• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Scottish Electrification updates & discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,717
Location
Leeds
I gather from the Blackpool thread that the new standard came in in March 2015 (a postponement ended then), but at what date did it become known that it was going to come in in March 2015 (or earlier)?

It seems a bit like the remodelling of Stalybridge station, which perpetuated the idea that the main line there is the line into/out of Manchester Piccadilly, yet by the time construction started, it was clear the line to/from Victoria should be the main line.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

QueensCurve

Established Member
Joined
22 Dec 2014
Messages
1,912
In 2015 the parapet height guidance for electrified routes increased. For existing structures on electrified lines this is not enforced except where work takes place. However for lines due to be electrified but where clearance and parapet work had been completed but lines hadn't been energised this has meant returning to carry out further parapet work.

Is it not the case that, since the project was already in hand, a derogation from the revised standard could have been adopted had it been sought by the project team.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
A relatively similar incident occured with the Livkey incline electrification program when it was declared that the new footrisge at the new Bromsgrove station didn't have sufficient clearance.

Any source for this?
 

route:oxford

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2008
Messages
4,949
As discussed in the Blackpool-Manchester thread, and briefly mentioned in the GWR thread, there's an issue with new(ish?) clearance rules that require a greater height for wires at platforms, in order to increase the distance from people on platforms (who may be holding large umbrellas, helium-filled metallic balloons etc) to the nearest live object - the end of a pantograph on a train.

How long are the wires on the Tasers that BTP now use?
 

Mordac

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2016
Messages
2,308
Location
Birmingham
http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/electrification-works-set-to-begin-on-shotts-line

Electrification works set to begin on Shotts line

Passengers should expect changes to their services as the programme to transform Scotland’s railway continues with the electrification of the Glasgow-Edinburgh, via Shotts, line.

Services on the route will be amended all day on Sundays, and Monday to Thursday evenings, after approximately 8.30pm. Buses will replace trains on portions of the route. Customers can also use Lanark trains, which will run as normal, between Bellshill and Glasgow Central in both directions.

The work on the line between Glasgow Central and Edinburgh via Shotts is part of our rolling programme of electrification to be completed by March 2019 delivering the Scottish Government’s vision for improved services, with more seats on longer, greener trains.

This phase of work begins on Sunday 25 September and will continue until May 2017.

David Dickson, ScotRail Alliance infrastructure director, said: “Electrification of the railway will allow us to increase the number of seats available on more environmentally friendly trains. The work we are delivering represents a huge investment in Scotland’s railway that will help transform travel on our network.

“Work on this scale will have an impact on services but every effort is being made to keep disruption to a minimum by doing the work at times when passenger numbers are at their lowest. We are urging people to check their journey details in advance via the ScotRail app or website. We will of course have extra staff on hand at key stations to assist customers.”

Customers are also reminded of previously announced engineering works on the line between Glasgow Central and Edinburgh via Shotts on the weekends of Saturday and Sunday 10 / 11 and 17 / 18 September. More information can be found at scotrail.co.uk/engineering

Details of the changes from 25 September can be found at scotrail.co.uk/electrification
 

Class 170101

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
7,933
Is this wise? Its at the same time as the E&G closures isn't it?

The A2B is going to be busy
 

PaxVobiscum

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2012
Messages
2,397
Location
Glasgow
You mean the M8. In reality, that's where people tend to go when the Falkirk route is closed/diverted.

Just as well there's no engineering works on the roads then - oh, wait... <D

While we're off topic on the subject of roads, was the M9 built with 'the wires too low' as well? I ask because there are often reminders on the gantry signs about checking vehicle height when using a feeder motorway (eg the M80) approaching the M9. Seems there are some low bridges. Perhaps Altnabreac would know?
 
Last edited:

92002

Member
Joined
27 Mar 2014
Messages
1,133
Location
Clydebank
You mean the M8. In reality, that's where people tend to go when the Falkirk route is closed/diverted.

The M8 is absolutely no use as a diversion.

Works have been ongoing for the last few months to add another lane to The A8 between Baillieston and the start of the current M8, with many entry and Exits either closed or being modified.

Come Monday, just to add more chaos overhead gantries at Baillieston are getting renewed.

So Airdrie To Bathgate trains win hands down.

Both the Queen Street high level and Shotts lines are closed early midweek and are late.opening on Sundays for OHL works.
 

clc

Established Member
Joined
31 Oct 2011
Messages
1,302
The M8 is absolutely no use as a diversion.

Works have been ongoing for the last few months to add another lane to The A8 between Baillieston and the start of the current M8, with many entry and Exits either closed or being modified.
.

Not that it's on topic but they're actually increasing capacity by 3-4 lanes in each direction.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
The M8 is absolutely no use as a diversion.

Tell me about it! It's bloody awful!

