Progress At Syon Lane Station – 27th August 2019
At last, something seems to be happening about erecting the new step-free footbridge at Syon Lane station.
Easily spotted are the following.
- An access road seems to have been fenced off.
- The tea huts and the toilets have arrived.
- Some scraping and digging has commenced by the down platform
- There is a poster saying finish, will be by the end of the year.
Nothing seems to have happened on the up platform.
It also seems strange that no building materials appear to have been delivered.
Could it just be that a concrete slab will be created on the down platform and on the up platform, the two advertising hoarding will be removed to create space for the bridge tower and stairs?
A prefabricated bridge, built off-site, will then be lifted in.
It’s the only way, that the bridge could be built by the promised completion date of the end of the year.
Has Boris Shot The Fox?
Has Boris shown Remoaners and the other parties to be bad losers?
They’ll all running around like headless chickens!
He’ll surely win the next election by a street!!
The only person, who can stop Boris, would be a brilliant orator, with total respect from everybody!
World’s First Solar-Powered Trains Are Coming To England
The title of this post, is the same as that on this article on Lonely Planet.
This is the first paragraph
The first ever solar unit to directly supply a railway line with electricity has been put in place in England, paving the way for the world’s first solar-powered trains
I am not sure yet about this technology., powering large sections of the UK’s railways.
But the technology does have applications, if it is combined with energy storage.
Boosting Power With Third-Rail Electrification
Third-rail electrification has a problem, in that it needs to be fed with power every few miles. Inevitably, as timetables get busier, there are areas, where there is not enough power to supply the trains.
These systems can provide that fill-in power.
Note that 25 KVAC overhead electrification doesn’t have the problem, as the wires themselves distribute the electricity.
This means that the Great Western Main Line electrification is only supplied with power from the electricity grid at three places; the two ends and one in the middle.
Electrification In Visually-Sensitive Places
Look at this picture of Brunel’s magnificent Wharncliffe Viaduct.
It has been recently electrified and some groups object to the electrification of Grade I Listed structures like this.
Most modern electric trains can be dual-voltage and can work on both electrification systems used in the UK; 25 KVAC overhead and 750 VDC third rail. They can also change between electrification systems at maximum speed
So could we see selective use of solar-powered third-rail electrification in visually-sensitive areas?
Possibly! But battery/electric trains may be a better alternative!
Charging Battery-Electric Trains
There are some branch lines, that will be served by battery-electric trains in the future.
These solar-powered systems could be used to provide the energy to charge the batteries for the return journey.
Powering Remote Stations
Stations are increasingly needing better electricity supplies with more lighting and various ticket and parking machines, and charging for electric cars will become more important.
Solar power systems and batteries could be used.
Conclusion
Solar power will be increasingly used on the railways, with a large number of stations like Blackfriars and the recently-opened White Hart Lane.
But that will happen, irrespective of the result of the Aldershot trial, as many stations are easy places to install solar panels, either on the roof or redundant spaces.
This Google Map shows one of my local stations; Haggerston.
It was rebuilt and reopened in April 2010, so solar panels were probably not thought about for the station.
From my helicopter, it appears that the stations at Dalston Junction, Hoxton and Shoreditch High Street, which were all built at the same time, don’t have solar rooves either.
Perhaps Transport for London and/or Network Rail should rent their roof areas to companies, who run solar farms?
I’m sure there’s a mutually beneficial deal in there somewhere!
As to powering trains, I’m sure they that Riding Sunbeams has a place on third-rail networks, where power needs boosting.
However, electric trains with batteries might be a better option in other applications.
The New White Hart Lane Station Opens
The new White Hart Lane station opened on Monday and I went along this morning and took these pictures.
Some points about the design.
- The station has three entrances on the stadium side and two on the other.
- Materials used include terracotta pots and weathered steel.
- There is a pedestrian tunnel under the railway for those that don’t want to use the trains.
- There are two sets of stairs to both platforms
- There are lifts to both platforms.
- The station can probably handle twelve-car Class 710 trains if required on match days.
- There are solar panels on the roof.
- The station must have some of the tallest overhead electrification gantries in the UK.
From what one of the project managers told me, it appears that the station was built by cleaning, refurbishing and strengthening the viaduct and then erecting an independent steel frame on either side to form the station.
It looks like a technique that could be used on other stations on viaducts.
It’s certainly a better station with a larger capacity, than the previous one, that I used many times back in the 1960s.
The old station is to be demolished, at some point in the future.
Conclusion
It is an excellent station, that should serve its main function of getting supporters to and from Tottenham Hotspur’s new stadium.
But will the station and the soon-to-arrive new trains have other effects.
- As I said earlier, the design could be repeated with different cladding for other stations on viaducts.
- I believe that good public transport infrastructure tends to calm crime and anti-social behaviour. Only the statistics will give a verdict.
- Will the passenger numbers rise through the station?
- Will the station and the stadium attract some better class retain premises and cafes, as the Emirates has done?
And perhaps most importantly! Tottenham Hotspur now has two new stations to serve the ground! Will this reduce the congestion caused by large crowds?
