• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
6,184
Location
Surrey
I think there is now a firm commitment to wire the whole route, with significant funds available, but when and how the gaps will be plugged is still a mystery.
I doubt Network Rail knows itself really, until it has done enough design work and made a plan.
But full electrification, extra freight capacity and new signalling is a decent promise, even if Manchester-Stalybridge live by 2025 is not exactly pushing it.
The new NPR routes are more of a mystery, it may be a long time before a scheme is announceable (to avoid political and environmental rows over the route).
March 1970 Labour approve Weaver Jcn to Motherwell Elecn 168 route miles electric trains running in May 1974 oh and it also involved resignalling at Preston, Carlisle and Motherwell PSBs not forgetting 36 new class 87's. So great that TRU finally gets full authority but no idea of dates and all very well telling us its going digital but there still spending money on trackside signalling.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

WAO

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2019
Messages
673
March 1970 Labour approve Weaver Jcn to Motherwell Elecn 168 route miles electric trains running in May 1974
Without being political, they were out of office in June, leaving Tory Edward Heath to find the money for it, rather like Adonis promising several electrifications in 2009, leaving the next government to find the money and with a NR stripped of its necessary technical staff. Not saying the others are that much better...

WAO
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,784
Location
Leeds
Without being political, they were out of office in June, leaving Tory Edward Heath to find the money for it, rather like Adonis promising several electrifications in 2009, leaving the next government to find the money
Indeed, on both occasions, losing the election was a fiendish plot by Labour against the Tories.
 

Purple Orange

On Moderation
Joined
26 Dec 2019
Messages
3,456
Location
The North
Does anyone know of where I can find details on the TRU option G (or know of the broad aims of this option)? This was included within the NPR element of the Integrated Rail Plan, and since the announcement yesterday, Im wondering if this option could for part of the £9-11.5bn budget.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,261
Does anyone know of where I can find details on the TRU option G (or know of the broad aims of this option)? This was included within the NPR element of the Integrated Rail Plan, and since the announcement yesterday, Im wondering if this option could for part of the £9-11.5bn budget.

option G includes extra work for NPR, and yes it is part of the revised budget.
 

Mollman

Established Member
Joined
21 Sep 2016
Messages
1,250
Partially this from what I gather. But also the National Audit Office report into TRU is due out imminently.
Out at the same time, job well done as press are mainly focussing on 'new' announcement rather than NAO report. Some are covering it though:
https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/new...by-more-delays-after-ps190m-is-wasted-3774614

Major rail upgrade in the North could be hit by more delays after £190m is 'wasted'

The Government has taken “too long” to make key decisions about the Transpennine Route Upgrade and the project could be hit by more delays and run over its new budget of £11.5bn, the Government’s spending watchdog has found.


By Nathan Hyde
Wednesday, 20th July 2022, 5:00 am



Plans to upgrade the 76-mile line, which runs between York and Manchester, were first announced in 2011 and the National Audit Office (NAO) has revealed £1bn has been spent so far on the project, which aims to increase capacity, improve reliability and improve journey times, but almost £200m has been wasted.
The Department for Transport promised £5.4bn for the project, when it published the Integrated Rail Plan in November, but its latest projection stated between £9bn and £11.5bn will be required and the work will completed between 2036 and 2041.






It comes after Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said the budget has been increased because the project has “totally changed”, not because costs have overrun.
The Transpennine Route Upgrade was first announced in 2011

The Transpennine Route Upgrade was first announced in 2011

In a new report, the NAO said the Department for Transport has “taken too long to decide how to upgrade the route”, “repeatedly altered” the plans, since work began in 2015, and not settled on options for electrification, digital signalling and track and station improvements.
Network Rail, which is working on the line, has spent £190m on work that is “no longer needed” as a result of these changes, the NAO added, but the Government has now developed a clear plan for the work.



Read More
MP introduces bill for drugs law change after death of Yorkshire schoolgirl

The watchdog said that while the project has been delayed, passengers have endured long-running problems with poor reliability and overcrowding on a route which is already at “full capacity”.



Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said the budget has been increased because the project has “totally changed”, not because costs have overrun.
More than 135m passengers used the line before the pandemic and just 38 per cent of trains ran on time in 2019.
The NAO has also warned that if Network Rail cannot address labour shortages and reach agreements with operators, to gain access to the line for construction, it “could lead to substantial delays in programme delivery and increased costs”.
Concerns have also been raised about rising costs, due to inflation, and it is not yet clear how much will be needed to buy new trains which can run on the upgraded line.


It added: “The Department and Network Rail have not yet agreed how and if they are able to manage additional inflationary pressures within existing budgets.”
Mr Shapps announced earlier this week the line will be fully electrified, digital signalling equipment will be installed along the route and the number of tracks will be doubled to four between Huddersfield and Westtown in Dewsbury.
“It's an entirely different project. The previous version didn't electrify the whole of the route,” he said.
“The previous version didn't do digital signalling or build the new lines. So this is really the full fat project that's going to mean you can travel from Manchester to Leeds in 33 minutes.”


He added: “It will take 10 to 15 years to deliver the entire line, but that's probably a decade faster than it would have been to deliver the alternative, which would have been trying to blast brand new tunnels through the Pennines.”
The Transport Minister also said almost £960m will be spent on the next phase of the Transpennine Route Upgrade.
The investment will be used to electrify the line between Stalybridge and Manchester, to reduce journey times for freight and passenger services.
Meg Hillier MP, Chair of the Committee of Public Accounts, said: “It took 10 years for TPRU to gain traction and money was wasted along the way, but the programme is finally moving forward.


"The Department for Transport appears to have put things on a firmer footing, but the path is littered with cautionary tales of transport projects that later went off the rails. At such an early stage, there are still a great many hurdles to overcome.
"There are still worrying question marks over how the benefits of the upgrades will actually be achieved. Benefit to public must be at the forefront of everyone’s mind.
“The people in the North of England deserve a transport system that meets their needs.”
Louise Haigh MP, Labour’s Shadow Transport Secretary, said: “This scathing report reveals the Conservatives’ calamitous mishandling of this vital line has wasted hundreds of millions of pounds, and is set to be at least a decade late.


“A lost decade of broken Tory promises has led to chronic delays and overcrowding on this critical route, holding the Northern economy back.”
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,765
Location
Mold, Clwyd
What I don't understand is this statement:
The Transport Minister also said almost £960m will be spent on the next phase of the Transpennine Route Upgrade.
The investment will be used to electrify the line between Stalybridge and Manchester, to reduce journey times for freight and passenger services.

But such a sum can't be right for upgrading the line from Victoria/Piccadilly to Stalybridge.
Something like £100m would be sufficient (that would be similar to Liverpool-Manchester/Wigan - 40-odd miles).
So what else has he approved?
And what difference will "digital signalling" make?
And why does it take 3 years to finish wiring a 9-mile route (OK, 11 miles if you count the Guide Bridge branch) where the bulk of the route upgrade is finished and the OHLE kit already installed?
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,784
Location
Leeds
I was given this description of the options about a year ago, before the publication of the IRP (see #4581):

The current approved (Grayling era scope) partial electrification option is "C" .
"F" and later lettered options include full electrification.
"F" is full electrification + 6tph TPE passenger service (Leeds - Stalybridge) + Northern stopper Leeds - York with EMU e.g. base case full electrification
"F1" is F +1 tph freight path each way (Liverpool -) Manchester - Raventhorpe (then via Healey Mills and Normanton, avoiding Leeds) - Church Fenton - York a pretty cheap add on to F. Quite where the freight services are going to appear from is another matter!
G is throwing a few more obvious extras in that make lots of sense if you do them at the same time (cost significantly more to do later)


The NAO report is here:


NAO press release here:


Government has put the Transpennine Route rail upgrade on a firmer footing, but there remains a risk of delays and cost increases, and it is not yet clear how the upgrade’s intended benefits will be achieved, according to the National Audit Office (NAO).
The Transpennine rail route provides the most direct rail link between Manchester and Leeds, as well as connecting smaller towns and commuter areas in the north of England. In 2011, the Department for Transport (the Department) first announced its intention to improve the route through the Transpennine Route Upgrade Programme (the Programme). In its Integrated Rail Plan in November 2021, the Department announced that the Programme would be delivered as Phase One of Northern Powerhouse Rail.1
The Department has developed a clear case for investment in the Transpennine route, but it has taken too long to decide how to upgrade it. In the decade prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, passenger journeys provided by the two main train operators of the route increased from 106 million to 137 million, resulting in overcrowding. Work on the Programme first started in 2015 but was paused. Since 2017, the Department has repeatedly altered the scope of the Programme to meet differing ministerial priorities and budget constraints. As a result, £190 million of the £1 billion Network Rail has spent on the Programme has been on work no longer needed.
The Department has committed to the Programme as a core element of its plan for rail in the north of England and the Midlands. The scope includes additional track to increase capacity for passenger and freight services and to improve journey reliability. As at May 2021, the Department forecast that the Programme will cost between £9 billion and £11.5 billion in cash terms and that it will be completed between 2036 and 2041.
Negotiations between Network Rail and train operators to agree track access for construction work on the route will be difficult, which creates a risk of delays. Network Rail must gain repeated access to the track for construction, disrupting train and freight operators, and therefore passengers and businesses. The Programme will also need buy-in from local leaders, businesses and landowners for timely access to land and to agree development.
The Department has not yet committed to funding the rolling stock needed to achieve the Programme’s full benefits. The upgraded route will require electric trains that are compatible with new signalling systems. Until funding is confirmed there is no certainty that rolling stock will be at the required level.
It is not yet clear how the Department and Network Rail will manage the cost of inflation. The Department and Network Rail have not yet agreed how sharp rises in the cost of energy and materials will be funded. It is also not clear if Network Rail and supply chain contractors will be able to fully address labour shortages, which may also increase costs.
Passengers’ awareness of the planned upgrades to the Transpennine route is low, which is a concern because of the disruption it may cause to their journeys.2This creates a risk that passengers will switch to other forms of transport to avoid disruption during upgrade works and will not return in the long-term. Network Rail is developing its communications approach with train operators and plans a large marketing campaign for autumn 2022. It is also minimising the use of rail replacement bus services throughout the Programme as they are unpopular with passengers.
The Department and Network Rail are taking reasonable steps to set up the Programme for success, including applying lessons from other major infrastructure projects. It is still at an early stage, and the real test will come as construction work begins in earnest. However, by now the NAO would expect Network Rail and the Department to know how success will be measured. The NAO also finds that:
  • It is not yet clear how other government departments and local government will help deliver the Programme’s benefits;
  • It has not been determined how the Programme will be managed as part of Northern Powerhouse Rail to ensure the benefits and connections between the two projects are fully aligned; and
  • It is not yet clear if the Programme’s design will provide long-term resilience to climate change.
The NAO recommends that the Department and Network Rail set out how they will measure the benefits of the Programme, such as reduced carbon emissions, and that they should also monitor the impact of disruption on passengers.

“Rail passengers in the north have contended with increasing over-crowding and delays for too long. It is good that plans for the Transpennine Route upgrade are now agreed, but there are still significant risks to the programme’s progress that could cause further disruption. The Department for Transport, Network Rail and government must work together to manage these challenges and deliver the expected benefits for rail users.”

Gareth Davies, the head of the NAO
 
Last edited:

Viscount702

Member
Joined
7 Sep 2011
Messages
331
The NAO report states that stages E1 W1 and W2a (Stalybridge) are under construction. What does W2a consist of and is any work taking place.

Many of us on here have often asked what is to be done at Stalybridge but that seems to remain a mystery.

