Electrification – Halifax and District Rail Action Group

Electric Railway Charter Update

RIA (Rail Industry Association) North has published a plan for electrification across the North spanning Carlisle, Teesside and the East Midlands. Most lines are designated priority 1 (yellow on map below). Priority 2 lines (green) would later transform bi-mode operation to pure electric. Priority 3 (blue) is longer term battery/hydrogen proposals around the edges of the map. RIA North marks 36 freight terminals that would be decarbonised one way or another.

Needless to say, all cross-Pennine routes are priority 1 from Merseyside to Humberside and Scarborough, including of course the full Calder Valley line that was top-ranked by the 2015 task force. Manchester-Bradford-Leeds is second among the top 10 priority 1 schemes, after Sheffield-Doncaster/Wakefield. Completion of Huddersfield and London-Sheffield is assumed. Our thumbnail of RIA North’s map below may be small print but you can find the whole report at Roadmap for a green railway in the North unveiled (riagb.org.uk).

The trick now of course is to convince HM Treasury that not only is electrification affordable. We cannot afford not to electrify, given environmental and resources uncertainties about hydrogen (the RIA barely mentions it) and about batteries (where’s all the lithium coming from?) and less-than ideal efficiency – wastefulness – of multi-mode trains. Electrification will pay for itself by cutting running costs, benefitting customers and combatting climate change.

White paper step forward on electrification?

Strongest hint yet of a rolling programme. But must we really wait for “feet under table” at Great British Railways?

The government’s Great British Railways white paper says “Transport generates over a quarter of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions, … the largest emitting sector of the economy. But rail produces around 1% of Great Britain’s transport emissions, despite carrying almost 10% of all passenger miles and nearly 9% of freight moved before the pandemic.” (p88 of the Report)

We say absolutely right. Rail already has the capability to move passenger and goods with net-zero carbon dioxide emissions. “ There are huge opportunities for rail to contribute … through further electrification.” That, at last, is getting close to what we should be hearing. The document continues:

Electrification is likely to be the main way of decarbonising the majority of the network. Electrification does not merely decarbonise existing rail journeys: it has a clear record of attracting new passengers and freight customers to rail, the so called ‘sparks effect’, thereby decarbonising journeys that would otherwise have been by road. The government has announced almost £600 million to start work on electrifying the Trans-Pennine route between Leeds and Manchester, design work to extend electrification to Market Harborough is underway, and the government will announce further electrification projects in England … shortly.
Great British Railways, the Williams-Shapps Plan for Rail

That may not be quite a commitment to a rolling programme, but is the nearest we’ve had yet. It’s not absolutely clear if this is a commitment to full electrification of the route through Huddersfield and Stalybridge but it feels like a strong hint. Market Harborough is on the Midland Main Line where, the next step must surely be through to Nottingham Sheffield and on to Leeds. We want to see these commitments firmed up, beyond vague ministerial (indeed prime ministerial) promises to a national programme that includes the March 2015 Northern Sparks task force recommendations headed by our full Calder Valley Line.

Note: “the main way” of decarbonising the majority of the network. We make no apology here for repeating figures showing what the split between electrification, battery power and hydrogen should be – based on Network Rail’s traction decarbonisation network strategy published last autumn. We think the DfT and ministers get this.

The worry is the word “shortly”. Here’s the next bit. You can spot our slight concern here:

Great British Railways will bring forward costed options to decarbonise the whole network to meet the government’s commitment to a net-zero society as part of the 30-year strategy. These plans will help to kickstart innovation and change across the sector, support long-term funding commitments and build on the forthcoming Transport Decarbonisation Plan and Great British Railways will bring forward costed options to decarbonise the whole network to meet the government’s commitment to a net-zero society as part of the 30-year strategy. These plans will help to kickstart innovation and change across the sector, support long-term funding commitments and build on the forthcoming Transport Decarbonisation Plan and Network Rail’s recent Traction Decarbonisation Network Strategy.
Great British Railways, the Williams-Shapps Plan for Rail

So the new “guiding mind” of our national rail network will offer options with price tags to the government. Meanwhile the DfT’s transport decarbonisation plan is coming soon. And at least the ground-breaking TDNS is acknowledged. But does this mean we have to wait until the still-to-be-appointed chief executive of GBR has established their feet under the table? Surely, Network Rail has schemes that it can be getting on with, and needs to be drawing up a rolling programme now? Yes, we have said it before, but let’s start getting electrification done.

