Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

[GRALISTAIR]

Seems likely, given the distance between the two is relatively short and allows for more electric services between the two cities.

Also useful electrified diversionary route plus opportunity of Leeds- Edinburgh and Glasgow all electric.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Seems a little odd that the Government have announced what they are going to pay for upgrades (£3bn) without apparently saying what upgrades they are going to do (beyond a hint at the possibility of new stations - which doesn't seem very compatible with faster journey times).

Realistically, what kinds of things would £3bn pay for? It seems quite a large amount of money, even by railway upgrade standards.

Well assuming Heyrod is already in place and paid for (is it?) then two Grid Feeders, associated masts and wire etc, labour, quite a few bridges raised, still some tunnels to track lower. Realignment of curves and junctions, 4 tracking at Ravensthorpe , 1 or two new stations, associated earthworks and deveging - cant think of anything more at the moment. Oh - compensation to TOCs while they go for route closure strategy.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

So extracting information from The Permanent Way Institution Lectures/Seminar - PowerPoint and Youtube posted in the pinned thread - here is the list for the desired scheme

92 Bridge modifications or re-deck / reconstruction
•8 Tunnels requiring modification or track lowering
•4400 Overhead line structures
•266km Catenary and contact wire
•2 New 25kV feeder stations (in addition to Heyrod)
•123km Troughing
•Immunisation Works
•125km Vegetation clearance
Electrification Plus;
•Up to 175km of track renewals
•Four tracking Huddersfield to Ravensthorpe
•Grade separation in the Heaton Lodge area
•Significant track re-alignment works to meet the journey time
•Significant junction re-modelling at 10 locations
•Re-signal / re-lock with Computer Based Interlockings (CBI) technology to prepare for European Train Control System (ETCS)
•In cab signalling to be in place in express services as a minimum
•45 level crossings will need to be assessed against “All Level Crossing Risk Model”

So 3 billion ( I am no expert BTW) sounds about right

 

[LOL The Irony]

They could build a new Woodhead route for that sort of cash.

 

[Mr Mean]

Does the 4 tracking hudds to ravensthorpe include new stations at deighton and mirfield? Deighton is a poor quality wooden construction so wouldn't take much effort to demolish. A new station could be built and continue to use the road bridge as access so wouldn't need expensive footbridge additions.

Mirfield is more tricky as it is an island platform built on a bridge structure with an old cellar under the station. There is plenty of railway land adjacent to the site but I would imagine 4 platforms would need to be built with potentially a footbridge / lifts. The station does serve around 1/2 million passengers a year but it would be quite pricey (I would imagine £20m+) for all works.

 

[Pete_uk]

£3Bn?

So that will be £6Bn and bi-modes then...

 

[GRALISTAIR]

£3Bn?

So that will be £6Bn and bi-modes then...

You cynic sir!

 

[59CosG95]

So extracting information from The Permanent Way Institution Lectures/Seminar - PowerPoint and Youtube posted in the pinned thread - here is the list for the desired scheme

92 Bridge modifications or re-deck / reconstruction
•8 Tunnels requiring modification or track lowering
•4400 Overhead line structures
•266km Catenary and contact wire
•2 New 25kV feeder stations (in addition to Heyrod)
•123km Troughing
•Immunisation Works
•125km Vegetation clearance
Electrification Plus;
•Up to 175km of track renewals
•Four tracking Huddersfield to Ravensthorpe
•Grade separation in the Heaton Lodge area
•Significant track re-alignment works to meet the journey time
•Significant junction re-modelling at 10 locations
•Re-signal / re-lock with Computer Based Interlockings (CBI) technology to prepare for European Train Control System (ETCS)
•In cab signalling to be in place in express services as a minimum
•45 level crossings will need to be assessed against “All Level Crossing Risk Model”

So 3 billion ( I am no expert BTW) sounds about right

Looking at the Huddersfield-Ravensthorpe section, the route north from Huddersfield Station to around Red Doles Rd (53.662158, -1.771262; https://goo.gl/maps/u3TWwbdEeH42) looks easy enough to return to 4-track. The bridge at Red Doles Rd, being a 2-track bridge, will probably need replacing. From there to Bradley Jct (53.676217, -1.740797;https://goo.gl/maps/RtbCtpofj322), 4 tracks may be harder to squeeze in. However, @Mr Mean notes that Deighton station should be relatively quick to demolish.