Corby Class 360/1s Earmarked For 110 mph Running
The title of this post, is the same as that of an article on Page 10 of Issue 886 of Rail Magazine.
In Are Class 360 Trains Suitable For St. Pancras And Corby?, I came to this conclusion.
In my view there is a lot of upgrade work to be done to the Class 360 trains to make them suitable for working on the services between St. Pancras and Corby.
- They need a new upgraded interior.
- The trains need upgrading to at least 110 mph.
- A possible upgrading with digital signalling.
I can’t help feeling that the Class 360 trains would make a good stop-gap, but in the long-term it might be better to have a small fleet of electric trains.
The Rail Magazine article says the following will be done.
- Trains will be upgraded for 110 mph running.
- 3+2 seating will be replaced by 2+2 seating.
- Wi-fi, tables and updated information screens will be added.
This all sounds a lot better.
Network Rail Reveals Detailed £2.9bn Upgrade Plans For TransPennine Route
The title of this post is the same as that of this article on Rail Technology Magazine.
It is planned to be a comprehensive upgrade to the Huddersfield Line that includes.
- Improvement between Huddersfield and Westtown
- Grade separation or a tunnel at Ravensthorpe
- Rebuilding and electrification of eight miles of track.
- Possible doubling the number of tracks from two to four.
- Improved stations at Huddersfield, Deighton, Mirfield and Ravensthorpe.
This project should be a major improvement to the Huddersfield Line.
Here are my thoughts on the upgrade.
Where Is Westtown?
Westtown is a difficult place to find on Google Maps.
This Google Map is the best I can do.
Note that Dewsbury station is at the North-East of the map and Ravensthorpe station is in the South-West corner, with the Huddersfield Line going through both stations.
- To the South-West the line goes to Mirfield, Deighton and Huddersfield.
- To the North-East the line goes to Batley, Morley, Cottingley and Leeds.
Westtown can be seen indicated to the West of the Huddersfield Line, North of the River Calder.
Railways Between Dewsbury And Huddersfield
This map clipped from the Wikipedia entry for the Huddersfield Line, shows the route between Dewsbury and Huddersfield stations.
Note the Leeds New Line, which was built by the London and North Eastern Railway and opened in 1900.
It appears to have been closed between 1960 and 1990.
Everybody blames Beeching for the closure of railways, but this closure started before he reported.
But it does seem, that LNER decided that four tracks were needed between Leeds and Huddersfield and that British Railways felt that two was enough.
It now appears that part of the solution to increasing capacity is to create a four-track section of the Huddersfield Line between Huddersfield and Westtown.
We often blame the state of our railways on poor Victorian planning and engineering, but it does appear that they got it right here and British Rail got it wrong, in the 1960s.
A Very Busy Line
If you look at the traffic through Dewsbury station, it is a busy train-spotters paradise, with five scheduled trains per hour (tph) typically stopping at the station and several more passing through.
Four-Tracking Between Huddersfield And Westtown
This is Network Rail’s preferred solution to providing more capacity between Huddersfield and Desbury.
It is not going to be simple engineering all the way.
This Google Map shows the Huddersfield Line crossing the River Calder and the Calder and Hebble Navigation Canal South of Dewsbury station and to the North of Ravensthorpe station.
Note the two double-track bridges over the waterways.
This page on Georgraph has a picture of the bridge over the River Calder. It looks an excellent example of a Victorian wrought iron bridge.
Depending on their condition, these might need to be replaced, but they will certainly need to be upgraded to four tracks.
This Google Map shows Ravensthorpe station and the rail lines in the area in more detail.
The line going East from Ravensthorpe goes to Wakefield Kirkgate station, although there are no platforms at Ravensthorpe.
The Wikipedia entry for Ravensthorpe station says this.
Ravensthorpe station is adjacent to Thornhill LNW (London North Western) Junction, where a line branches to Wakefield Kirkgate. There are plans to extend the station by building new platforms on this line, which was built by the former Manchester and Leeds Railway.
It looks to me that there are possibilities to rebuild Ravensthorpe station and the lines in the area to meet the following objectives.
- Two fast lines and two slow lines through the station.
- Platforms for Dewbury and Leeds services.
- Platforms for Wakefield Kirkgate services.
- Four tracks to as close to Dewsbury station as possible.
It must help that a lot of the land North of the line to Wakefield Kirkgate, appears to be devoid of buildings.
The engineering would not be difficult, but probably extensive and expensive.
It should be noted that the Werrington Diver Under near Peterborough, which is a similar scale of project, was costed at £200 million.
West of Ravensthorpe station, there appears to be plenty of space to fit in two extra tracks alongside the current pair.
This Google Map shows Ravensthorpe station and the tracks to the West.
Note that there is space on both sides of the current tracks and a bridge.
But between Ravensthorpe and Mirfield stations, there are at least three more bridges.
This Google Map shows Mirfield station and the tracks to the West.
There could be problems adding extra tracks here.
- The track and platform layout is unusual.