Over and over again rail industry bodies call for ongoing electrification where teams stay together, developing and improving techniques as they move from scheme to scheme. This is network electrification, it reduces the overall costs, and multiplies the benefits as it cuts the number of non-electric trains operating “under the wires”. In Scotland all four routes between Edinburgh and Glasgow are electrified and there’s a plan to electrify all but the most remote outposts of the rail network. That’s a local example of good practice for the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow later this year. Even better would be a plan for the rest of the UK to catch up with Scotland.

Neighbouring schemes have mutual benefits – like the Calder Valley line naturally following on or even getting started in tandem with TransPennine Route Upgrade.

We do not disagree that some routes will have battery or hydrogen powered trains. Batteries and hydrogen are important ways of storing energy – but not the only ones. Storage is essential because the wind does not blow all the time even out at sea where the turbines spin. But hydrogen and battery powered trains may – in terms of track miles needing to be decarbonised – be no more than 15% of the total. The white paper says:

Battery and hydrogen-powered trains will be trialled for passenger routes where conventional electrification is an uneconomic solution, in order to support the government’s ambition to remove diesel-only trains from the network by 2040. Advances in technology, deployment and more appropriate regulation will be instrumental to achieving this in an affordable way, while also minimising disruption to passengers and freight customers.

“Trialled” – is someone admitting here that battery and hydrogen trains have still to be proven? And “diesel-only trains” removed from the network by 2040 – does that mean there will still be diesel bi-modes running, still wasting energy carrying around dead weight, still increasing maintenance costs, still burning carbon? Of course there are schemes under development to take the diesel engines out of electro-diesel bimodes and replace them with batteries – a form of electrification “without wires”, albeit limited.

And “where conventional electrification is an uneconomic solution” – who decides on the economics? We know that a rolling programme will cut costs of wiring, maybe by a third, maybe even by half.

We also know that electric trains:

use less energy to run because overhead wires are the most efficient way of delivering traction energy. So they are cheaper to buy and cheaper to run.
are much less complicated than diesels, bi-modes or hydrogen-power meaning they are more reliable and cheaper to maintain.

And electrics deliver business benefits:

Lower mass, carrying more passengers for the same amount of power;
Better acceleration reducing journey times even with more stops serving more stations on lines such as the Calder Valley;
Attractive to would-be passengers as clean, quiet, more spacious and more modern – and green. That’s the sparks effect mentioned in the white paper.

Now add in the economic benefit of having clean air, safety, roads freed of congestion by having more people using public transport, and saving future generations from climate catastrophe. Surely, then you have the economic case. With a stake in both tracks and trains Great British Railways should put the case effectively. Grant Shapps must get the message to the Treasury. And readers, please tell your MPs!

Header Image: “Electrification work at Cardiff Central” flickr photo by Dai Lygad https://flickr.com/photos/126337928@N05/48892795197 shared under a Creative Commons (BY) license

Spring update – HADRAG responds to Williams review. Plus timetable issues and Electric Charter campaign

180HBG Zeke

HOW SHOULD our railways be run in the future? As a campaigning rail users’ group embracing a range of views, HADRAG does not take a view on whether our national rail system should continue with largely privatised, private enterprise train operation, or whether there should be some form of social ownership or renationalisation. What many of us do think is that the present system is crazy, not necessarily because of who owns it, but because of fragmentation. We desperately need one railway that works for passengers and to provide an attractive, modern, reliable alternative to congested roads, supporting good growth and protecting the environment, locally and globally.

Last May we had a timetable change that was a complete mess. That must never happen again. In the North of England we have two main train operators, Northern and TransPennine Express. They run across a system operated by Network Rail, the government-owned track operator. Network Rail decides the final timetable, from a remote train planning office in Milton Keynes. Northern and TPE both have their own train planners and must bid, to some degree in mutual competition, for slots in the Network Rail plan. So that is three separate bodies of train planning expertise planning what rail users are surely entitled to see as one train service. Who cares who runs the trains (or owns it – a wholly separate matter in the fragmented railway)? We just want a timetable that is strategically planned by a regional guiding mind to meet the needs of commuters and more occasional travellers, and delivers enhancements that will make train travel more attractive, more usable.

The Williams Review is looking at the whole organisation of our railways with a view to feeding in to a government white paper this autumn. It’s a tight deadline. HADRAG responded to the “initial listening phase earlier this year, but anyone can put forward views – on franchising, the public-private debate or other issues by the end of May. See the summary of our initial response below, and our full paper here.