The single track chord from Bradley Jct to Bradley Wood Jct (53.690328, -1.748032; https://goo.gl/maps/gpSdooZjuEA2) I'm unsure about; I suspect it may remain as a chord for the time being.

Meanwhile, Heaton Lodge is going to be very interesting indeed...
The section of line between Bradley Jct and Heaton Lodge Jcts that crosses both the Huddersfield Broad Canal & the River Colne (just before its confluence with the Calder) (53.679614, -1.732175; https://goo.gl/maps/WhLjNASLVGp) will need both its overbridges replaced, as the aerial view looks like (to me) that they could only accept 3 tracks in their present state.
The diveunder, taking the Down Line under the 2-track line towards Brighouse, was originally double-track, but I suspect track lowering and/or complete rebuilding would be required to accommodate OLE. The diverging route from the Up junction towards Huddersfield looks to be able to accommodate a second track with no major issues.

East of there, the route to Mirfield looks simple enough to reinstall the 4th track with little difficulty. Again, as Mr Mean pointed out, the island platform layout poses a problem; I suspect the island may have to be trimmed back enough to allow the two lines on the southern side to be slewed northwards, creating space for a 4th track at the southern extremity with a second island platform between the southernmost existing track and the new track.
Finally, it should be straightforward to Ravensthorpe; I can only assume and hope that platforms will be added in on the southern pair of tracks.

 

[BMIFlyer]

So extracting information from The Permanent Way Institution Lectures/Seminar - PowerPoint and Youtube posted in the pinned thread - here is the list for the desired scheme

92 Bridge modifications or re-deck / reconstruction
•8 Tunnels requiring modification or track lowering
•4400 Overhead line structures
•266km Catenary and contact wire
•2 New 25kV feeder stations (in addition to Heyrod)
•123km Troughing
•Immunisation Works
•125km Vegetation clearance
Electrification Plus;
•Up to 175km of track renewals
•Four tracking Huddersfield to Ravensthorpe
•Grade separation in the Heaton Lodge area
•Significant track re-alignment works to meet the journey time
•Significant junction re-modelling at 10 locations
•Re-signal / re-lock with Computer Based Interlockings (CBI) technology to prepare for European Train Control System (ETCS)
•In cab signalling to be in place in express services as a minimum
•45 level crossings will need to be assessed against “All Level Crossing Risk Model”

So 3 billion ( I am no expert BTW) sounds about right

I can input the following responses....

•125km Vegetation clearance = already underway, especially at Heaton Lodge Junction, in preparation for the new flyover.

•Four tracking Huddersfield to Ravensthorpe = plenty of room if you remove road access points / cess 'roads'. Will require some strengthening to the viaduct on the down side at Huddersfield however (weight restricted to vehicles currently).

•Grade separation in the Heaton Lodge area = preparatory work underway currently.

•Significant track re-alignment works to meet the journey time = from conversations I have had with NR/TPE this includes removal and rebuilding of Mirfield (2 single platforms and 1 island platform potentially - increase of 1 platform), Deighton (2 single platforms on the slow lines or 1 island platform depending on track layout (same number of platforms as today) and Slaithwaite station (demolished, moved slightly west and rebuilt with stone/brick/concrete and platform length extended - track to be straightened) and also remodelling of the junction (again) at Stalybridge (main line becomes towards Ashton, junction speed increased to 40mph). Some of the work is already nearly completed (Ashton-U-Lyne track renewals).

