netherlands with hills. 100mph line speed, stations at sensible distances, high frequency. Build that, then electrify.

100mph limit is not realistic between Manchester and Leeds without significant tunneling which may as well be much faster. Looking through Lord Adonis report from last year 40 minutes seems to be a realistic target for the services while avoiding the need to wait for TWAs and CPOs. A 802 could probably get very close to it without further work if it was given a clear run. Adonis list highlighted multiple 4 tracking options plus reopening the viaduct into Leeds to reduce congestion approaching the station. A few moderate line speed improvements and much less congestion should be enough to have a 40 minute journey time for services that only stop once. If or when the route is electrified journey time could drop to maybe 35 minutes? The Liverpool-Victoria-Leeds should hopefully drop to 75 (33+3+39) minutes by the end of the franchise maybe lower with further work between Liverpool and Manchester.