It's true that Airdrie-Bathgate provides a reasonable diversionary route between the two cities. I would use it if I needed to travel between the two cities when the main route is closed.

But, in my experience, when the line via Falkirk is closed passenger numbers on the A-B (or for that matter other routes between the East and West) don't rise all that much, and I can only suggest that people are choosing to drive or indeed not travel at all in these times.

There is a widespread perception that the other routes are "slow" and are not used; even though journey times are not that much slower all in all. The road, whilst still a massive pain because of the roadworks, gives the commuters some illusion of control and the comfort of their own car. And it isn't "of absolutely no use" - I've used the M8 quite a bit during the roadworks and whilst it is awful, it's still completely usable (in fact, even in the rush hours, it's still preferable to taking the back roads).

That is where they are going - it may not be logical, but believe me the vast majority of people aren't using diversionary rail routes.

Works have been ongoing for the last few months to add another lane to The A8 between Baillieston and the start of the current M8, with many entry and Exits either closed or being modified.

That's not exactly what they're doing - it's a bit more complicated than just a new lane.

There is a new motorway between Ballieston and Eurocentral bypassing the current M8 - this will be 3 lanes + HS in both directions, with one intermediate junction at Shawhead (which is being redesigned). The existing A8 will be retained as a local access road (for Bargeddie and Carnbroe) and will be diverted to start at a new roundabout in Bargeddie with the A89 - it will be much quieter. East of Eurocentral, there will then be four carriageways of traffic each with two lanes and a HS - the M8 in the centre that will have no exits and the local A8 on the outside which will serve the existing exits. After Newhouse the lanes will merge (potentially a bottleneck) into the existing motorway - it looks like it'll be built to facilitate widening to 3 lanes on the existing M8 but there are no plans or funding for this at present.

This is being done alongside a separate but complimentary scheme to widen the M8/M73/M74 network - there will soon also be an additional lane of traffic from M74 J5 (Raith) through J4, onto the M73, and onto the M8 as far as J10 (Glasgow Fort/Easterhouse) in both directions - with the exception of the relevant junctions there will now be four lanes of traffic in each direction here.

This might give you an idea.
[youtube]0v9vl8d6k88[/youtube]
 
Last edited:

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,717
Location
Leeds
That will be 3 usable lanes and a hard shoulder for breakdowns.

Normal motorway design.

The M8 main line will be a mixture of 2, 3 and 4 lanes each way, depending on which section you're talking about, but the A8 will also be available with its own 2 lanes each way. Over Newhouse junction there will be two motorway carriageways each way, each with two lanes.
 
Last edited:

clc

Established Member
Joined
31 Oct 2011
Messages
1,302
The M8 main line will be a mixture of 2, 3 and 4 lanes each way, depending on which section you're talking about, but the A8 will also be available with its own 2 lanes each way. Over Newhouse junction there will be two motorway carriageways each way, each with two lanes.

Yes you'll have:

- 3 lanes between Baillieston and Shawhead
- 4 lanes between Shawhead and Eurocentral
- 3 lanes between Eurocentral and Chapelhall
- 2 lanes between Chapelhall and Newhouse

On top of all that you'll have the 2-lane All Purpose Road which will have hard shoulders between Baillieston and Eurocentral and hard strips between Eurocentral and Newhouse.
 

Lurpi

Member
Joined
13 Jul 2015
Messages
77
If I may get back to Scottish electrification, there was an update from Network Rail on 7 September. I know I'm a few days late with it, but it's not been mentioned here yet and it moves the discussion on the allegedly wrongly installed wires on somewhat.

Here is the announcement, which basically admits that design work is having to be redone but not, it seems, OLE already installed:

All overhead line equipment (OLE) installed so far as part of EGIP is at the correct height and no wires will need to be restrung. We are, however, reworking OLE designs through some stations and under some bridges to further enhance clearances in line with current European standards. Industry guidance on these standards was issued after EGIP had begun delivery of its route clearance projects in 2012.

That appears to contradict the ORR report I linked to a few days ago, which said:

2.52 The main reason for the higher costs on these projects is that on both projects there was a
late identification of additional electrification scope required to be compliant with safety
legislation; in particular increases to the height of bridge parapets and wire heights through
stations relative to the specification Network Rail used, as well as additional screening for
lineside infrastructure. In some cases, this has required both re-design and re-work to
completed structures
.

They can't both be right.
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
7,877
Location
Dalton GA USA & Preston Lancs
If I may get back to Scottish electrification

- thank you - roads want to make me --- :|

QUOTE " All overhead line equipment (OLE) installed so far as part of EGIP is at the correct height and no wires will need to be restrung. We are, however, reworking OLE designs through some stations and under some bridges to further enhance clearances in line with current European standards. Industry guidance on these standards was issued after EGIP had begun delivery of its route clearance projects in 2012." QUOTE


They can't both be right.
I tend to believe this later updated announcement which is indeed great news. So the via Shotts route will definitely not make the same "mistakes" :D
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,717
Location
Leeds
They can't both be right.