Meanwhile, HADRAG’s latest newsletter Halifax and Calder Valley Rail Views sets out our latest thoughts on timetable issues, and we have an update on the Electric Railway Charter with the argument swinging back from “gapped” electrification towards the need for strategic routes like the Calder Valley (as well as the Huddersfield Line “TransPennine” route) to be fully electric. – JSW

Here’s HADRAG’s summary from our response to Williams:

“There should not be a conflict between the interest of passengers and taxpayers. Taxpayers benefit from the existence of a modern and effective rail network through its ability to reduce congestion, taking people to work and delivery goods. Railways directly reduce the number of vehicles on the roads. Government financial support for rail should be seen not as subsidy but as social payment for a public service with wide social, economic and environmental benefits. Because of that, the possibilities of rail travel should be made attractive to as great a percentage of the population as possible.

Priorities should be:

To re-integrate a railway that is fragmented in its structure. Removal of fragmentation to put functions under one roof can reduce costs and promote effective, agile decision making. Train-operation and system operation (including timetable planning) need to be unified. For example, in the North of England a single company should be responsible for internal services, planning service patterns, devising the timetable and delivery of the service. The present system for example of separate train-planning establishments within Northern and TransPennine Express TOCs and centrally within Network Rail does not make sense.
Devolved structures to promote effective and prompt decisions as close as possible to the point of service delivery, responsive to passengers’ needs. Regional “track+train” operating companies may be in the private sector or may be socially or cooperatively owned. (HADRAG maintains a neutral position on the political question of private versus public ownership.)
Expansion of the rail network with a fares system that encourages increasing use for an increasing range of purposes – culture, leisure and community as well as work and business.”

Electrification: Harrogate leads the way…with buses!

The Electric Railway Charter calls for smart electrification to save time, costs and disruption. Rail needs to catch up as cars and buses go green. Could pioneering bus development set the example? Andrew Whitworth reports from Harrogate.

It’s exasperating that railway electrification in England is going backwards.

Latest news on the delayed Manchester-Leeds-York plans came as an apparent (deliberate?) leak in September. The emphasis was on how difficult it would all be, despite actual proposed electrification seeming to be limited to Leeds-Huddersfield. It’s a different story in Scotland, where the fourth electrified route linking Edinburgh and Glasgow went live in July – and work progresses on the fifth route. The enterprising Scots are also wiring the Stirling to Alloa branch line. Meanwhile,

Wales has approved some innovative electric plans for the Cardiff Valleys lines using battery power to reduce the costs, timescales and disruption of electrification.

In contrast to their lamentable rail electrification policy for England, on the roads our government have set ambitious targets to switch everyone to electric cars (or at least hybrids) by 2040.

The government is also spending money now to promote low emission buses in towns and cities.

Of 13 such schemes approved in 2016, most are hybrid or electric, including a unique plan for Harrogate due to go live imminently.

Harrogate has had two battery buses since 2014, but they can only run for about 7 hours, then need an 8 hour slow charge at the depot.

Now, The Harrogate Bus Company owner Transdev is buying 8 new-generation electric single-deckers. The new battery buses are able to run for a full day, by using fast ‘opportunity charging’ whenever they’re at the bus station, which takes only 6 minutes. This is topped up by an overnight slow charge. Compared to conventional battery buses this system requires fewer vehicles, with smaller batteries -which also saves a lot of weight.

It’s an innovative idea which – together with the flexible approach in Wales, and the stability of the rolling programme that has succeeded in Scotland – must have potential to help get northern railway electrification plans back on track.

The Electric Railway Charter — watch out for our launch!

Quick recap: big station, fully electrified since 1960. But five out of six trains in our picture are still diesel. Seems a waste? It’s blindingly obvious more could be electrics, helping to keep the air in the station safe to breathe, helping to combat global warming, if only more lines had the “wires” up. Britain lags other advanced European countries in terms of electric rail-km. Yet the Department for Transport seems to be saying that buying fleets of trains laden with both electric pick-up and diesel-generator equipment is a sensible substitute. As explained in our Autumn issue, we don’t agree. “Bimodes” are inefficient, underpowered on diesel, overweight on electric, more complex and costlier to maintain, bad for business and bad for the environment. If diesel or bimode traction were to be the norm for another generation those polluting trains would still be running when fossil fuel power is coming to an end on the roads. Of course electrification means major investment, and, like any improvement scheme, some disruption. But as has been shown the cost is recouped by operational savings (such less fuel, less maintenance) and the “sparks effect” of trains that more people want to use.