- There may be a lack of space at the station.
But the biggest problem will probably be four-tracking the bridge over the River Calder.
This Google Map shows the bridge in more detail.
It does appear that the bridge currently has three tracks and might have at some time had four tracks.
If the two extra tracks could be added to this bridge, it would probably be heroic engineering at a high cost, given the difficulty of the site.
But I think engineers have replaced similar bridges on UK railways in recent years.
After Mirfield, the tracks take a wide loop to the North to go to Deighton station.
The tracks were probably built to follow the contours above the River Calder, so hopefully despite the terrain, they could be fairly level.
This Google Map shows the tracks through Deighton station.
It certainly looks that there should be room for two extra tracks.
Between Deighton and Huddersfield stations, it would appear that four-tracking would be as easy as any part of the route.
Looking at the stations from the air from my helicopter (i.e. Google Maps), I suspect that one way to four-track the line would be to proceed in something like this way.
- Rebuild and four-track the bridge over the River Calder at Mirfield station.
- Build the junction and the bridges to the North-East of Ravensthorpe station.
- Create a pair of fast lines on the South side of the current tracks.
- Move all traffic onto these new fast lines.
- Rebuild the existing railway and the stations.
There may be a need for replacement buses, whilst the stations are rebuilt, but hopefully through services could continue.
Electrification
The Rail Technology Magazine opens with this paragraph.
Major station upgrades and plans to rebuild and electrify an 8-mile stretch of track have been put forward by Network Rail as part of a public consultation on a major upgrade to the TransPennine route.
As it is eight miles between Huddersfield and Dewsbury stations, it would seem likely that the electrification will stretch between the two stations.
This would enable TransPennine Express’s Class 802 trains to switch between electric and diesel power in the stations, if this is preferred by the operator.
Line Speed
The eight miles section of track will never have a particularly high speed, given the not very straight route and the terrain.
Currently, trains that stop at both Huddersfield and Dewsbury stations take eight minutes for the trip. Even trains going at speed through both stations seem no faster.
Four-tracking will surely allow fast expresses to pass local services and freight trains, but will the improvement save much time?
If trains could average 100 mph between Huddersfield and Dewsbury, just over three minutes could be saved.
Station Upgrades
The three stations between Huddersfield and Dewbury will all be upgraded, as will Hudderfield station.
The three smaller stations will probably be rebuilt as four platform stations or two platform stations with two through lines for fast services.
In Huddersfield And High Speed Two, I showed several pictures of Huddersfield station.
- It will not be easy to upgrade to a full four-track station.
- There are three through tracks and some bay platforms.
The two main through platforms are on the South side of the station, so if the two fast lines were on the South side of the route between Huddersfield and Ravensthorpe, this could enable an efficient station at Huddersfield.
I also think, there could be a problem at Huddersfield station, with trains to Sheffield on the Penistone Line, if more and faster trains were going through the station.
A New Timetable
I suspect that, if and when the upgrade is finished, that a new timetable will be brought in.
A possibility could be. that TransPennine Express trains run non-stop between Huddersfield and Leeds.
Now that Northern are getting new trains, perhaps these could run a Turn-Up-And-Go service of a train every fifteen minutes between Huddersfield and Leeds.
Heritage Issues
Huddersfield station is a Grade I Listed building and I suspect that the three bridges I have noted are lListed as well.
Will the Heritage lobby object to electrification in these sensitive areas?
Onward To Manchester
I have flown my helicopter between Huddersfield and Stalybridge and if the proposed improvement is successful, I suspect that the route to the West can be improved as far as Stalybridge.
- The route is at least double track.
- It looks like in places, it once had more tracks.
- The trackside margins are fairly generous.
- There doesn’t seem to be too many bridges.
- Electrification will soon be as far as Stalybridge from Manchester.
After my quick look, I don’t think that electrifying between Huddersfield and Manchester would be too challenging, except for possibly, the Standedge Tunnel.
Onward To Leeds
The route between Dewsbury and Leeds is double track, with the only complication of the Morley Tunnel.
Conclusion
It looks to me, that all the difficult bits to creation of an electrified route between Manchester and Leeds via the Huddersfield Line, are in the stretch between Huddersfield and Dewsbury.
So perhaps it makes sense to sort out the difficult bits first, with this £2.9billion project.
British Start-Up Beats World To Holy Grail Of Cheap Energy Storage For Wind And Solar
The title of this post is the same as that of this article on the Daily Telegraph.
If you think it sounds too good to be true, then watch this video from the company behind the technology; Highview Power.
The basic principle is very simple.
- Electricity is used to turn air into liquefied air using refrigeration technology, that has been around for donkeys years.
- This is stored in tanks under pressure.
- To retrieve the energy, the liquid air is allowed to evaporate and creates electricity through a turbine and generator.
These engineers have taken several pieces of readily available industrial equipment, put it together in a novel way. to create an energy storage system.
I believe that this could be the Holy Grail of energy storage!
Why?
