Sheffield Station north throat

[YorkshireBear]

Is this part of the newtork a bad pinch point?

I regularly use sheffield and always wait just north of station and always wait for a path out north. Is there any way of improving the capcity of sheffield at all?
There seems no room for extra tracks or really anything. Has anything ever been suggested?

If i was living in a dream world i would build a second tier to the station for through services but that is a dream world.

 

[37372]

There's nothing that can be done with it really with it being in such a tight space, and because timings are so tight, if one train is late it can cause a knock-on effect on others, which is often the case. I've done many a trip to Sheffield and been held outside.

Then again it doesn't help that the signallers there do a naff job anyway.

 

[silvermachine]

The short answer is no.

There is only room for two tracks through the cutting and along the viaduct for about 1.5 miles and it would require an unimaginable amount of money to widen the route.

alternatives might be to free up some paths by routing sheffield rotherham doncaster services via nunnery curve ( about 400yds north of the station ) and then via freight only lines to rotherham - an occasional diversion up to the 1990s, BUT, that would mean missing meadowhall which is now a major interchange.

 

[YorkshireBear]

The short answer is no.

There is only room for two tracks through the cutting and along the viaduct for about 1.5 miles and it would require an unimaginable amount of money to widen the route.

alternatives might be to free up some paths by routing sheffield rotherham doncaster services via nunnery curve ( about 400yds north of the station ) and then via freight only lines to rotherham - an occasional diversion up to the 1990s, BUT, that would mean missing meadowhall which is now a major interchange.

Still is an occasional diversion it was used at the beginning of this year i believe.
Didn't think anything could be done... so without openeing victoria sheffield is going to see no improvements in service then really?

I've always thought giving meadowhall a second interchange at tinsley south tram stop could work but not sure about the practicalities of having two stations. With one being much larger than the new one ever could be.

In terms of waiting for platforms could you increase the amount of bay platforms on the nort side by maybe rationalising the through roads a bit? Or even making platform 2,5 and 6 have a similar situation to platfrom 1 where trains can acess half way down the platform essentially looping round another service?

 

[TomBoyRacer]

Only obvious thing to do would be to make both Lines Bi-Directional and try to ensure all trains for the nunnery curve use the eastern side of the station. coming.

Reopening the Woodhead would be hard but not impossible - or Matlock - Buxton which would divert all the Liverpool - Norwich's away from Sheffield, or send then via Dore South.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Only obvious thing to do would be to make both Lines Bi-Directional and try to ensure all trains for the nunnery curve use the eastern side of the station. coming.

Reopening the Woodhead would be hard but not impossible - or Matlock - Buxton which would divert all the Liverpool - Norwich's away from Sheffield, or send then via Dore South.

I dont think retrouting the nowrcih services away would have any effect on sheffield at all as they come and go from the south which has more capacity. Its the locals crowding the north that is the problem.

I presumed it was bi directional? If not then it really should be the south entrances are arn't they?

 

[dggar]

Reopening the Woodhead would be hard but not impossible - or Matlock - Buxton which would divert all the Liverpool - Norwich's away from Sheffield, or send then via Dore South.

Here is a link to a discuion in Buxton at the end of May this year regarding the Buxton Matlock route. 33 pages long!!!

http://transitionbuxton.co.uk/sites/default/files/all/Buxton Matlock Rail Inquiry.pdf

 

[SuperOwl86]

Only real way you can increase services into Sheffield is by re opening Sheffield Victoria.

Routing trains via Meadowhall south is no good still have to use the north throat I would more or less add to the pressure having to cross the tracks.

If i would do anything I would re open the line upto Stocksbridge and run a Worksop to Stocksbridge service but also reroute the Lincoln to Adwick service via Victoria and have it avoid Meadohall maybe introducing a new Meadowhall South station.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Only real way you can increase services into Sheffield is by re opening Sheffield Victoria.

Routing trains via Meadowhall south is no good still have to use the north throat I would more or less add to the pressure having to cross the tracks.

If i would do anything I would re open the line upto Stocksbridge and run a Worksop to Stocksbridge service but also reroute the Lincoln to Adwick service via Victoria and have it avoid Meadohall maybe introducing a new Meadowhall South station.

No what i mean is if meadowhall south station was opening the services would run along past nunnery square and terminate in victoria? ddoes that make more sense?

