Electrification: Where and When

[LNW-GW Joint]

The best feature of the NR Electrification RUS was that it painted a detailed picture of the costs and benefits of electrification, and the value of a rolling programme across the country.
I don't think anyone takes the individual priorities and BCRs seriously. There will always be outside factors, and politics, to consider.

The NW electrification is really about redeploying Thameslink rolling stock, and "kick-starting" a rolling programme in the north (and it keeps the northern MPs and PTE's at bay).
TP electrification builds on this and begins to get strategic/incremental.

Thames Valley electrification ditto, on the back of Crossrail and the Reading rebuild.
GW main line is the obvious rolling extension, and keeps the WAG quiet (well, almost).

By contrast, MML doesn't do a lot for the wider network (unless it reaches Leeds/Doncaster), and there isn't the same rolling stock cascade.
Basingstoke-Exeter might seem logical to NSE folk and 3rd-railers but again has little network benefit. It is also "more spend in the rich SE".
Cross Country is pointless until some of the other building blocks are in place.

I would look to some more "political" authorisations, spreading the largesse around the country, rather than the proposed NR sequence.
And then there is IEP. Currently a bigger sacred cow than electrification.
And HS2.

 

[giblets]

I wholeheartedly agree, but it's also a good place to start, as some of the proposals are exceedingly far down the BCR which would most probably exclude them anyway.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Current projects: Great Western, Transpennine & North West, inc. Leeds-Hull, Cardiff Valley lines, Edinburgh-Glasgow

When was this announced?

 

[YorkshireBear]

Current projects: Great Western, Transpennine & North West, inc. Leeds-Hull, Cardiff Valley lines, Edinburgh-Glasgow

When was this announced?

I am not aware of leeds hull being announced, but i think the valleys have been confirmed, but no one knows how much will be electrified.

 

[mattyb1405]

I always thought a good fill in electrification project could be Coventry - Nuneaton Could then link a the WCML and Cov/Bham line and allow for potential diversions. Also seeing a single car class 153 head to Cov from Bham direction followed by a Pendolino makes me chuckle to myself -I need to get out more....

 

[Waverley125]

Doing Cov-Nuneaton would be a good idea if Cov-Leam was done at the same time, and Kenilworth station was reopened, along with new ones at Bermuda Park, Stivichall, Radford & the Ricoh Arena. Then you could run a regular half-hourly 'coventry Crossrail' service of:

Nuneaton, Bermuda Park, Bedworth, Ricoh Arena, Radford, Coventry, Stivichall, Kenilworth, Leamington Spa

also were the Chiltern to be electrified in future, it gives an entire alternate route from London to Nuneaton.

 

[HSTEd]

Hopefully Chiltern would be electrified as an add on to a Cross Country project, although that is not the same cross country route as the one that has the huge BCR post-Midland

 

[jopsuk]

Chiltern is noticably absent from the official list, with the Snow Hill Lines (partly the northern end of the route) having a low BCR on the list. I reckon Marylebone will be the last terminus in London with any diesel services.

 

[Pen Mill]

Whilst these wish lists are well & good it should be remembered how long it's taken to get us to here.
In the order of 50 years is the answer if you ignore the pioneer works of the early 20th century.

The major trunk routes that have been done so far are :
WCML 1959ish to 1974 = 15 years
ECML 1975 to 1978 then 1984 to 1991 = 16 years
GEML to Norwich completed 1986.
MML 1983 to Bedford
Note that most of these weren't done concurrently and that gives me a flavour as to the funding available.
and what's been done in the last 20 years ?
Bits and pieces that's all :-
Heathrow 1994.

What I'm saying is that these wish lists could well take another 50 years or more to complete. There is no track record of lots of megadosh being thrown at the infrastructure system so why would that change in a recession era ?

 

[LE Greys]

Whilst these wish lists are well & good it should be remembered how long it's taken to get us to here.
In the order of 50 years is the answer if you ignore the pioneer works of the early 20th century.

The major trunk routes that have been done so far are :
WCML 1959ish to 1974 = 15 years
ECML 1975 to 1978 then 1984 to 1991 = 16 years
GEML to Norwich completed 1986.
MML 1983 to Bedford
Note that most of these weren't done concurrently and that gives me a flavour as to the funding available.
and what's been done in the last 20 years ?
Bits and pieces that's all :-
Heathrow 1994.

What I'm saying is that these wish lists could well take another 50 years or more to complete. There is no track record of lots of megadosh being thrown at the infrastructure system so why would that change in a recession era ?