In World’s Largest Wind Farm Attracts Huge Backing From Insurance Giant, I discussed how Aviva have invested a billion pounds in wind farms, as it gives them the sort of long-term return they need to provide pensions and pay out insurance claims.
But if you own a Gigawatt-sized wind farm in the North Sea, one thing is missing; the ability to store that energy in an affordable way.
So by investing in this type of energy storage and coupling it with their own wind farms, Aviva can control the output of the wind farms to what the National Grid needs.
All it needs is some more money, that needs a home. And Aviva have lots of that!
It’s also an investment with an ethical and green profile.
- No polluting technology.
- Proven technology.
- Zero-carbon technology.
- Non-toxic technology.
- No use of exotic and scant resources.
- No expensive or dangerous fuel
- Affordable technology
Systems can also be distributed to where they are needed or where there is surplus electricity.
If you want to know more, watch the video and then look at other videos for Highview Power.
How Much Energy Can Highview Power’s Systems Store?
The biggest energy storage system in the UK is Electric Mountain, which has a power output of 1,728 MW and an energy storage capacity of 9.1 GWh.
That is some battery and it was built in the 1970s for a cost of £425 million, which would be £1.3billion today.
In a video it is claimed that Highview Power are designing a storage system, which has a power output of 200 MW and an energy storage capacity of 1.2 GWh.
You would only need to build nine and you’ve got another Electric Mountain!
Perhaps to maximise security of supply and obtain a fast response, the systems could be placed in Cumbria, Essex, Humberside, Kent, Merseyside, Norfolk, Suffolk, Thurso and Yorkshire.
Would We Need Nuclear Power?
Probably not!
For the same amount of money as a large nuclear power station, you’d get an awful lot of offshore wind farms and the storage thrown in.
Conclusion
This technology could solve the world’s energy problems.
I
Will HS2 And Northern Powerhouse Rail Go For The Big Bore?
Different Versions Of This Post
The original post was published on the 25th August 2019.
It has been updated on the 21st November 2020 to reflect changes made to High Speed Two (HS2).
It has been updated on the 13th January 2023 for piggy-back freight trains.
The Merging Of High Speed Two And Northern Powerhouse Rail
It looks to me that there will be increasing links and merging between High Speed Two (HS2) and Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR).
This report on the Transport for the North web site, is entitled At A Glance – Northern Powerhouse Rail.
Proposals and possibilities include.
- NPR will have a Western terminal at a new station in Liverpool City Centre.
- HS2 trains would access Liverpool and Manchester via a junction between HS2 and NPR at High Legh.
- There will be six trains per hour (tph) between Liverpool and Manchester via Manchester Airport.
- The route between Manchester and Manchester Airport is planned to be in tunnel.
- There will be six tph between Manchester and Leeds.
In addition, Boris has made positive noises about a high speed line between Manchester and Leeds being of a high priority.
So will the planners go for the logical solution of a High Speed tunnel between Manchester Airport and Leeds?
- There could be a theoretical capacity of perhaps 18 tph, which is the design capacity of High Speed Two.
- Speeds of up to 125 mph or more could be possible. The Gottard Base Tunnel has an operating speed for passenger trains of 125 mph.
- Stations could be at Manchester Airport, Manchester Piccadilly/Piccadilly Gardens/Victoria, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds.
- West of Manchester Airport, the route appears easier and the tunnel would emerge close to the airport. High Speed Two is planning that the tunnel emerges just to the North of the Airport and that the station is below ground level.
- East of Leeds the tunnel would join up with existing routes to Doncaster, Hull, Newcastle and York.
- Freight trains would be allowed at speed of up to 100 mph.
I believe such a tunnel could be built without disrupting existing rail services and passengers. Remember building Crossrail’s tunnels in London was an almost invisible process.
It would result in two rail systems across Northern England.
- Upgraded Classic Rail Routes
- The Big Bore
My thoughts on the two systems follow.
Upgraded Classic Rail Routes
This could include improvements such as these,
- Extra passing loops.
- Selective electrification
- Improved stations
- Comprehensive in-cab digital signalling
- More paths for passenger and freight trains.
Which could be applied to routes, such as these.
- The Huddersfield Line
- The Chat Moss Line
- The Calder Valley Line
- The Hope Valley Line
- The Dearne Valley Line
- The Selby Line
- The Midland Main Line North Of Clay Cross
In addition, there could be the reopening of some closed or freight routes to passenger trains.
This article on Rail Technology Magazine is entitled Network Rail Reveals Detailed £2.9bn Upgrade Plans For TransPennine Route.
It is a comprehensive upgrade that includes.
- Improvement between Huddersfield and Westtown, which is near Dewsbury
- Grade separation or a tunnel at Ravensthorpe
- Rebuilding and electrification of eight miles of track.
- Possible doubling the number of tracks from two to four.
- Improved stations at Huddersfield, Deighton, Mirfield and Ravensthorpe.
This project would be a major improvement to the Huddersfield Line.
In Sheffield Region Transport Plan 2019 – Hope Valley Line Improvements, I talked about planned improvements to the Hope Valley Line, which should begin in the next couple of years.