 

[SuperOwl86]

Yep i get you now.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Yep i get you now.

did you get my message on your profile?

 

[caliwag]

Thanks for that link DGGAR...probably worth posting in the heritage thread as I've no mention elsewhere. Cheers.

 

[daza7789]

Then again it doesn't help that the signallers there do a naff job anyway.

You must be a signaller at sheffield??? if not then please tell me how you know they do a naff job. I trust you are aware of the pressure that they are under, and the amount of movements that they have to handle there. signallers DO NOT delay trains for the sake of it. As mentioned the north end of the stations is very restrictive and busy, what do you expect the signallers to do about that other than work the service the best they can??

Not one to rant but it really does get up my nose when rail staff get un-informed criticism when they cannot do anything about the situation!

 

[tbtc]

I think there are around thirteen passenger trains an hour using the throat (in each direction).

• 4x Chapletown (to Barnsley/ Huddersfield/ Leeds)
• 2x Dearne Valley (to Leeds/ Edinburgh)
• 3x Doncaster Fast (to Newcastle/ Hull/ Cleethorpes)
• 2x Doncaster Slow (to Adwick/ Scunthorpe)
• 1x Darnall (to Lincoln)

(plus a decent dollop of freight, plus some "York via Pontefract" and "Grimsby via Worksop" services)

Its a lot for one two track route (esp given the flat junctions), but the real problem (in my eyes) is that the long distance stuff can be delayed whilst there's no "plan B" to divert/ accommodate local trains.

For example, whilst there's no chance of widening between Sheffield Midland and Meadowhall, I do feel that Meadowhall should have been built with additional platforms to allow overtaking etc.

Reopening Victoria sounds good, but I don't think it'd free up many paths (apart from the Lincoln one). Any diversion of Doncaster/ Rotherham services that way would come up against the long single track section round the back of Sheffield Arena (plus end up complicating things by having some using Midland and others using Victoria).

Not an easy one...

 

[Max]

You must be a signaller at sheffield??? if not then please tell me how you know they do a naff job. I trust you are aware of the pressure that they are under, and the amount of movements that they have to handle there. signallers DO NOT delay trains for the sake of it. As mentioned the north end of the stations is very restrictive and busy, what do you expect the signallers to do about that other than work the service the best they can??

Not one to rant but it really does get up my nose when rail staff get un-informed criticism when they cannot do anything about the situation!

I do find that the signallers often release stoppers northbound out of Sheffield right ahead of CrossCountry trains. The delay for stopping around Meadowhall can then cause them to be stuck from behind a stopper after Moorthorpe into Leeds and again after Leeds towards York, thus causing quite a significant total delay.

 

[bus man]

The short answer is no.

There is only room for two tracks through the cutting and along the viaduct for about 1.5 miles and it would require an unimaginable amount of money to widen the route.

alternatives might be to free up some paths by routing sheffield rotherham doncaster services via nunnery curve ( about 400yds north of the station ) and then via freight only lines to rotherham - an occasional diversion up to the 1990s, BUT, that would mean missing meadowhall which is now a major interchange.

Some XC journeys are still routed this way for route knowledge purpose , but to route others would help however , the problem is of course you still have to get them out of the station and to nunnery so in some ways you still have the same problem : the northern throat.

 

[boing_uk]

You must be a signaller at sheffield???

Doesn't need to be; they're a passenger and all passengers know best. Like all car drivers know all there is to know about traffic engineering; you should see some of the names Ive been called in the local paper.

 

[tbtc]

I do find that the signallers often release stoppers northbound out of Sheffield right ahead of CrossCountry trains. The delay for stopping around Meadowhall can then cause them to be stuck from behind a stopper after Moorthorpe into Leeds and again after Leeds towards York, thus causing quite a significant total delay.

This is a real headache.

For those who don't know, the Northern ""Dearne Valley" service leaves Sheffield at xx.14, stops at Meadowhall at xx.21, diverts into Rotherham (over a flat junction, along the single track "Holmes Chord", back over a flat junction onto the main line again). It then stops at all stops via the Dearne Valley and Wakefield Westgate on to Leeds...

...the XC service (normally Plymouth - Edinburgh) leaves Sheffield at xx.21 runs fast past Meadowhall and the Rotherham loop, non stop up the Dearne Valley line, only stopping at Wakefield Westgate before Leeds.