Network Rail is the national agency that has the multifarious tasks of managing day to day operation of the system, maintaining tracks and signalling and organising upgrades. Having let engineering expertise go it has, with its contractors, been learning the hard way how to electrify railways in the North West, in Scotland and on the Great Western. An effectively managed rolling programme would capitalise on the skills gained. Nearly three years ago a politically balanced task force backed by professional research recommended a dozen northern routes for electrification by the mid-2020s. You won’t need reminding that the Calder Valley Line, from Leeds to both Manchester and Preston via both Bradford and Brighouse was the top-scoring scheme.

Campaigning train user groups along the length of the line are not giving up. In the coming weeks, HADRAG, STORM (Rochdale), Bradford Rail Users and our colleagues in the Upper Calder Valley Renaissance Sustainable Transport Group are to jointly launch the Electric Railway Charter. The charter will be a declaration calling for implementation of the task force recommendations with our line at the top. It will promise to keep up the campaign for an economically and environmentally sustainable railway. And it will call on a wide range of other groups—business, environmental, political, workplace, community—to support us. We are already supported by the Yorkshire branch of Railfuture, the national independent group campaigning for a better rail network for both passenger and freight. Spread the word.

Electrification: Don’t take our word for it!

Look at the recent panorama of one of our big northern stations, complete with overhead electric wires. Of six trains in shot, five are diesels. If only more lines in the North were electrified all could be electrics, quieter, more efficient, better for air quality, for the climate and for passengers. Don’t take our word for it; here’s what Network Rail said on its website:

Electrification of the railway allows for faster, greener, more reliable train journeys, improves passenger services and supports economic growth in Britain.

Benefits of electric trains:

More capacity for passengers; more seats than diesel trains of the same length
Faster than diesel trains: superior braking and acceleration make journey times shorter.
Quieter than diesel trains: good news for our lineside neighbours.
Better for the environment:… carbon emissions 20 to 35% lower than from diesel trains, and there are no emissions at point of use improving air quality in pollution hotspots such as city centres
Lighter. Less maintenance is needed because electric trains cause less wear on the track so the railway is more reliable for passengers.
Good for the economy. Faster trains with more seats and better connections with previously hard-to-reach areas improve access to jobs and services, and open up new business opportunities.

Electric trains are better business than diesels because they use simpler technology—cheaper to buy, operate and maintain, offering a self-evidently better passenger experience.

Calder Valley sparks!

HADRAG intends to co-opt other groups on either side of the Pennines and lead a “Charter” campaign for a rolling programme of rail electrification across the North of England, starting with our own Calder Valley Line. It’s two and a half years now since the Northern Electrification Task Force (NETF) unveiled its Northern Sparks report. A cross-party group of MPs and local authorities supported by professional expertise, the taskforce ranked full Calder Valley line electrification as top scorer on economic, operational and business criteria.

By “full” Calder Valley line the taskforce meant the route from Leeds/Mirfield to both Manchester and Preston, via both Bradford and Brighouse. The assumption was that the Huddersfield Line from Manchester to Leeds and York would already be done by the end of the decade, a hope dashed in summer 2015, as Network Rail struggled with ongoing work, when that scheme, along with Midland Main Line was paused, and then “unpaused” for two years of replanning.

Then earlier this summer the Government (in the person of Chris Grayling MP, Secretary of State for Transport) announced to Parliament that Midland Main Line electrification from Kettering to Sheffield (once paused, then unpaused) was now cancelled, along with the Windermere Branch. There was nothing definite about the Huddersfield Line or any of the NETF schemes, but subsequent quoted comments cast doubt not only on what is now being called “Trans-Pennine Route Upgrade” (TRU) but on rail electrification generally.

The Department for Transport (DfT) seems to be sold on the idea that the North does not need electrification, or perhaps that it can make do with “discontinuous electrification”. Gaps will be left where electrification is too difficult or disruptive—such as through long stretches of tunnel, or where the overhead wiring is judged unsightly. (Is not the latter laughable given the DfT’s enduring love affair with building multi-lane highways through our green and pleasant landscape?) The gaps can be filled by running “state of the art” bi-mode trains. So the new Midland Main Line will have to invest in electro-diesel trains, electrics with underfloor diesel engines to be inefficiently carted about whilst the train is running “under the wires” as well as electric pick-up gear and transformers that will be equally dead weight whilst the train is running on diesel. Surely that must be bad not just for the environment, but also for business too, as energy, running and maintenance costs increase. The idea of electro diesels is not new, but what is now being built, and more proposed, is a complex train with dual traction systems. For “state of the art” should we read “yet to be fully tested in service”?

We’re not sold on electro-diesel bimodes!