These improvements are given in detail under Plans in the Wikipedia entry for the Hope Valley Line.
The Hope Valley Improvements will cost in the region of tens of millions of pounds and Wikipedia sums up the benefits like this.
These changes to allow three fast trains, a stopping train and freight trains each hour were also supported in a Transport for the North investment report in 2019, together with “further interventions” for the Northern Powerhouse Rail programme.
It seems like good value to me!
So could we see other multi-million and billion pound projects created to improve the classic routes across the Pennines?
Projects would be fully planned and the costs and benefits would then be assessed and calculated.
Then it would be up to the Project Managers to devise the optimal structure and order in which to carry out all the projects.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see the following techniques used.
- Discontinuous electrification to avoid bridge reconstruction.
- Intelligent, hybrid diesel/electric/battery trains from Bombardier, CAF, Hitachi or Stadler, capable of 125 mph running and changing mode at speed.
- Modular digital signalling
- Factory built stations and step-free bridges.
- Removal of all level crossings.
- All stations updated for step-free access between train and platform.
The objectives would be as follows.
- More train paths, where needed.
- Faster line speed.
- Less running on diesel.
- Fast station stops.
Hopefully, the upgrading could be done without too much disruption.
Remember though, that disruption to existing users during a project, is most likely down to bad project management.
The Big Bore
The Central Core tunnel of Crossrail between Royal Oak and East London, was virtually a separate project before Crossrail’s stations and much of other infrastructure was built.
I believe that digging the tunnel first gave a big advantage, in that it could be constructed as an independent project, provided that the logistics of delivering the components and removing the junk was done efficiently.
But it did mean that travellers wouldn’t see any benefits until the project was almost complete.
HS2 and NPR are different in that they also envisage upgrading these routes.
- The Huddersfield Line
- The Chat Moss Line
- The Calder Valley Line
- The Hope Valley Line
- The Dearne Valley Line
- The Selby Line
- The Midland Main Line North Of Clay Cross
Only the Huddersfield Line is directly affected by the Big Bore.
Effectively, the Big Bore will provide a by-pass route for passenger trains between Leeds and West of Manchester Airport, to take the fast trains of HS2 and NPR underneath the congested classic lines.
In Changes Signalled For HS2 Route In North I said this about a tunnel between Leeds and Manchester.
To get a twenty-five minute time between Leeds and Manchester with a ten minute frequency, which I believe is the minimum service the two cities deserve, would be like passing a whole herd of camels through the eye of a single needle.
The Swiss, who lets face it have higher hills, than we have in Northern England would create a new route mainly in tunnel between the two cities, with perhaps an underground station beneath the current Grade I Listed; Huddersfield station.
The transport for the North report suggests Bradford Low Moor station, as an intermediate station, so why not Bradford Low Moor and Huddersfield stations?
Note that the Gotthard Base Tunnel, which opened a couple of years ago, deep under the Alps, is about the same length as a Leeds and Manchester tunnel, and cost around eight billion pounds.
It would be expensive, but like Crossrail in London, the tunnel would have big advantages.
- It could be built without disrupting current rail and road networks.
- It would have a capacity of up to thirty tph in both directions.
- Unlike Crossrail, it could handle freight trains.
- It would unlock and join the railway systems to the East and West.
I believe, it would be a massive leap forward for transport in the North of England.
It would be a very big project and probably one of the longest rail tunnels in the world.
Comparison With The Gotthard Base Tunnel
But surely, if a small and rich nation like Switzerland can build the Gotthard Base Tunnel, then we have the resources to build the Big Bore between Manchester Airport and Leeds.
Consider these facts about the Gotthard Base Tunnel.
- It is two single track bores.
- Each bore has a track length of around 57 kilometres or 35 miles.
- The tunnel may be deep, but it is direct and level.
- The maximum speed is 250 kph or 160 mph.
- The operational speed for passenger trains is 200 kph or 125 mph.
- The operational speed for freight is 100 kph or 62 mph.
- It can take the largest freight trains.
To make numbers even more impressive it is joined to the shorter Ceneri Base Tunnel, to provide an even longer route.
Manchester Airport And Leeds Direct
Now consider Manchester Airport and Leeds.
- The current rail distance is 56 miles.
- There are stops at Manchester Piccadilly, Manchester Oxford Road, Manchester Victoria and Huddersfield stations.
- Journey time is eighty minutes.
But the direct distance is only 68 kilometres or forty-three miles.
Surely if the Swiss can blast and dig two 57 km. single-track rail tunnels through solid rock, we can go eleven kilometres further with all the recent experience of tunnelling around the world.
The lengths of the various legs would be as follows.
- Manchester Airport and Manchester – 14 km.
- Manchester and Huddersfield – 35 km.
- Huddersfield and Bradford – 17 km.
- Bradford and Leeds – 13 km
Trains running on the various legs at 200 kph, which is the cruising speed of a 1970s-built InterCity 125, could take the following times for the various legs.