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Extremely useful information -thankyou very much

 

[Bald Rick]

Note, no mention of wires in that press release.

I'm praying (well not really, I'm agnostic) that the new signalling is AC immunised otherwise someone's going to have to explain at some point why 10-20 year old signalling is being ripped out half way through its lifespan.

Come to think of it, I think all major re-signalling projects should involve with full or provision for AC immunisation.

I think the current trend for axle counters renders immunisation moot.

Does immunisation protect any other systems than track circuits?

Generally it’s just the track circuits, and even then only certain types. Although there are some other components that need ‘immunisation’ from AC return currents. There are some other issues, such as keeping signals / gantries out of the way of where the OLE (and pantograph) will actually be.

Also generally, new signalling in non electrified areas is provided as AC immune.

 

[filey donkey]

Good evening guys my first post, BMI Flyer do you know what the plans are for heaton lodge it looks totally different without the tree's and unveils a large area of land, are they taking out the underpass

 

[Senex]

•Significant track re-alignment works to meet the journey time ......... track to be straightened) and also remodelling of the junction (again) at Stalybridge (main line becomes towards Ashton, junction speed increased to 40mph).

Stalybridge only 40? In the PWI presentation we've often seen referred to here the line-speed profile shews a target for 70 there as against the present 25. Has there already been further descoping? More seriously, in a speech to the Northern Chambers of Commerce Summit on 20 February Mark Carne re-iterated the target of a 40 minutes timing from Manchester to Leeds (and 62 minutes to York) — https://www.networkrail.co.uk/who-we-are/publications-resources/speeches/. The distance from Manchester to Leeds is marginally less than 43 miles by the Huddersfield route. If we make some optimistic assumptions, the first two miles up the hill and round the corner out of Manchester will need 3 minutes and the last mile into Leeds will need 2 minutes, and a day-to-day schedule will need some recovery-time, let's say 2 minutes. That would leave 33 minutes for running 40 miles, including all accelerations and decelerations. Add in another 3 minutes for a 2-minute stop in Huddersfield and we're left with just 30 minutes. Does anyone have any idea how running times might look to achieve that 40 minutes to Leeds, given that 40 at Stalybridge, the 45 at Marsden, and the 50 at Morley? (The point stressed in the PWI lecture was that it's the low speeds that really have to come up to get accelerations, as 80 > 100 saves you only 9 seconds a mile, 80 > 90 only 5, and you'd only get 100 on about 10 miles of the Manchester to Leeds section.)

 

[YorkshireBear]

Can everyone not get too excited about the devegetation it is only to allow detailed surveys and ground investigation at this stage. The options have not been chosen.

Interesting to see a remodel at stalybridge. Wasn't long ago we did that!

 

[lejog]

Indeed, can I remind people of the timetable in post #762, single option selection is not until the Summer/Autumn.

According to a report to the West Yorkshire Combined Authority, GRIP 3 is complete and in the hands of the DfT. Given the timetable, don't expect anymore news yet awhile though!
It is understood that Network Rail have submitted their report to the Department for Transport on the options for TRU as expected on the 14th December.

The DfT have confirmed that the submission by Network Rail on December 14th will initially remain private to allow the Secretary of State ample opportunity to be briefed on the findings. However, it is Rail North’s intention to request sight of the entire report and in collaboration with Rail North Partner authorities (including WYCA) and Transport for the North, develop a pan view/input to Government on a preferred outcome, output and scheme scope:

With regards to the next steps the indicative timeline for decision making is as follows:

• 14 December 2017: Price, programme and options received by Department for Transport, based on the original 16 July 2016 Client Development Remit;
• December 2017 – Spring 2018: development and assessment of the best value and affordable combination of options and impact on the franchises, with support from Rail North Partnership;
• Spring 2018: Department to engage with Rail North/Transport for the North on how to achieve the agreed objectives for TRU and possible interaction with other schemes;
• Summer 2018: Consideration of stakeholder views and interactions with other schemes by DfT, and recommendation for preferred option, ubject to Ministerial and Treasury approval;
• Summer/Autumn 2018: Approvals for progressing TRU to the next stage – outline design; and
• 2019: Following outline design outcomes -decision on final scope, full business case and investment authority, through DfT and HMT

 

[BMIFlyer]

Stalybridge only 40? In the PWI presentation we've often seen referred to here the line-speed profile shews a target for 70 there as against the present 25. Has there already been further descoping? More seriously, in a speech to the Northern Chambers of Commerce Summit on 20 February Mark Carne re-iterated the target of a 40 minutes timing from Manchester to Leeds (and 62 minutes to York) — https://www.networkrail.co.uk/who-we-are/publications-resources/speeches/. The distance from Manchester to Leeds is marginally less than 43 miles by the Huddersfield route. If we make some optimistic assumptions, the first two miles up the hill and round the corner out of Manchester will need 3 minutes and the last mile into Leeds will need 2 minutes, and a day-to-day schedule will need some recovery-time, let's say 2 minutes. That would leave 33 minutes for running 40 miles, including all accelerations and decelerations. Add in another 3 minutes for a 2-minute stop in Huddersfield and we're left with just 30 minutes. Does anyone have any idea how running times might look to achieve that 40 minutes to Leeds, given that 40 at Stalybridge, the 45 at Marsden, and the 50 at Morley? (The point stressed in the PWI lecture was that it's the low speeds that really have to come up to get accelerations, as 80 > 100 saves you only 9 seconds a mile, 80 > 90 only 5, and you'd only get 100 on about 10 miles of the Manchester to Leeds section.)

Yes, Stalybridge goes from 25 to 40. I highly doubt you would achieve 70 for a Junction there in all honesty anyway without some serious remodelling.

A lot of the time saving comes from upgrading the line speed from Man Vic to Stalybridge.

 

[BMIFlyer]

Indeed, can I remind people of the timetable in post #762, single option selection is not until the Summer/Autumn.

Correct and there is due to be a 3 month possession for whatever works are chose over that area of the route, sometime in 2019 I believe?

As I understand it will be a Huddersfield to Leeds blockade. Can anyone verify?

 

[Spartacus]

Where there used to be a power station there are usually surviving high voltage connections. Heyroad ceased to be a power station way back in the 1980s but evidently was seen as a good place to supply power to the rail network. Unsurprising as it's probably the closest such place to the Pennine ridge. It's also one reason why many gas-fired stations have sprung up on the site of former coal-fired ones.

Funny you should mention gas, as there is still a power station at Ravensthorpe, though it's now called Thornhill, probably due to it being on the Thornhill side of the Calder. https://www.eonenergy.com/About-eon...io/combined-heat-and-power/about-us/thornhill

Curiously a number of local politicians are pushing for a few giant estate (essentially a new town) on the South side of the Calder between Mirfield and Ravensthorpe, with a new station at Sands Lane, but this would involve the closure of both Ravensthorpe and Mirfield stations. Understandably there's a lot of opposition.

 

[lejog]

Correct

Of course its correct, which is why I find the likes of the following somewhat premature. Nothing's decided yet.

and there is due to be a 3 month possession for whatever works are chose over that area of the route, sometime in 2019 I believe?

As I understand it will be a Huddersfield to Leeds blockade. Can anyone verify?

 

[YorkshireBear]

Of course its correct, which is why I find the likes of the following somewhat premature. Nothing's decided yet.

While it is premature in terms of the design I think the possession strategy is far more advanced than the actual design based on my conversations with various people involved.

The possession strategy simply relies on knowing where work will take place, which they actually pretty much have decided now. The TOCs for this level of disruption are going to want 2-3 years notice so that they can plan a robust alternative including temporary timetables route knowledge (stock clearance where necessary for the newer stock).