The Windermere branch may get “alternative fuel” trains by early next decade — which sounds like a glimmer of hope for more enlightened thinking. Because diesels, as we all now know, can never be anything but dirty, century-old technology that manufacturers are struggling to clean up whilst maintaining performance. If we care about air quality in our towns and cities we should care about air quality in our train stations. We hear that diesel buses that comply with the latest environmental standards have difficulty climbing Calderdale hills. Of course there are some significant rail gradients on our cross-Pennine tracks. The TransPennine express franchise is getting some new diesel-hauled coaches for its Liverpool/Manchester-Middlesbrough/Scarborough routes and electro-diesel bimodes for services going to Newcastle and Edinburgh. Even without full Huddersfield line electrification the diesel power will be doing significant mileage under the wires. It seems such a waste. Looking with an engineering eye at the specifications it is not clear whether these trains will perform as well on diesel power as existing trains between Manchester,

Huddersfield and Leeds. Power to mass ratio and other factors come in. In short, we’re not sold on electro-diesel bimodes even if the DfT is. For the record we’ll add without comment here that within days of announcing cancellations of electrification schemes and casting doubt on other infrastructure improvements the government not only announced substantial investment in planning London’s Crossrail 2, but also in its air quality plan reminded us of an existing policy to ban the sale of “conventional” petrol and diesel road vehicles by 2040. (The same policy, dating back at least to 2011, aspires to near-total zero-emission road transport by 2050.) Meanwhile planning of HS2, the ultra-high-speed railway between the North and London divides opinion among transport campaigners, and could end up costing the best part of £100 billion, forges ahead.

We should know the scope of the replanned TransPennine Route Upgrade by early next year. How much electrification it includes we shall see. Perhaps not through Standedge Tunnel, perhaps not anywhere between Stalybridge and Huddersfield. But the TRU (Huddersfield Line) is not just electrification. Track enhancements should increase capacity (as well as speed). HADRAG wants to see tracks restored in the Huddersfield/ Mirfield area to allow a better timetable on our Elland/Brighouse line. Mr Grayling has recently announced £5 million for Network Rail to develop plans for “digital signalling” on the Huddersfield Line. This may not be a miracle cure! (See our Back Page.)

Returning to electrification as such, HADRAG and other groups believe the case remains sound, as sound as it was when NETF drew up its list of 32 schemes, ranging in size from the Calder Valley Line downwards, with 12 recommended for Network Rail’s 2019-24 Control Period — including the top scoring Calder Valley itself. What better place to start a rolling programme of electrification across the North? Our line should be next after the Huddersfield Line. We want to orchestrate a cacophony of calls for that.

A start was made in Halifax Town Hall at September’s full council meeting when Calderdale councillors passed a resolution calling on government to recommit to rail development in the north, to a fair balance of investment across the country and more particularly to Calder Valley electrification. From the public gallery it was pleasing to hear arguments that chime with HADRAG’s view. Issues about the cost and disruption of electrification work were rightly raised, but in the end the resolution had all-party support and no member of the council voted against.

For HADRAG’s part, we understand the argument about the need for smarter electrification. Network Rail is learning the lessons of projects in the West of England and Scotland that have proved far more difficult than anticipated. Those lessons are wasted if we do not persevere with a rolling programme.

If clean technology can be used to allow some sections involving tunnels or other obstacles to be left unwired then, maybe, so be it. Electric trains with energy storage have been tested and will surely be part of the solution. Battery technology is moving ahead driven by renewables and (with in-your-face irony) road transport. But dirty diesels, no. -JSW

See HADRAG’s draft Argument’s for Electrification paper via our website:

www.HADRAG.com

Header Image: “Northern Electrics branding” flickr photo by hugh llewelyn https://flickr.com/photos/camperdown/20658157925 shared under a Creative Commons (BY-SA) license

Autumn update 1: Arguments for electrification

DSCF1406 HADRAG intends to play a leading role in the campaign for a rolling programme of rail electrification across the North of England. It’s well over two years since the Northern Electrification Task Force (NETF) drew up a list of 32 northern routes and recommended 12 for electrification in the early 2020s. The schemes were scored on economic and operational criteria, and the top ranked scheme was our Calder Valley Line from Leeds to both Manchester and Preston via both Bradford and Brighouse. We say that would follow on naturally from the Huddersfield Line “TransPennine Route Upgrade” scheme, the scope of which should be announced later this autumn.