Also it indicates Stalybridge-Wigan is planned to be completed and go live by December 2024. Do we think that is possible bearing in mind the apparent lack of progress on Lostock- Wigan
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
7,919
Location
Dalton GA USA & Preston Lancs
The NAO report states that stages E1 W1 and W2a (Stalybridge) are under construction. What does W2a consist of and is any work taking place.
* W1 – Manchester Victoria to Stalybridge: line speed increases and electrification
* W2a – Stalybridge station: general improvements and remodelling of the junction at the west of the station
* W2b – Stalybridge to Huddersfield: electrification – including Standedge tunnel
* W3 – Huddersfield to Ravensthorpe: electrification with four-tracking and at Ravensthorpe, grade separation and a new station
* W4 – Ravensthorpe to Leeds: line speed improvements and electrification
* W5 – Morley station: greater line speed and electrification
* E1 – North of Church Fenton to York: line speed improvements and electrification
* E2 – Leeds station improvements
* E3 – Crossgate to Micklefield
* E4 – Micklefield to Church Fenton
 

Viscount702

Member
Joined
7 Sep 2011
Messages
331
* W1 – Manchester Victoria to Stalybridge: line speed increases and electrification
* W2a – Stalybridge station: general improvements and remodelling of the junction at the west of the station
* W2b – Stalybridge to Huddersfield: electrification – including Standedge tunnel
* W3 – Huddersfield to Ravensthorpe: electrification with four-tracking and at Ravensthorpe, grade separation and a new station
* W4 – Ravensthorpe to Leeds: line speed improvements and electrification
* W5 – Morley station: greater line speed and electrification
* E1 – North of Church Fenton to York: line speed improvements and electrification
* E2 – Leeds station improvements
* E3 – Crossgate to Micklefield
* E4 – Micklefield to Church Fenton
Thanks for that.

I knew I had seen a list but couldn't find it. In which case what is to be done at Stalybridge bearing in mind it is supposed to be under construction
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,784
Location
Leeds
Snippets from the NAO report:

para 2.13: Electrification Manchester-Stalybridge still doesn't have approval from NR's Programme Board! Expected next month. Completion expected Dec 24. Apparently linked to Lostock-Wigan. This is presumably the reason why Lostock-Wigan was approved when it was.

para 2.4: One project is not due to begin construction until 2031. Does this mean Stalybridge-Marsden? Or Marsden-Huddersfield?

Marsden to Hudds does not appear as a section in Fig 4 except at the bottom as one of the "NPR facilitation" projects.
 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
6,184
Location
Surrey
Out at the same time, job well done as press are mainly focussing on 'new' announcement rather than NAO report. Some are covering it though:
https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/new...by-more-delays-after-ps190m-is-wasted-3774614
This was reported in Dft Annual Report & Accounts 2021/22 which provides some more background. All in all pretty disgraceful and given we have no physical assets to show for it its begs the question what on earth they have spent the money on even glossy reports can't have cost this much!

1658348046471.png
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
13,526
Location
Bristol
This was reported in Dft Annual Report & Accounts 2021/22 which provides some more background. All in all pretty disgraceful and given we have no physical assets to show for it its begs the question what on earth they have spent the money on even glossy reports can't have cost this much!
Key part there is 'following changes in scope'. Who sets the scope? The DfT. So who's really wasted the money?

Also, if they got to signalling and engineering design, things get costly quite quickly.
 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
6,184
Location
Surrey
Key part there is 'following changes in scope'. Who sets the scope? The DfT. So who's really wasted the money?
Yes fair point and ought to be thoroughly investigated but our governments of whatever colour are masters of mismanagement of taxpayers money despite all the effort they have gone to with tightening up the running of major projects. The MOD remain the winners of the gold star.
Also, if they got to signalling and engineering design, things get costly quite quickly.
The £50m element seems to be on detailed design but £140m was on options that wouldn't have involved detailed signalling design maybe scheme plans if they got upto Grip stage 4. I've been involved with plenty of big schemes that involved TWO and we never spent that sort of money on development although once you get legal and land people involved the hourly rates become eyewatering even compared to signalling design.
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,784
Location
Leeds
Key part there is 'following changes in scope'. Who sets the scope? The DfT. So who's really wasted the money?
The NAO report does draw attention to this. Just to quote one of several mentions, in 1.7, "changing ministerial priorities and budget constraints led the Department to make repeated changes to the scope of the programme (Figure 2). ... The Department subsequently revised the Programme several times with no clear agreement on the end state until 2021".
 

modernrail

Member
Joined
26 Jul 2015
Messages
1,060
Basically a £200 million cost for making lots of promises that haven’t been thought through to win seats then working out which ones to row back on.