- Manchester Airport and Manchester – 4.2 minutes
- Manchester and Huddersfield – 10.5 minutes
- Huddersfield and Bradford – 5.1 minutes
- Bradford and Leeds – 13 km – 3.9 minutes
Leeds and Manchester Airport would be under thirty minutes apart, even allowing two minutes each for the three stops.
Looking at NPR between Liverpool and Hull, times could be as follows.
- Liverpool and Manchester – 26 minutes
- Manchester and Leeds – 20 minutes
- Leeds and Hull – 38 minutes
Or a Coast-to-Coast time of under ninety minutes.
Train Frequencies
HS2 is being designed to handle eighteen tph, although slower intensive railways in the UK can handle up to twenty-four tph.
At the current time or certainly in a few years time, the theoretical maximum frequency through the Big Bore should be between these two figures. I will assume at least eighteen tph in this post.
The At A Glance – Northern Powerhouse Rail report talks about the following frequencies.
- Liverpool and Manchester via Manchester Airport – Six tph.
- Manchester and Leeds – Six tph
- Leeds and Hull – Two tph
This is all so lacking in ambition. It is like building a new high capacity road and only allowing those with status to use the road.
If Leeds and Manchester Airport can handle eighteen tph, why not use some of it to create an Express Metro under the Pennines?
To me, if the Big Bore is built, nothing short of twelve tph or a train every five minutes is acceptable, at Liverpool, Manchester Airport, Manchester, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds stations.
The extension to Hull could be reduced to perhaps six tph, but with the upgrading of the Hull and Leeds Line to perhaps 140 mph, I’d be bold and create a true TransPennine Express;
Hull and Liverpool every five minutes would be the ultimate Marketing Man’s dream.
The Underground Stations
Manchester Airport, Manchester, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds would all be through stations deep underground.
- They would be connected to the surface by lifts and escalators.
- Some entrances to the stations would connect to existing stations and others might emerge in City squares like Manchester’s P:iccadilly Gardens.
- Most stations would be just two platforms, as all trains would pass through on either side of a large underground concourse.
- Bay platforms could be added as required.
- All stations would have platform edge doors.
- Passengers would be able to reverse direction by just walking across the concourse.
Stations would build on the lessons learned from Crossrail. But then NPR is closer to Crossrail than a Classic High Speed Line.
Weston Williamson’s Vision For Manchester Piccadilly Station
I wrote about this in The Rival Plans For Piccadilly Station, That Architects Say Will ‘Save Millions’.
I believe that this is the way to create an underground station.
The Terminal Stations
The two main terminal stations for NPR and trains running through the Big Bore would be the proposed High Speed station at Liverpool and the existing Hull station.
But one other terminal station is being created; Edinburgh.
I have been going to Edinburgh station to and from England for perhaps thirty years and the capacity of the station has constantly increased.
Recent developments have been an extended Platforms 5 and 6, that can take the longest LNER trains.
I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that with the application of digital signalling, that there is capacity for at least eight tph between Edinburgh and Newcastle.
There would certainly be capacity for at least two tph between Liverpool and Edinburgh via Manchester Airport, Manchester, Huddersfield, Bradford, Leeds, York and Newcastle.
In the East the other possibilities for terminals are Doncaster, Newcastle and York.
- I would discount Newcastle, as it lacks capacity and its location would make it difficult to add more.
- Doncaster has good connectivity and space, but do Leeds and Hull offer similar connectivity?
So that leaves Hull, Edinburgh and York, as the only Eastern terminals.
In the West, there is probably a need to connect to the Northern section of the West Coast Main Line (WCML).
- Glasgow Central is probably the obvious terminal, but it would need an extra connection at the junction of HS2, NPR and WCML at High Legh.
- If necessary Preston could be used, as it has space and lots of connectivity.
- Why not use Blackpool North, as it sits on a large site and is fully electrified. It could certainly take four tph?
- A lot of the things I said for Blackpool, also apply to Chester, which would give a gateway to Mid and North Wales!
The trains through the Big Bore could fan out at both the East and West.
Tunnel Size
As Manchester will be served by High Speed Two’s Full-Size trains from Birmingham and London, both Manchester stations will need to be built to accept these trains.
I feel that the whole tunnel between Manchester Airport and Leeds, should be built to the High Speed Two size, so that it can accept the largest possible passenger and freight trains, in the future.
That would obviously include the ability to handle piggy-back freight trains.
Integration Of HS2 and NPR
The At A Glance – Northern Powerhouse Rail report is proposing this and it looks that the following HS2 services could be possible between Euston and Manchester.
- Two tph – Euston and Hull via Old Oak Common, Manchester Airport, Manchester, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds
- Two tph – Euston and Edinburgh via Old Oak Common, Manchester Airport, Manchester, Huddersfield, Bradford, Leeds, York and Newcastle.
Note.
- Manchester Airport, Manchester, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds would all have four tph to and from London, by the Western arm of HS2’s Y.
- If in addition there were two tph between Liverpool and Hull and Liverpool and Edinburgh, this would mean four tph from the Big Bore of NPR to both Hull and Edinburgh.