How much actual electrification of the York-Huddersfield-Manchester route it will involve is now in doubt following government announcements and comments by the Secretary of State for Transport earlier this summer. Talk at the Department of Transport is now of “state of the art” bimode trains that mean sections of line can be left unwired – “discontinuous electrification” – where the constructing masts for overhead wires is deemed too expensive or disruptive.

Many of us think that is short term thinking, bad for business, bad for the environment. What bimode trains really mean is “electro-diesels” and “state of the art” means electric multiple units with diesel engines under the floors. More complexity meaning more to go wrong, higher maintenance costs – and compromised reliability? The diesels take over on sections of line that are not electrified, but mean the whole train is heavier, less energy efficient and more polluting. When the train is running on electricity from the overhead supply, the diesel engine is just dead weight. When it’s on diesel the transformers that handle the 25000V electricity are not being used. More mass means more energy used, means higher running costs, bad for business, bad for the environment.

And train companies seem at present to be creating a glut of modern electric trains. New trains are being ordered and replacing ones that are perfectly serviceable for years more use – if only more lines were electrified to use them! See picture caption below.

So why, when there is more and more talk about electric cars and road transport generally become “greener”, do we seem to be committing our railways to the obsolescent internal combustion engine for another generation? Government aspirations are to stop sale of conventional petrol and diesel road vehicles by 2040 and make road transport almost completely zero-emission by 2050. Surely it’s time we had a plan also for the rail industry to phase out prime movers that damage air quality and damage the climate. HADRAG says the argument for electrification, starting with our own line, remains strong. Yes, there may be innovative solutions for sections with significant lengths of tunnel or other obstacles. We believe future electric trains may be pure electrics with onboard energy storage. Battery technology is leaping ahead driven by renewable energy development and (ironically) electric cars.

HADRAG intends to promote a Charter for Rail Electrification and have written a draft supporting document Arguments for Electrification . Click to read – and prepare to engage in the debate!

: HERE’s one of those “cast-off” trains that came North from London’s travel-to-work area, and a story that shows just one little reason – among many bigger ones – for electrifying more of our railways. It’s a Class 319 electric train at Liverpool Lime Street station about to work a service to Manchester Airport. From March 2015 the old Northern Rail franchise gave them glossy new colours so that from the outside at least they really did look almost like new. (Now they are beginning to appear in Arriva Rail North’s near-white livery.) Not bad inside either, despite old-fashioned 2+3 seating layout. (A former Northern boss was once heard to say that passengers couldn’t tell them from brand-new trains, but we weren’t sure we quite believed that.) The last “319s” have now ceased service on the Thameslink route between Bedford and Brighton. There were 86 of these 4-car trains. 32 are now with Northern (or about to be). Eight more are to be given diesel engines, becoming electro-diesel “bimodes” called Class 769. The eight should (assuming conversion and testing runs smoothly) enter Northern from next Spring. A further five “769s” have been approved for the Welsh trains franchise. That still leaves nearly half of these decent modern trains, easily upgradable to modern high quality, in store, “off-lease”, awaiting a user. Northern (Arriva) will probably use some of its eight 769s on the Windermere branch, where electrification plans have recently been cancelled by the government. Windermere-Manchester Airport trains seem likely (until brand new stock arrives) to run on diesel on the branch line, and on overhead-wire electric from Oxenholme to the Airport. So heavy internal combustion engines and fuel tanks will be dragged as dead weight under the wires. The promised brand-new stock might have to be pure diesel, though there is a hint of “alternative fuels” – electrics with battery storage maybe – by the early 2020s. It’s not just the 319s – with new franchises down south – not to mention Northern’s neighbour TransPennine Express – replacing serviceable electrics with brand new stock, there appears to be an increasing glut of electric trains. All the more reason, surely, for a rolling programme of proper electrification, not least across the North of England and starting with our top-ranked Calder Valley Line. Read our draft Arguments for Electrification paper.

Aspirations for more

Network Rail’s HADRAG presentation was about projects in the current 2014-19 control period (CP5) and our guests preferred not to be drawn on any more ambitious aspirations that might be considered in the future. There are obvious projects, some that we have called for in the past and that our friends in the UCV Renaissance Sustainable Transport Group included in a list of priorities published a year ago. Much of this is not so much investment in new railways but more about restoring valuable infrastructure short-sightedly taken away over the last few decades, such as:

Loops/four tracking between Hebden Bridge and Mytholmroyd to allow freight trains to be overtaken.
Putting back four tracks in the Huddersfield/Mirfield/Dewsbury area creating capacity for more trains through Brighouse as well as on the Huddersfield line.
Halifax platform 3 as through loop.
The “Crigglestone Curve” linking the lower Calder Valley and Barnsley routes for a service through Brighouse to Sheffield —advocated years ago by HADRAG!
And of course CVL electrification via both Bradford and Brighouse.