Even now, it is pretty much impossible to work out what has been announced and what is aspirational.

Bloody annoying at the north could really do with every penny spending well bearing in mind how much needs sorting out. I bet TfW and the Scottish are not being so blasé about their spending on upgrades.
 

Roger B

Member
Joined
16 Jun 2018
Messages
899
Location
Gatley
Basically a £200 million cost for making lots of promises that haven’t been thought through to win seats then working out which ones to row back on.

Even now, it is pretty much impossible to work out what has been announced and what is aspirational.

Bloody annoying at the north could really do with every penny spending well bearing in mind how much needs sorting out. I bet TfW and the Scottish are not being so blasé about their spending on upgrades.
Especially where much of this money will have gone to 'professionals' working in the south.
There seems to be a trend in this country of bloating these 'professional' parts of organisations (eg finance, legal, HR, planning, etc) - more expensive jobs for university educated boys and girls - at the same time as trimming the number of (usually much less well-paid) roles involved in delivery of the actual service.
No wonder UK productivity remains stubbornly mediocre.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,765
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Key part there is 'following changes in scope'. Who sets the scope? The DfT. So who's really wasted the money?
Also, if they got to signalling and engineering design, things get costly quite quickly.
Imagine the money "wasted" on planning the Eastern and Golborne legs of HS2, in the latter case bringing a bill for it to parliament.
Or planning the reconstruction of Piccadilly (through platforms) and Oxford Road to TWAO level.
Presumably the Ordsall Chord is not quite wasted, but hardly value for whatever it cost.
Reconfiguring the west end of Stalybridge in 2012 could also be classed as "waste" if it is to be done again.
 

Spartacus

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2009
Messages
2,958
Regarding Batley from looking at that video posted a while back it does appear that the station is to get a footbridge and lifts, presumably the subway will then be infilled and the bump flattened.

There's certainly more work than I expected for this, far beyond the northern end of the station, with perhaps almost 600m of clearance work altogether.

Has anyone got a quick link to the video referenced? I've had a look but got lost in the many, many pages now!
 

Geeves

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2009
Messages
1,955
Location
Rochdale
I have read through in detail but I am not 100% sure, will the OHLE be continuous from Leeds to York or will there be a gap between Leeds and Church Fenton? By the looks of it that would be the only gap as the Standedge tunnel looks to be being wired now if Viscount's post is anything to go by.
 

Watershed

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
12,195
Location
UK
I have read through in detail but I am not 100% sure, will the OHLE be continuous from Leeds to York or will there be a gap between Leeds and Church Fenton? By the looks of it that would be the only gap as the Standedge tunnel looks to be being wired now if Viscount's post is anything to go by.
It will eventually be continuous but Colton Jn to Church Fenton (exc) is the first part to be authorised.
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
7,919
Location
Dalton GA USA & Preston Lancs
It will eventually be continuous but Colton Jn to Church Fenton (exc) is the first part to be authorised.
Indeed. I have seen numerous (including the NAO report) announcements, that the entire route is to be electrified eventually. For the eye-watering sums being quoted, I would b----y well hope so too! Post 5629 has link to Yorkshire Post for example which says

Mr Shapps announced earlier this week the line will be fully electrified, digital signalling equipment will be installed along the route and the number of tracks will be doubled to four between Huddersfield and Westtown in Dewsbury.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,711
Location
Another planet...
Indeed. I have seen numerous (including the NAO report) announcements, that the entire route is to be electrified eventually. For the eye-watering sums being quoted, I would b----y well hope so too! Post 5629 has link to Yorkshire Post for example which says
That quote is half true: it's already three tracks between Heaton Lodge and Thornhill LNW junctions.
 

Top