- None of these core services need to terminate in the Big Bore.
I very much feel that integrating HS2 and NPR is the way to go.
Could We See A High Speed Northern Metro?
If we assume that the Big Bore could handle the HS2 frequency of at least eighteen tph, then it would be possible to create a high speed service across the Pennines with the following Metro-like frequencies.
- Liverpool and Hull – 4 tph
- Liverpool and Edinburgh – 2 tph
- Glasgow and Hull – 2 tph
- London Euston and Hull – 2 tph
- London Euston and Edinburgh – 2 tph
- London Euston and Glasgow – 2 tph
This would result in the following frequencies
- Liverpool – 6 tph
- Glasgow – 4 tph
- London Euston – 4 tph
- Manchester Airport – 12 tph
- Manchester – 12 tph
- Huddersfield – 12 tph
- Bradford – 12 tph
- Leeds – 12 tph
- Hull – 8 tph
- York – 4 tph
- Newcastle – 4 tph
- Edinburgh – 4 tph
What would these frequencies do for train travel in the North of England?
Freight
The Gotthard Base Tunnel has been designed so that both freight and passenger trains can use the route.
There is a need for extra freight capacity across the country and I wonder if freight trains could use the Big Bore.
I estimate that the Big Bore would be 68 kilometres if bored straight and level between West of Manchester Airport and Leeds.
Lets assume it is seventy kilometres or 43.5 miles.
So times, through the tunnel at various average speeds would be.
- 125 mph – 21 minutes
- 110 mph – 23.7 minutes
- 100 mph – 26.1 minutes
- 90 mph – 29 minutes
- 80 mph – 32.6 minutes
- 62 mph (Gotthard Base Tunnel speed for freight) – 42 minutes.
Could it be mandated that freight trains can use the tunnel, if they could maintain a particular speed?
Consider.
- A 125 mph train with stops at Manchester Airport, Manchester, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds would probably take thirty minutes to transit the tunnel.
- A freight train running at 90 mph would take more or less the same time.
- Fifteen tph would mean a train every four minutes.
- Automatic control of all trains in the tunnel would be a possibility. It appears to work on the much more complicated Thameslink.
I think with the following conditions, one or even two freight trains per hour, in addition to the passenger trains, can pass through the Big Bore in each direction.
- The locomotives have the performance of at least the Class 93 locomotive, which is currently being built.
- Freight trains can be hauled through at a minimum speed, which could be between 90 and 110 mph.
- The passenger trains and train and platform staff work together to produce very short station dwell times.
- All passenger trains are identical.
- Station platforms are designed so that passengers can leave and enter the trains rapidly.
It will be a Big Bore with a capacity to match!
What About Sheffield?
I haven’t forgotten Sheffield, but I think it could be linked across the Pennines by another route.
Under the upgrades for Northern Powerhouse Rail, it is proposed that services between Sheffield and Leeds become 4 tph in 25 minutes along the Dearne Valley Line.
Does Boris Know More Than He Lets On?
The headline on the front cover of Issue 885 of Rail Magazine is Boris Backs New Pennine Railway.
There is also a sub-heading of PM commits to Leeds-Manchester line.
Boris didn’t apply any substance to the speech, except to say that it will be funded.
Conclusion
I believe that my naïve analysis in this post shows that a TransPennine tunnel is possible.
But I believe that the right tunnel could have one big advantage.
Suppose it was built to handle the following.
- A capacity of eighteen tph, which is the same as High Speed Two.
- An operating speed of 140 mph or more. The Gotthard Base Tunnel has a maximum operating speed of 160 mph.
- High Speed Two’s Full-Size trains.
- The largest freight trains.
It would be future proofed for longer than anybody could envisage.
There are also other smaller advantages.
- It would by-pass a lot of difficult areas.
- It would cause very little aural and visual disruption.
- If it were designed with care, it would not affect the flora and fauna.
- As with the Swiss tunnel, it could be dug level, which would save energy and allow trains to run faster.
- It could be running twelve tph between Leeds and Manchester Airport via Bradford, Huddersfield and Manchester Piccadilly.
- Existing surface railways at the Eastern end could serve Cleethorpes, Darlington, Doncaster, Edinburgh, Hull, Middlesbrough, Newcastle, Scarborough, Sheffield and York
- Existing surface railways at the Western end could serve Barrow, Blackpool, Carlisle, Chester, Glasgow, Liverpool. North Wales, Preston and Wigan.
It would be more like Thameslink for the North turned on its side, rather than Crossrail for the North.
Are Class 360 Trains Suitable For St. Pancras And Corby?
It appears that East Midlands Railway will be using Class 360 trains on the route between St. Pancras and Corby stations running them under the branch name of EMR Electrics.
The London And St. Pancras Route
The route has the following characteristics.
- It is just short of 80 miles long.
- The current Class 222 trains take one hour and fifteen minutes for the journey.
- This means these trains have a start to stop average at 64 mph.
- Much of the route is cleared for 125 mph running.
- The route is being made a complete double track.