Network Rail and DfT must keep promises to Calder Valley Line

When Rt Hon Patrick McLoughlin MP, Secretary of State for Transport announced that the Huddersfield Line and Midland Main Line electrification projects were in a state of pause, HADRAG’s committee had already agreed to write both to the Secretary of State and to bosses of Network Rail. At the end of September, when Mr McLoughlin made his surprise announcement that the two big schemes were to be immediately “unpaused” – but significantly delayed – we wrote again.

Sir Peter Hendy, freshly moved from his old job as Transport for London commissioner to shake up Network Rail as its new chair, is actually still reviewing the whole programme of “CP5” projects originally planned for the 2014-19 “Control Period”. For HADRAG this is not just about electrification of our line which was recommended by the task force earlier this year for CP6 (2019-24), but also about more urgent enhancements between Manchester and Bradford that should be in CP5.

Our latest letter to Patrick McLoughlin and Sir Peter Hendy expounds three wishes:

a) linespeed and capacity upgrades Manchester-Bradford to be delivered as promised to enable more trains and quicker journeys on the CVL before 2020;

b) replanning of Huddersfield Line electrification to include significant capacity increases as well as electrification. We want restoration of four tracks, Huddersfield-Mirfield, to allow CVL services via the Brighouse Line to be increased and speeded up;

c) electrification of the Calder Valley route Leeds-Manchester/Preston via both Bradford and Brighouse to follow straight on after Huddersfield Line wiring is finished in 2022, aiming to keep the 2024 promise of the Northern Electrification Task Force.

Back in June, if you knew anything about current UK rail development, you had known for months that Network Rail was struggling to deliver its ambitious 2014-19 plan that had been sold to a government eager for pre-election good news. It was clear that North-west electrification was running late – it still is. And, we heard, planning work had ground to a halt on Trans-Pennine electrification scheme to extend the wires from Stalybridge via the Standedge Tunnel route to Huddersfield, Leeds and York. We were worried delays to Huddersfield Line electrification could have a knock-on effect on projected improvements including electrification on the Calder Valley Line.

Before HADRAG’s 30th anniversary annual general meeting in May this newsletter reported optimistically on the outcome of the Northern Electrification Task Force. The task force was a cross-party group of MPs, councillors representing Rail North, and officers from Rail North, the Department for Transport (DfT) and Network Rail. Professional work for the task force yielded in spring this year a list of lines recommended to the Secretary of State for electrification in the rail industry’s CP6 – the 2019-24 control period. Just to remind ourselves: in terms of points scored on economic, business and operational criteria Calder Valley Line (CVL) was ranked top of this list.

We say the CVL should follow on immediately after electrification of the Huddersfield Line. Economic and business modelling apart, it is simply common sense. The two routes are closely linked in terms of railway geography and operation. We are a diversionary route for TransPennine Express. Already our Blackpool-York trains run on lines (Blackpool-Preston, Leeds-York) that will be electrified in a few years. Planned services from Bradford should run to Manchester Airport by the end of 2019, probably with regional express branding, again over already electrified lines in south Manchester. In short it makes no sense not to electrify the CVL straight after the Huddersfield line with the teams that erect the masts and string up the overhead wires simply moving round the curve to get started on our line.

Maybe Huddersfield Line and Calder Valley Line electrification should be seen as a single project to be completed by the end of CP6. Whether Network Rail will see it that way is another matter.

Early essentials for Calder Valley as prelude to electrification

But there are other essential and more immediate enhancements required if the new Northern franchise (taking over next spring) is to deliver promised timetable improvements. The specification demands: extension of a Calder Valley service every hour to Chester via Warrington (from December 2017), and from 2019 an extra fast train hourly Bradford-Manchester with (as mentioned) through running to Manchester Airport. (The Airport service also requires the Ordsall Chord to be built in, a matter only very recently resolved in the courts) To facilitate the Calder Valley improvements as part of the wider Northern Hub development, we understand plans are already drawn up with funding both from Network Rail’s resources and (via West Yorkshire Combined Authority) from the West Yorkshire Plus Transport Fund for the following:

line-speed improvements, Manchester-Bradford. Current limits of 70mph west of Hebden Bridge, 60 as far as Halifax, then 55 to Bradford could, we understand, be raised to 75 or 85mph.
capacity improvements Hebden Bridge to Bradford with new signals so trains can run at closer headways.
remodelling Milner Royd Junction, where Bradford and Brighouse routes diverge east of Sowerby Bridge, allowing existing 40mph speed restrictions to be raised.