 

[Senex]

Yes, Stalybridge goes from 25 to 40. I highly doubt you would achieve 70 for a Junction there in all honesty anyway without some serious remodelling.

A lot of the time saving comes from upgrading the line speed from Man Vic to Stalybridge.

It would indeed need some serious re-modelling, which is why I was so interested to see it in the PWI presentation. At the moment the long left-hander coming from Ashton straightens out in order to point to the former L&Y station and there's then a dog's-leg to produce the junction into the former LNW lines—in effect the equivalent of a double crossover on a four-track line. The only way of getting a major improvement would be to come off the curve aiming directly into the LNW alignment west of the station, over pretty well open land—a much bigger job than just replacing the junction bit in its present location.
What you say about a lot of the time coming from better speeds M/c–S is very interesting, again in the light of that PWI thing. It shewed 40 for the first half mile out of Victoria, then 60 up the rest of the bank and round the Miles Platting curve to Phillip's Park, then 80 to Ashton, dropping for half a mile to 75 and then to 70 on to what appears to be the west end of Stalybridge, where it's 80 again.
Incidentally, the 40 minutes to Leeds, 62 to York that I cited from Mark Carne's presentation suggest a round 20 minutes Leeds to York if there's a 2-minute stop in Leeds. It will be very interesting to see what the proposals are to get that (and if the plans take any account of the routine signal-checks into York!).

 

[snowball]

Interesting to see a remodel at stalybridge. Wasn't long ago we did that!

However that was done on the assumption, already superseded at the time, that the main route was towards Piccadilly!

 

[BMIFlyer]

While it is premature in terms of the design I think the possession strategy is far more advanced than the actual design based on my conversations with various people involved.

The possession strategy simply relies on knowing where work will take place, which they actually pretty much have decided now. The TOCs for this level of disruption are going to want 2-3 years notice so that they can plan a robust alternative including temporary timetables route knowledge (stock clearance where necessary for the newer stock).

Thanks for that. Some of us have already found out about the required timescale for the possession in 2019 (we were told 2018 initially) so yes whilst the actual structure hasn’t been decided on we do know something should be happening, at least if the plans pan out.

 

[BMIFlyer]

It would indeed need some serious re-modelling, which is why I was so interested to see it in the PWI presentation. At the moment the long left-hander coming from Ashton straightens out in order to point to the former L&Y station and there's then a dog's-leg to produce the junction into the former LNW lines—in effect the equivalent of a double crossover on a four-track line. The only way of getting a major improvement would be to come off the curve aiming directly into the LNW alignment west of the station, over pretty well open land—a much bigger job than just replacing the junction bit in its present location.
What you say about a lot of the time coming from better speeds M/c–S is very interesting, again in the light of that PWI thing. It shewed 40 for the first half mile out of Victoria, then 60 up the rest of the bank and round the Miles Platting curve to Phillip's Park, then 80 to Ashton, dropping for half a mile to 75 and then to 70 on to what appears to be the west end of Stalybridge, where it's 80 again.
Incidentally, the 40 minutes to Leeds, 62 to York that I cited from Mark Carne's presentation suggest a round 20 minutes Leeds to York if there's a 2-minute stop in Leeds. It will be very interesting to see what the proposals are to get that (and if the plans take any account of the routine signal-checks into York!).

My understanding is a line speed increase Miles Platting to Stalybridge, constant speed being a minimum of 80mph.

Regarding Leeds to the east, the junction at Micklefield was recently remodelled and line speed changed from 70 to 80mph.

When the track has fully bedded in this goes up again to 90mph. Sometime this year it should happen.