So, if the XC service isn't bang on time then it often sees a Pacer let out ahead of it (the xx.24 to Scunthorpe, which follows the same route as far as the Rotherham loop with no scope to overtake, plus stops at Meadowhall).

Get caught behind the Scunthorpe Pacer and the XC service won't get to Parkgate (the north end of the Rotherham loop) before the Dearne Valley service comes out. This then means the XC train is sitting behind the "all stops" Dearne Valley route (often a 144). The XC service is then half an hour late getting to Leeds (meaning its missed its slot on the route to York, with further implications on timekeeping towards Edinburgh).

Ideally I'd schedule the Dearne Valley service to run at a different time, to avoid running this close to the XC service (the Dearne Valley service takes around 75 minutes, so there are times in the hour when it'd be faster to use it for Sheffield - Leeds journeys rather than wait on the next train, *if* scheduled carefully).

Of course, if Meadowhall had "avoider" lines then the XC service could overtake the Scunthorpe train here and have a chance of getting to the Dearne Valley section ahead of the stopper.

 

[Tracked]

Seeing as increasing the number of lines out of the station isn't possible how about joining some of the services? Probably difficult on the XC and TPE services but join services through Barnsley & Rotherham and let them split at those two stations - the Rotherham ones will follow each other to Swinton, but it cuts the number using Sheffield-Meadowhall, there is capacity for at least 1 more line between the Steelworks & Swinton for that if NR fancied making Swinton Platform 3 bi-directional

 

[tbtc]

Seeing as increasing the number of lines out of the station isn't possible how about joining some of the services? Probably difficult on the XC and TPE services but join services through Barnsley & Rotherham and let them split at those two stations - the Rotherham ones will follow each other to Swinton, but it cuts the number using Sheffield-Meadowhall, there is capacity for at least 1 more line between the Steelworks & Swinton for that if NR fancied making Swinton Platform 3 bi-directional

Good idea.

An (other) advantage of this is that you would then ensure that services were longer at the Sheffield end (whilst not needing to be as long elsewhere).

A couple of examples:

Sheffield - Barnsley - Huddersfield and Sheffield - Barnsley - Castleford - Leeds could join/split at Barnsley (four coaches Sheffield - Barnsley, two coaches from Barnsley to Huddersfield/ Leeds)

Sheffield - Doncaster - Hull and Manchester Airport - Sheffield - Doncaster - Cleethorpes could join/split at Doncaster (four coaches from Manchester Airport to Doncaster, two coaches to Hull/ Cleethorpes)

(with tinkering to ensure that stations like Chapletown still received a reasonable service)

 

[LE Greys]

I don't know Sheffield at all, but is it possible to get the north throat up to four tracks. Going on my Quail track diagram, there are a couple of what look like headshunts that could be modified to run through. Ideally, this would lead all the way to Nunnery Junction, with the eastern pair being used by trains coming from the old GC line past Tinsley (doubled and returned to full passenger running status) and the western pair being used for the former Midland lines through Brightside. Farther north, Ardwarke Junction would be remodelled to have four full running lines passing through it, the Roundwood Chord would be doubled and upgraded and Mexborough Junction would be remodelled to give priority to what would once again be the GC line to Sheffield. Finally, Rotherham Masborough would reopen. Anything passing through Mexborough would run via Rotherham Central and Tinsley, avoiding Swinton. Anything passing through Bolton-on-Dearne would still run through Swinton, then be split roughly 50/50 between the two routes. The only certainty is that all XC services would run via the newly-upgraded GC route. Ideally, I'd like all EMT services to use the Midland route, but the Midland's old main line to Leeds has some crucial sections missing, so they will probably have to use the GC route.

Essentially, this undoes the rationalisation done under BR, splitting up LMS and LNER services.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I think there are around thirteen passenger trains an hour using the throat (in each direction).

• 4x Chapletown (to Barnsley/ Huddersfield/ Leeds)
• 2x Dearne Valley (to Leeds/ Edinburgh)
• 3x Doncaster Fast (to Newcastle/ Hull/ Cleethorpes)
• 2x Doncaster Slow (to Adwick/ Scunthorpe)
• 1x Darnall (to Lincoln)

(plus a decent dollop of freight, plus some "York via Pontefract" and "Grimsby via Worksop" services)

Its a lot for one two track route (esp given the flat junctions), but the real problem (in my eyes) is that the long distance stuff can be delayed whilst there's no "plan B" to divert/ accommodate local trains.