These enhancements are considered urgent for another reason. When Huddersfield Line electrification does go ahead there will be a need to use the line via Brighouse and Hebden Bridge for diversions. So capacity and speed improvements round our way really should precede a start of serious engineering work on the Huddersfield TransPennine route.

Our first letter went to Patrick McLoughlin and also both to Network Rail chief executive Mark Carne and Sir Peter Hendy. We pressed the case for the Manchester-Bradford CP5 enhancements to go ahead, and, in CP6, for electrification of our line to follow the Huddersfield Line. We received fairly prompt replies during July, from a DfT official in response to our letter to the Secretary of State, and from Network Rail boss Mark Carne himself. Both were brief but reasonably positive in tone. Not surprisingly Mr Carne could not give direct assurances but was good enough to put us in touch with a regional strategy director who has promised to brief a delegation from HADRAG on the outcomes of the Hendy review later in the autumn. The offer will be taken up.

The reply from the DfT reasserted commitment to £13bn of transport investment in the North. (We take it this refers to Network Rail’s budget for enhancements, not to be confused with a higher figure sometimes quoted of about £39bn which includes like-for-like renewals.) “The budget for rail enhancements remains intact and the… pause on some projects will not impact on the delivery of the new rail franchises for TransPennine Express and Northern… .” That sounded encouraging in terms of the work required to deliver timetable improvements.

The DfT reply went on to say that consideration of schemes for delivery during CP6 (2019-24) had started, but it was “not possible yet to say whether or how the Electrification Task Force’s recommendations for the Huddersfield and Calder Valley lines might be accommodated in CP6”. A little worrying, perhaps? (And spot the error: Huddersfield electrification had already been approved and so was not on the task force list!)

Then three months after the great pausing of 25th June came the great unpausing of 30th September, in the middle of the party conference season. The full Hendy Review is not expected to report until November, and so is pre-empted by the surprise announcement (did Sir Peter have his arm twisted to agree to this?). Network Rail now seems to be saying it thinks it can probably electrify Stalybridge-Huddersfield-Leeds-York by 2022 – four years later than originally planned. For two years starting now there will be a “a full planning exercise” involving Network Rail, the DfT and Transport for the North resulting by the end of 2017 in a project that “increases benefits to passengers compared to the previous paused scheme” (letter from Sir Peter Hendy to Patrick McLoughlin, 29 Sep’15).

Make Huddersfield line improvements work for Brighouse and the Calder Valley – and then electrify our line!

Everyone concerned with campaigning for rail in the North certainly hopes that the replanned Huddersfield Line electrification will be a better scheme, building in significant capacity increases as well as just electrifying existing tracks. From a mid-to-lower Calder Valley perspective there is obvious scope to restore the mainly 2-track route between Dewsbury and Huddersfield to the 4-track railway that it used to be. This is important for HADRAG because it could help with the need for improved services on the Brighouse line, benefitting the whole of Calderdale. We are saying sensible capacity enhancements on the premier trans-Pennine route could also work for our line, as a prelude to full electrification as recommended by the task force.

But comments by Mr McLoughlin dampened optimism that schemes in the task force’s list would follow during CP6. Since questions remained about Calder Valley projects up to and including electrification, rather than simply wait for the outcome of the Hendy Review, HADRAG wrote again. We welcomed the restart of Huddersfield Line electrification, but set out our 3-point wish-list, expressing concern “to see progress with work that will enhance infrastructure and hence services on the Calder Valley Line which is linked geographically and operationally with the Huddersfield route. These Calder Valley enhancements are vital. They are both the short term (CP5) projects associated with the Northern Hub on the Bradford-Manchester route, and also medium term (CP6) aspirations including the extension of electrification to our line.”

Our Calder Valley route has been waiting decades for serious infrastructure enhancement. Services have been improved despite long-standing capacity and speed limitations which affect performance as well as limiting development. If the promised transformation is to be delivered by the new franchise, faster tracks and more signals will be needed before the end of the current decade. We say Sir Peter Hendy’s review of Network Rail projects must keep the promise to Calder Valley line passengers, actual and would-be, of speed and capacity improvements in the current “control period”, laying foundations for electrification in less than ten years. We are not giving up on this.

Header image attribution: flickr photo by Department for Transport (DfT) https://flickr.com/photos/transportgovuk/9305649181 shared under a Creative Commons (BY-NC-ND) license