There are plans to raise speeds toward church Fenton and around the curve there as well, along with higher speed from there to Colton junction.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Looking at the Huddersfield-Ravensthorpe section, the route north from Huddersfield Station to around Red Doles Rd (53.662158, -1.771262; https://goo.gl/maps/u3TWwbdEeH42) looks easy enough to return to 4-track. The bridge at Red Doles Rd, being a 2-track bridge, will probably need replacing. From there to Bradley Jct (53.676217, -1.740797;https://goo.gl/maps/RtbCtpofj322), 4 tracks may be harder to squeeze in. However, @Mr Mean notes that Deighton station should be relatively quick to demolish.

The single track chord from Bradley Jct to Bradley Wood Jct (53.690328, -1.748032; https://goo.gl/maps/gpSdooZjuEA2) I'm unsure about; I suspect it may remain as a chord for the time being.

Meanwhile, Heaton Lodge is going to be very interesting indeed...
The section of line between Bradley Jct and Heaton Lodge Jcts that crosses both the Huddersfield Broad Canal & the River Colne (just before its confluence with the Calder) (53.679614, -1.732175; https://goo.gl/maps/WhLjNASLVGp) will need both its overbridges replaced, as the aerial view looks like (to me) that they could only accept 3 tracks in their present state.
The diveunder, taking the Down Line under the 2-track line towards Brighouse, was originally double-track, but I suspect track lowering and/or complete rebuilding would be required to accommodate OLE. The diverging route from the Up junction towards Huddersfield looks to be able to accommodate a second track with no major issues.

East of there, the route to Mirfield looks simple enough to reinstall the 4th track with little difficulty. Again, as Mr Mean pointed out, the island platform layout poses a problem; I suspect the island may have to be trimmed back enough to allow the two lines on the southern side to be slewed northwards, creating space for a 4th track at the southern extremity with a second island platform between the southernmost existing track and the new track.
Finally, it should be straightforward to Ravensthorpe; I can only assume and hope that platforms will be added in on the southern pair of tracks.

It's worth noting that Mirfield station's island platform is a problem anyway due to not being step-free, and it wouldn't be easy to make so. Mirfield is a place where "rip it up and start again" might be the best tactic: both mains have kinks in them to get around the island platform: the Up doesn't feel like it affects speed too much but it is almost guaranteed to make at least one unsuspecting standee on each 185 service lose their balance!

Bradley chord is unlikely to ever need more than single track, what actually happens at Bradley Junction will presumably depend on how the tracks are configured between Huddersfield and Heaton Lodge.

Ravensthorpe is a tricky one, it's the least-used station between Leeds and Manchester and the Up platform is not step-free. I believe there was talk of it being made peak-only prior to the latest route upgrade plans. That said, the 4-tracking is Huddersfield to Ravensthorpe, which I interpreted as being from HUD to the parting of the Wakefield and Dewsbury routes: in which case the station itself at Ravensthorpe might not be affected.

Extra tracks beyond there to Dewsbury would be difficult as that section has only ever been double track I believe, and adding an extra track would present issues with clearance heights for road bridges.

EDIT: The idea of a long blockade on the route sounds like it'll be fun! Kinda destroys a big chunk of Grayling's reasoning for intermittent wiring though...

 

[Senex]

My understanding is a line speed increase Miles Platting to Stalybridge, constant speed being a minimum of 80mph.

Regarding Leeds to the east, the junction at Micklefield was recently remodelled and line speed changed from 70 to 80mph.

When the track has fully bedded in this goes up again to 90mph. Sometime this year it should happen.

There are plans to raise speeds toward church Fenton and around the curve there as well, along with higher speed from there to Colton junction.

Thanks for that. Micklefield is already up to 90 on the up and is apparently designed for an eventual 100 on both. It'll be very interesting to see what can be done with Church Fenton.

 

[YorkshireBear]

It's worth noting that Mirfield station's island platform is a problem anyway due to not being step-free, and it wouldn't be easy to make so. Mirfield is a place where "rip it up and start again" might be the best tactic: both mains have kinks in them to get around the island platform: the Up doesn't feel like it affects speed too much but it is almost guaranteed to make at least one unsuspecting standee on each 185 service lose their balance!