For example, whilst there's no chance of widening between Sheffield Midland and Meadowhall, I do feel that Meadowhall should have been built with additional platforms to allow overtaking etc.

Reopening Victoria sounds good, but I don't think it'd free up many paths (apart from the Lincoln one). Any diversion of Doncaster/ Rotherham services that way would come up against the long single track section round the back of Sheffield Arena (plus end up complicating things by having some using Midland and others using Victoria).

Not an easy one...

Well for me i was thinking about this yesterday (was at waddington air show i had alot of time on my hands) , If you could get enough services to victoria you could justify sheffield having two stations. You could send all manchester trains there (with work on rotheram section) to here. Except the local service which would still use midland, cos people wouldnt use that to manchester so essentially all manchester trains leave victoria.

Presumes woodhead reopeneing thats all....

I do find that the signallers often release stoppers northbound out of Sheffield right ahead of CrossCountry trains. The delay for stopping around Meadowhall can then cause them to be stuck from behind a stopper after Moorthorpe into Leeds and again after Leeds towards York, thus causing quite a significant total delay.

But then again si it fair to delay northern locals because XC is late? It's probably a tough decision. ( i am not in the know so that is a presumption)

 

[GingerSte]

Personally I reckon you could get the line 4-tracked to Nunnery Lane Junction by widening the cutting to three tracks (although 3 tracks with a single bi-directional line for the Darnall-bound trains would probably be easier). It would take some heavy engineering though, and a long possession of that stretch of line. However, it is more like 200-300 metres than a mile and a half (I've just checked on multimap). Land purchase would be minimal as it would be between the existing line and Park Square Roundabout for most of it.

I also think that some of the road bridges over the line are no longer in use (Anson Street and South Street Park form a dead end so closure might be easier). Duke Street, High Street Lane and Bard Street bridge closures could be staggered to maintain road access. Old street Bridge could be closed while maintaining access from the other side. The junction of Cricket Inn Road and Broad Street could be remodelled to avoid it going over the railway. Land purchase would be minimal as it would be between the existing line and Park Square Roundabout for most of it. According to Multimap, there is some sort of car park (or possibly car dealership) over the line at Stepney Street. I would bet that Network Rail own this land and could force a move if they needed to. I'm not sure how much more access is needed to Stepney Street.

As far as operations during the blockade goes, London St P - Shef trains could operate as normal, as could Shef-Man. Services to the Local services would have to terminate at Meadowhall. The easiest way of dealing with XC services is to temporarily reopen Rotherham Masborough, stop the XC's there, and run shuttle buses to Shef. XC could then run round Sheffield to Chesterfield.

So difficult, yes, but not impossible IMO. I also imagine that this could be done on a similar price scale to the Leeds and Reading remodelling (ie low 9 figures).But this would open up a whole area for the railway to exploit. Combine this with 3 or 4-tracking of Shef-Dore and you've got a very accessible station.

Edited to add:
Having looked at this section of line with this in mind, I don't think you would need to close any of the Sheffield Supertram to achieve this, as the bridge crosses the throat before it merges into two tracks. This would help keep the cost down.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Good idea.

An (other) advantage of this is that you would then ensure that services were longer at the Sheffield end (whilst not needing to be as long elsewhere).

A couple of examples:

Sheffield - Barnsley - Huddersfield and Sheffield - Barnsley - Castleford - Leeds could join/split at Barnsley (four coaches Sheffield - Barnsley, two coaches from Barnsley to Huddersfield/ Leeds)

Sheffield - Doncaster - Hull and Manchester Airport - Sheffield - Doncaster - Cleethorpes could join/split at Doncaster (four coaches from Manchester Airport to Doncaster, two coaches to Hull/ Cleethorpes)

(with tinkering to ensure that stations like Chapletown still received a reasonable service)

I think if you start halving the frequency of routes you put in a very negative effect on the passeneger usage. However, you could (for hallam line) join the express and the local together to meadowhall, split, front portion going on to barnsley and the stopper obviously stopping after it, leaving barnsley for huddersfield or normanton for leeds before the next express catches it.

