R A I LT R AC K - The Railways Archive

1
146
West Coast Main Line: London to Glasgow and Edinburgh continued
These are the route improvements we plan to deliver continued
Rugby–Carlisle From Rugby to Colwich (75km), the four-track sections are interspersed with a three-track section from Rugby to Attleborough and a two-track
section from Tamworth to Armitage which substantially reduces effective capacity. Crossing moves at Nuneaton, Lichfield and Colwich and stops by
selected trains at Rugby, Nuneaton, Tamworth, Lichfield and Stafford further reduce capacity.
The Colwich to Stafford section (9km) is partially a two-track section and is also constrained by slow line conflicts at Milford, Whitehouse and Trent
Valley Junction at Stafford.
From Stafford to Crewe (38km), the line is four track but effective capacity is reduced by crossing moves at Norton Bridge Junction to and from the
Manchester Line and the fast and slow lines, and also at Basford Hall.
At Crewe Station, various crossing moves which consume capacity cannot currently be avoided: freight trains into and out of Basford Hall yard; and
trains to and from the Shrewsbury, Manchester and Chester lines have to cross many of the main lines.
The C rewe to Carlisle section is two track for 85% of its 250km length. Capacity is highly used on the two-track sections between Winsfo rd and
We aver Junction, and is further constrained by the mix of speed, the need for Liverpool–St Helens–Wigan trains to use the main line from Springs
Branch to Wigan, the mixed traffic speeds on the Wigan–Balshaw Lane two-track section, the single lead junction with nu m e rous crossing moves at
Euxton, and limited slow line platforming capacity at Preston. Again, diffe rential speeds of trains mean that many trains consume more than one
‘ s t a n d a rd path’ from Preston to Carlisle. At Carlisle Station, there is limited capacity to handle freight trains.
Option A Provide four miles of additional fourth track and five miles of additional third and fourth tracks between Rugby and Stafford.
We will then be able to path the additional 42 freight and open access trains between Rugby and Crewe as set out in our PUG 2 undertaking
with the Rail Regulator.
Option B Provide four tracks throughout the Trent Valley to double capacity in this area which would require 9km of fourth track, 16km of third
and fourth tracks, including creation of new track through National Trust Land, and widening of Shugborough Tunnel. This doubles the capacity in
the Trent Valley, allowing an additional 14 trains per hour to be pathed between Rugby and Stafford.
Option C Divert trains that exceed this route’s capacity via Coventry and Walsall. The Coventry–Walsall Corridor is currently operating at full
capacity and the planned improvements to capacity (under PUG 2) will be fully utilised by contracted additional services. There would be a need for
heavy investment if trains were to be diverted this way from Trent Valley. Additional work would four-track the railway from Beechwood Tunnel to
Stechford, provide a grade-separated junction at Stechford and need other off-WCML works.
Option D Stafford–Crewe: reduce crossing moves at Norton Bridge and Crewe and thereby increase effective capacity.
Grade-separated junction at Norton Bridge. Increased utilisation of independent lines and Basford Hall sidings at Crewe facilitated by improved yard
arrival/departure facilities. NB: The junction layout at Crewe is proposed for improvement under PUG 2. Additionally, improved platform capacity
could be provided here and, further improvements made to the layout. At Norton Bridge, a grade-separated junction would avoid approximately
four crossing moves per hour and, at Basford Hall near Crewe, possible layout changes would create approximately two additional paths per hour
for freight trains. However, unless works to alleviate congestion north and south of this area are undertaken, no advantage can be taken of such a
capacity improvement.
Option E Four track from Winsford to Weaver (eight miles). Two viaducts would also have to be widened as part of the eight-mile four tracking.
Option F Avoid crossing fast lines at Euxton and encourage efficient use of slow lines between Euxton and Preston by Blackpool services. Provide
grade-separation doubling of the junction at Euxton. Reallocate platforms at Preston.
Option G Ease the capacity consumption caused by differential speeds over Shap summit through provision of a third track northbound between
Carnforth and Shap summit, and southbound from Carlisle to Shap summit. Assuming each freight path consumes 2.5 nominal paths on the incline,
all services aspired to could be accommodated.
A is our preferred option as no viable potential funding package has been identified for additional capacity on this route which the other
options will provide.
Manchester network development We have analysed the current network capacity of all of our routes radiating from Manchester, together with our assessment of future market
developments for both passenger and freight operations to determine an appropriate way forward. Our strategy is:
(1) To invest in infrastructure between Manchester Piccadilly and Crewe, which will enable the new Virgin Trains’ West Coast services (committed
to in the ‘PUG 2’ agreement) and other operators services using current track access rights to be delivered reliably.
This objective assumes that the track access rights of franchise operators that expire in 2004 are renewed in similar form. We have already
remodelled the track layout at Manchester Piccadilly and restored the capacity to 12 fully operational platforms in the main trainshed. About
£100M will be spent on completely renewing the signalling between Slade Lane and Cheadle Hulme, and in providing altered track configuration
to optimise train path capability.
(2) To provide costed options to develop further the capacity and capability of all routes which are impacted by services needing to access
Manchester Piccadilly, Victoria, Oxford Road, Manchester Airport or Trafford Park freight terminal.
We are using input from the Franchising Director and other customers, together with our own assessments of market demand to determine
these options. There are specific interdependences with the strategies of Trans-Pennine freight developments and also local passenger services in
Merseyside, Greater Manchester and West Yorkshire. Virgin Trains’ investment in new high-capability diesel trains for its CrossCountry services,
together with our investment at other nodal points such as Leeds provide a basis on which to identify options. We would like to agree
commercial terms for some of these new requirements; in particular, those for long-distance cross-country passenger services, by December
1999 in order that the necessary infrastructure investment can be confirmed in the 2000 NMS.
(3) To participate actively with Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive (PTE) in developing an investment strategy for heavy and light rail
services in order to deliver their full potential of shifting current and future journeys from private car to public transport.
We believe that the social benefits of a step change in the use of rail services could justify the land-use planning and significant investment
necessary to provide a step change in capacity on the rail network. We propose to report on the outcome of this strategic review, and the
commitments of the parties to the necessary infrastructure investment, in the 2000 NMS.