- The whole route is being electrified with 25 KVAC overhead wires.
In December 2020, the route will host a new electric service.
East Midlands Railway’s Train Specification For The Route
This page on the Department for Transport web site is an interactive map of the Abellio’s promises for East Midlands Railway.
These features are mentioned for Midland Main Line services to Corby.
- Increased capacity
- Twelve-car trains in the Peak.
- More reliable service
- Improved comfort
- Passenger information system
- Free on-board Wi-Fi
- At-seat power sockets
- USB points
- Air conditioning
- Tables at all seats
- Increased luggage space
- On-board cycle storage
What more could passengers want?
How Well Do Class 360 Trains Fit The Specification?
These are a few pictures of a Class 360 train, which I took today.
Some problems and strengths are immediately obvious.
- There are no tables.
- Will two+three seating e acceptable, considering that the current trains on the route have two+two seating.
- There is no space for bicycles.
- There are no luggage racks, which will be needed as the Corby service will also double as a service to Luton Airport.
- The trains are in reasonably good condition.
- There ia a fully-accessible toilet.
A lot of work will need to be done to update the interior of the trains to a standard, that fits East Midland Railway’s specification and their customers expectations.
But there is a full twelve months before the trains will be needed to run on the newly electrified route between St. Pancras and Corby stations.
This may seem enough time, but many current train refurbishment projects are running late.
Is The Performance Of Class 360 Trains Good Enough?
The current Class 222 trains have the following performance.
- 125 mph maximum speed.
- An acceleration rate of 0.80 m/sec/sec
By comparison the Class 360 trains have the following performance.
- 100 mph maximum speed.
- An acceleration rate of 0.98 m/sec/sec.
Given that much of the route between St. Pancras and Corby stastions will be constructed for 125 mph running, will the top speed of the Class 360 trains be high enough?
Will The Class 360 Trains And The Hitachi AT-300 Bi-Modes Be Compatible?
East Midlands Railway has ordered thirty-three AT-300 bi-modes, which will be able to run at 125 mph on the fully-electrified Midland Main Line to the South of Market Hsrborough station.
As thetwo trains will share the fast lines, with the Class 360 trains, will there be conflicts, as the Class 360 trains are only capable of 100 mph?
Ideally, the Class 360 trains should be upgraded to their highest speed possible.
Some of similar Class 350 trains are capable of 110 mph.
This could be enough, but surely for ease of operation, all of East Midlands Railway’s services into St. Pancras should be run by trains capable of running at 125 mph.
Will The Class 360 Trains Need Digital Signalling?
The Hitachi AT-300 trains will probably be able to run using digital signalling, which could be a valuable way of creating more paths on the Midland Main Line.
So will the Class 3560 trains be fitted with digital signalling?
Conclusion
In my view there is a lot of upgrade work to be done to the Class 360 trains to make them suitable for working on the services between St. Pancras and Corby.
- They need a new upgraded interior.
- The trains need upgrading to at least 110 mph.
- A possible upgrading with digital signalling.
I can’t help feeling that the Class 360 trains would make a good stop-gap, but in the long-term it might be better to have a small fleet of electric trains.
Electric AT-300 trains must be one of the favourites, although Class 745 trains, similar to those that Abellio will run between Liverpool Street and Stansted Airport, would do nicely.
East Midlands Railway Announces Three Brands
The title if this article is the same as that of this article on Railway Gazette.
This is a quote about their electric trains to Corby, which will run under the brand name of EMR Electrics.
EMR said that once various developments had been completed, passengers would be able to reach the terminal at Luton Airport in ‘a little under half an hour’ from central London.
Currently, the fastest services going to between St. Pancras and Luton Airport Parkway stations take twenty-four minutes using 125 mph Class 222 trains with Luton Airport Parkway as the first stop.
Thameslink using 100 mph Class 700 trains take 30 minutes and more!
I question, whether the 100 mph Class 360 trains, running with Luton Airport Parkway as the first stop, can do the trip in the 24-26 minutes to get to the terminal in under half an hour, even with Luton Airport’s DART shuttle train working!
In Are Class 360 Trains Suitable For St. Pancras And Corby?, I looked at Class 360 trains running the service between St. Pancras and Corby stations.
I came to this conclusion.
In my view there is a lot of upgrade work to be done to the Class 360 trains to make them suitable for working on the services between St. Pancras and Corby.
- They need a new upgraded interior.
- The trains need upgrading to at least 110 mph.
- A possible upgrading with digital signalling.
I can’t help feeling that the Class 360 trains would make a good stop-gap, but in the long-term it might be better to have a small fleet of electric trains.
Electric AT-300 trains must be one of the favourites, although Class 745 trains, similar to those that Abellio will run between Liverpool Street and Stansted Airport, would do nicely.
So will East Midlands Railway have updated and faster Class 360 trains or will they be bringing in 125 mph trains to hit the required schedule to Luton Airport Parkway?
Conclusion
Luton Airport will have a real Airport Express!
But will the Class 360 trains, be able to deliver it? I have my doubts!
The Anonymous Widower 