You could argue that there's just room for it not to be a contradiction, if

1) all wires already installed are at the correct height

2) some wires designed but not yet installed will need to be installed higher than previously planned

3) some parapets already "completed" will need to be raised further.
 
Last edited:

Lurpi

Member
Joined
13 Jul 2015
Messages
77
Fair point.

Hopefully that means that no bridge deck will have to be ripped out and re-installed?
 

Altnabreac

Established Member
Joined
20 Apr 2013
Messages
2,414
Location
Salt & Vinegar
You could argue that there's just room for it not to be a contradiction, if

1) all wires already installed are at the correct height

2) some wires designed but not yet installed will need to be installed higher than previously planned

3) some parapets already "completed" will need to be raised further.

This is exactly the case. Some of the early cleared structures have had higher parapets installed. So both statements are correct.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,884
Location
Nottingham
This is exactly the case. Some of the early cleared structures have had higher parapets installed. So both statements are correct.

"Structures" could also refer to OLE supporting structures, so it is possible that some of those that have been installed but don't have wires yet will need modifying.
 

Altnabreac

Established Member
Joined
20 Apr 2013
Messages
2,414
Location
Salt & Vinegar
"Structures" could also refer to OLE supporting structures, so it is possible that some of those that have been installed but don't have wires yet will need modifying.

It could but there wasn't much if any OLE work done before the regs change whereas quite a few bridges had been done.
 

Lurpi

Member
Joined
13 Jul 2015
Messages
77
"Structures" could also refer to OLE supporting structures, so it is possible that some of those that have been installed but don't have wires yet will need modifying.

Not unless NR weren't telling the truth.

See quote above: they stated that "all overhead line equipment installed so far as part of EGIP is at the correct height"... that includes supporting structures.
 

Peter Mugridge

Veteran Member
Joined
8 Apr 2010
Messages
14,817
Location
Epsom
Please excuse me if I have missed this in the 66 pages this thread already has, but something is puzzling me.

At Glasgow Queen Street, is there more work to be done on the wires themselves?

Only... there are no insulators between the wires and the masts...
 

Railsigns

Established Member
Joined
15 Feb 2010
Messages
2,503
Please excuse me if I have missed this in the 66 pages this thread already has, but something is puzzling me.

At Glasgow Queen Street, is there more work to be done on the wires themselves?

Only... there are no insulators between the wires and the masts...

The modern polymeric insulators may be less obvious than the old ceramic ones.
 

Peter Mugridge

Veteran Member
Joined
8 Apr 2010
Messages
14,817
Location
Epsom
The modern polymeric insulators may be less obvious than the old ceramic ones.

Could you tell me a bit more about this please?

There were normal looking insulators between the adjacent wires and above the wires, but I could not see anything sideways between the wires and the masts.
 

McRhu

Member
Joined
14 Oct 2015
Messages
444
Location
Lanark
Was in Queen Street myself during the week and there are definitely no insulators where there ought to be insulators: neither polymeric nor glass fibre, etc. The copper contact wires runs straight to the terminating portals and the live cross-span wires ditto to their headspan masts. Obviously work still to be done, but I'm sure there must be a good reason for not doing it at the time.

Also noticed that in place of the MK III fibreglass underbridge arms they are using something that looks distinctly Series 1-ish. In fact Series 1 seems to appear intermittently amongst the Series 2 at the top of the bank too.
 

PaxVobiscum

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2012
Messages
2,397
Location
Glasgow
Could you tell me a bit more about this please?

There were normal looking insulators between the adjacent wires and above the wires, but I could not see anything sideways between the wires and the masts.

Perhaps some photos may help? These are from the 10th August just after the reopening. The earth bonding cables in the 2nd photo may not be there now.
 

Attachments

  • ohle.jpg
    ohle.jpg
    156.5 KB · Views: 92
  • ohle 2.jpg
    ohle 2.jpg
    223.8 KB · Views: 96
  • ohle 3.jpg
    ohle 3.jpg
    89.5 KB · Views: 80
  • ohle 4.jpg
    ohle 4.jpg
    111.3 KB · Views: 82
  • ohle 5.jpg
    ohle 5.jpg
    175.7 KB · Views: 88
Last edited:

McRhu

Member
Joined
14 Oct 2015
Messages
444
Location
Lanark
Perhaps some photos may help? These are from the 10th August just after the reopening. The earth bonding cables in the 2nd photo may not be there now.

Yes - thanks very much for those: very detailed and informative. The first and last pics seem to show the lack of insulators in the respective live wires (and between each track's registration equipment in the headspans). The other pics illustrate the use of Series 1 components amongst the Series 2. To my eye this looks a very clumsy and inelegant pair of systems, even compared to MK 1: like improvised Meccano.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top