Bradley chord is unlikely to ever need more than single track, what actually happens at Bradley Junction will presumably depend on how the tracks are configured between Huddersfield and Heaton Lodge.

Ravensthorpe is a tricky one, it's the least-used station between Leeds and Manchester and the Up platform is not step-free. I believe there was talk of it being made peak-only prior to the latest route upgrade plans. That said, the 4-tracking is Huddersfield to Ravensthorpe, which I interpreted as being from HUD to the parting of the Wakefield and Dewsbury routes: in which case the station itself at Ravensthorpe might not be affected.

Extra tracks beyond there to Dewsbury would be difficult as that section has only ever been double track I believe, and adding an extra track would present issues with clearance heights for road bridges.

EDIT: The idea of a long blockade on the route sounds like it'll be fun! Kinda destroys a big chunk of Grayling's reasoning for intermittent wiring though...

Very good point about Mirfield, I would not be suprised to see a rip it up and start again at a few stations. The space is there to do an awful lot of work without disrupting services. I'd say the Bradley chord almost guarantees that the slow lines of any possible four tracking will be on the North side through the section from Heaton Lodge to Huddersfield. Probably hence why some grade separation is needed as you'd want to look at having the slow lines on the South through Mirfield. So the Wakefield and Brighouse lines would both feed into the slows giving the fasts a clear run through. That makes sense as the Wakefield, Brighouse and Freight services should all be pathed on the slow lines. I would probably look at putting Ravensthorpe on the Wakefield lines and renaming it Thornhill. That might leave you able to get away with 2 tracks to Dewsbury.

So to sum up. I would be inclined (assuming four tracking) slow lines on the North until Thornhill LNW junction (Ranvensthorpe) with a grade separation to pass the fast lines over the slows onto Dewsbury. Mirfield rebuilt as four platforms. Deighton as two platforms, Ravensthorpe moved to Thornhill on Wakefield lines.

Obviously the junctions would have connections between fast and slow.

My 2pence worth on that section anyway.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Ravensthorpe on the Wakefield line makes sense in a way, though at a guess travel from there is to Leeds/Dewsbury in greater numbers than to Huddersfield. If those users have to change at Mirfield or Kirkgate (or start using Dewsbury instead) they'll not be too happy. Moving to the Wakefield lines makes sense operationally but might end up killing the station off.

 

[Mr Mean]

Slows on the North make sense. Would the Leeds to hudds slow dive under at heaton lodge or swing to the left with the 2 fasts?

Rebuilding ravensthorpe onto the Wakefield line is also sensible as it avoids slowing the expresses. The small user base means if would have negligible impact on passengers. Hopefully if/when these works are complete there is a further review into this side of the Huddersfield line, making better use of the line to wakefield. Reinstating the curve to sheffield would open up opportunities for direct bradford/Halifax to South Yorkshire. Simpler still, extend the Castleford service to York or send to Leeds after kirkgate instead of Castleford. Lots of scope for further improvements beyond the tpe upgrades.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Slows on the North make sense. Would the Leeds to hudds slow dive under at heaton lodge or swing to the left with the 2 fasts?

Rebuilding ravensthorpe onto the Wakefield line is also sensible as it avoids slowing the expresses. The small user base means if would have negligible impact on passengers. Hopefully if/when these works are complete there is a further review into this side of the Huddersfield line, making better use of the line to wakefield. Reinstating the curve to sheffield would open up opportunities for direct bradford/Halifax to South Yorkshire. Simpler still, extend the Castleford service to York or send to Leeds after kirkgate instead of Castleford. Lots of scope for further improvements beyond the tpe upgrades.

Indeed having completely separate slows lines on this section gives ample opportunity to improve some inter-Yorkshire links not via Leeds or the incredibly slow and painful Penistone Line.