 

[Donny Dave]

You must be a signaller at sheffield??? if not then please tell me how you know they do a naff job. I trust you are aware of the pressure that they are under, and the amount of movements that they have to handle there. signallers DO NOT delay trains for the sake of it. As mentioned the north end of the stations is very restrictive and busy, what do you expect the signallers to do about that other than work the service the best they can??

Not one to rant but it really does get up my nose when rail staff get un-informed criticism when they cannot do anything about the situation!

I'm not disagreeing with you about how much pressure someone is under by being at somewhere like Sheffield PSB, especially when the copper fairies have been out in the Mexborough/Swinton/Rotherham area. I've played Simsig Sheffield a fair bit, so I know it can get very messy, very quickly.

However, the staff at Sheffield PSB can and do make a fair amount of odd decisions on a regular basis, such as sending the stopper to Manchester on the Hope Valley ahead of the TPE (which was fair enough, seeing as the TPE was 12 mins late), but then sending an early running freight ahead of the TPE as well! What would have been a 25-30 minute delay became a 75 minute delay, with the EMT to Liverpool right behing that, followed by the next TPE as well.

On other occasions, the Manchester bound TPE has been delayed between Swinton and Sheffield because the signaller has allowed a freight ahead at Swinton. Line speed between Swinton and Aldwarke Jn is 90/100 HST/35 freight.

 

[Tracked]

It's probably not going to have too much of a major effect, but is there any reason why Barnsley trains can't be routed off the mainline just before Brightside? taking them off there rather than at Meadowhall junction would mean the line was cleared about 30-60 seconds earlier.

My other suggestion for further down the line was to remodel Aldwarke junction so that freight to Doncaster doesn't have to go on & then off the Mainline, an extra line or two between there Masborough for freight maybe to. Er, sort of like it used to be then ...

 

[Tomnick]

It's probably not going to have too much of a major effect, but is there any reason why Barnsley trains can't be routed off the mainline just before Brightside? taking them off there rather than at Meadowhall junction would mean the line was cleared about 30-60 seconds earlier.

It would probably have the opposite effect - I believe the route towards Barnsley at Wincobank Jn is approach controlled by flashing yellows (so there's little time penalty against the 'straight' route), whereas the turnout onto the West (??) Slow through Brightside is almost certainly approach controlled from red (so any train for the diverging route will be checked right down before the signal clears).

 

[YorkshireBear]

It would probably have the opposite effect - I believe the route towards Barnsley at Wincobank Jn is approach controlled by flashing yellows (so there's little time penalty against the 'straight' route), whereas the turnout onto the West (??) Slow through Brightside is almost certainly approach controlled from red (so any train for the diverging route will be checked right down before the signal clears).

Yes and that bit of line is not the best for speed on turnouts or on the track itself.

If upgraded though yes easily possible. There is enough room for more tracks in that area too i always thought it might be worth splitting p3/p4 and p1/p2 trains a lot earlier may free up a little congestion not much but a little.

 

[telstarbox]

Re-opening Victoria doesn't sound good to me. Sheffield Midland is on the edge of the city centre as it is when compared to other major stations like Leeds and Nottingham. Victoria is even less accessible and the walk would be difficult across Park Square and the Ring Road.

Sheffield Midland is also well-connected to the Interchange although this has plenty of spare capacity and would be better if served by all the main bus routes (e.g. the 52).

Having two stations would also make connections harder and mean splitting services between the two. The best plan would be to make the best use of the existing Midland station.

 

[LE Greys]

Re-opening Victoria doesn't sound good to me. Sheffield Midland is on the edge of the city centre as it is when compared to other major stations like Leeds and Nottingham. Victoria is even less accessible and the walk would be difficult across Park Square and the Ring Road.

Sheffield Midland is also well-connected to the Interchange although this has plenty of spare capacity and would be better if served by all the main bus routes (e.g. the 52).

Having two stations would also make connections harder and mean splitting services between the two. The best plan would be to make the best use of the existing Midland station.

I suppose it wouldn't help that Trans-Pennine services would have to separate from MML, since they use the GCR line from Doncaster, which would have to divert into Victoria so that TPX could go via Woodhead. The Woodhead route is the only reason why Victoria should reopen and we might have to wait until HS2b gets there for there to be any other reason. It's a pity, I like the idea of disentangling the different networks in Yorkshire, so that they could compete against each other, with Northern operating the LNER lines and EMT the LMS lines.