TRANSPORT | Piccadilly To Victoria Direct Rail Link | Ordsall Curve

[HollyBlack]

Originally Posted by CHAPS2034

As I posted a few weeks ago, I was informed by NR staff at the recent exhibitions on the Ordsall Chord that there is a solution
However it costs some £10m and is currently not funded, so someone would have to find the money.

A vertical-lift bridge perhaps?

[Farsight]

Originally Posted by slipdigby

...In this case, there is a half way house which is a flat crossing on the chord allowing retained access to MOSI. But, as with any compromise there are issues. Firstly, any flat crossing is a complicated and expensive bit of permanent way to maintain. Such a solution would presumably rule out including a degree of cant for increased service speed on the chord...

Thanks for that, Slip.

[js1000]

If Network Rail can spend half a billion on Kings Cross station then they can an extra £10 million to avoid cutting the first inter-city railway in the UK. But they're in London - so anything outside of it is irrelevant.

[madferret]

Originally Posted by js1000

If Network Rail can spend half a billion on Kings Cross station then they can an extra £10 million to avoid cutting the first inter-city railway in the UK. But they're in London - so anything outside of it is irrelevant.

Yes, they should stop all new projects until MOSI are satisfied. Or just get on with it. You choose.

[slipdigby]

Originally Posted by HollyBlack

A vertical-lift bridge perhaps?

Ski jump...



Best,
Slip

[DiscoSteve]

a locked off flat crossing CAN NOT be hard FFS

[Altfish]

The problem is not the odd excursion, it's the daily shuttle

[Christopher125]

Originally Posted by DiscoSteve

a locked off flat crossing CAN NOT be hard FFS

There's not just the expense of installing a flat crossing, trap points etc but the cost of ongoing maintenance - how do you justify both the upfront and ongoing expense for a mainline connection used just 3 times in the last decade and in future might only be useable at night?

Chris

[WatcherZero]

Network Rail only charges a £5000 a year fee for a site (such as rail served factory) to maintain access to the national rail network.

[Mwmbwls]

A glimpse of the day before the day before yesterday.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/actonwe...n/photostream/

[Christopher125]

Originally Posted by WatcherZero

Network Rail only charges a £5000 a year fee for a site (such as rail served factory) to maintain access to the national rail network.

The problem is the huge cost of installing and maintaining both a junction and flat crossing which would barely, if ever, be used.

Chris

[Altfish]

Originally Posted by Christopher125

The problem is the huge cost of installing and maintaining both a junction and flat crossing which would barely, if ever, be used.

Chris

Chris, the flat crossing would be used many times every day the shuttle is running. They have the 'Lion' replica running up and down at weekends, that line will be severed.
Mike

[fallowfield_fergy]

Originally Posted by WatcherZero

Network Rail only charges a £5000 a year fee for a site (such as rail served factory) to maintain access to the national rail network.

Originally Posted by Altfish

Chris, the flat crossing would be used many times every day the shuttle is running. They have the 'Lion' replica running up and down at weekends, that line will be severed.
Mike

Reality check please guys.

1. Seeing our railway in Derbyshire was told the cost for the connection onto the MML was £100k per annum, I doubt whether the MOSI connection would cost just £5k.

2. The is no way on earth that NR would allow the shuttle to cross the Chord. Even if they did, every locomotive would need to have all the equipment of a main line vehicle (ERTMS, OTMR etc.), so forget that one.

Neil

[Altfish]

Originally Posted by fallowfield_fergy

Reality check please guys.
2. The is no way on earth that NR would allow the shuttle to cross the Chord. Even if they did, every locomotive would need to have all the equipment of a main line vehicle (ERTMS, OTMR etc.), so forget that one.

Neil

That is why I flagged it, it is a bad design for the Museum and they will lose the opportunity to demonstrate a key exhibit

[fallowfield_fergy]

Originally Posted by Altfish

That is why I flagged it, it is a bad design for the Museum and they will lose the opportunity to demonstrate a key exhibit

Unfortunately, I really can't see another option.

[Altfish]

Originally Posted by fallowfield_fergy

Unfortunately, I really can't see another option.

Not without significant cost increases

[Chogmook]

Can they not add another track and widen the curve and connect to the mainline towards Victoria? *Edit - scrub that, would require a rather sharp corner!

[slipdigby]

Originally Posted by Mwmbwls

A glimpse of the day before the day before yesterday.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/actonwe...n/photostream/

Fantastic image! Thanks for that, amazing to see how much has changed...

Best regards!
Slip

[WatcherZero]

Originally Posted by fallowfield_fergy

Reality check please guys.

1. Seeing our railway in Derbyshire was told the cost for the connection onto the MML was £100k per annum, I doubt whether the MOSI connection would cost just £5k.

2. The is no way on earth that NR would allow the shuttle to cross the Chord. Even if they did, every locomotive would need to have all the equipment of a main line vehicle (ERTMS, OTMR etc.), so forget that one.

Neil

Went back and checked, the license to maintain an existing connection which I was talking about, base price since 2006 is capped at £10,000 per year or actual cost if lower than £10,000, for a brand new connection its the cost to install the new connection capped at £100,000 per year or the sum of 'Agency Costs, Contractors' Costs and Personnel Costs (all as defined in Schedule 3) included in the Base Price as at the Commencement Date' if lower than £100,000.

edit: Theres also a clause to allow Network Rail to recover an additional charge of upto £50,000 per annum until repayed if the works require extensive modification to the pre-existing infrastructure valued at more than £50,000.

Basically its set up partially subsidised so Network Rail is liable for the bulk of the ongoing costs and renewals as well as connection cost to encourage companies to use the service and not face any nasty surprises of unexpected expensive renewals costs.

[jrb]

MCC Planning.

101158/LO/2012/C1 | LISTED BUILDING CONSENT Intrusive coreholes (3no.) and boreholes (3no.) to listed structures for survey purposes. | Water Street Central Manchester

http://www.publicaccess.manchester.g...158/LO/2012/C1