Most of those were split schemes. The ECML, they did King's Cross/Moorgate to Hitchin/Royston, stopped for 12 years, then did the rest over a 3-year period during which time HSTs ran the expresses, so there would have been no way to introduce faster trains unless APT had been available (which I think was the original plan). The WCML, similar story, done in bits. Shenfield, then Clacton, then Norwich resulted in the line being done in stages starting with the suburban section then gradually extending, but done in bits under different sets of management for different stock (although why they couldn't have gone all the way to Norwich with the Clacton scheme is a mystery to me). Heathrow 1994, Reading 2015, Oxford/Newbury 2017, Bristol 2019, Cardiff 2020 and Swansea 2021 might not look too bad (numbers out of thin air) and there should be the stock there to do it.

 

[anthony263]

Most of those were split schemes. The ECML, they did King's Cross/Moorgate to Hitchin/Royston, stopped for 12 years, then did the rest over a 3-year period during which time HSTs ran the expresses, so there would have been no way to introduce faster trains unless APT had been available (which I think was the original plan). The WCML, similar story, done in bits. Shenfield, then Clacton, then Norwich resulted in the line being done in stages starting with the suburban section then gradually extending, but done in bits under different sets of management for different stock (although why they couldn't have gone all the way to Norwich with the Clacton scheme is a mystery to me). Heathrow 1994, Reading 2015, Oxford/Newbury 2017, Bristol 2019, Cardiff 2020 and Swansea 2021 might not look too bad (numbers out of thin air) and there should be the stock there to do it.

Its 2017/2018 for Cardiff and possibly Swansea

 

[giblets]

On that note, how has technology changed to make it faster? Or Slower for that matter.
Guessing that when the WCML was done originally they shut it down for a couple of weeks (or did they?).
Think I read that the new electrification machines can do one section (1.6km) per shift. How long did that take in the past?

 

[sprinterguy]

Chiltern is noticably absent from the official list, with the Snow Hill Lines (partly the northern end of the route) having a low BCR on the list. I reckon Marylebone will be the last terminus in London with any diesel services.

The opportunity to electrify the Chiltern line would be best taken when the class 165s are due for withdrawal and hence the commuter train fleet is up for renewal. An RUS or similar document noted Network Rails' aspiration that this could be carried out during the CP6 period.

 

[LE Greys]

On that note, how has technology changed to make it faster? Or Slower for that matter.
Guessing that when the WCML was done originally they shut it down for a couple of weeks (or did they?).
Think I read that the new electrification machines can do one section (1.6km) per shift. How long did that take in the past?

According to a DVD I have about the East Anglian lines, covering Shenfield, Clacton and Norwich, it was surprisingly fast. The methods used, pile-drive the mast bases into place, bolt on the masts and knit it all together, mostly done from a moving train, are basically the same. The major difference today is the level of automation (it originally took hundreds of people). Obviously, we don't tend to have workers running along coach roofs without safety lines any more!

 

[jopsuk]

The opportunity to electrify the Chiltern line would be best taken when the class 165s are due for withdrawal and hence the commuter train fleet is up for renewal. An RUS or similar document noted Network Rails' aspiration that this could be carried out during the CP6 period.

Well quite. It's a pity the BR route modernisation occurred at a point where the money simply wasn't available for wires- hence the 165s rather than electric Networkers

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I really think a change of heart and a perfect storm has come so a lot will turn into reality. There is a need to be seen to be "Green- low carbon". The UK is starting to get embarrassed by the state of its railways compared to the rest of Europe. Much stock is due for renewal. There is a genuine desire to be seen to be less "LONDON CENTRIC"
So HS1 complete
So HS2 - approved
GWML (I know to Cardiff only) but trust me, it will go to Swansea
Liverpool - York
Liverpool-Preston
Manchester-Blackpool.

These are not wish lists but already approved and work started. There will be fill ins and I am certain MML will get done
Glasgow-Edinburgh etc. approved. We are in a much better position than ever and I am very optimistic.

 

[tbtc]

The best feature of the NR Electrification RUS was that it painted a detailed picture of the costs and benefits of electrification, and the value of a rolling programme across the country.
I don't think anyone takes the individual priorities and BCRs seriously. There will always be outside factors, and politics, to consider.

The NW electrification is really about redeploying Thameslink rolling stock, and "kick-starting" a rolling programme in the north (and it keeps the northern MPs and PTE's at bay).
TP electrification builds on this and begins to get strategic/incremental.

Thames Valley electrification ditto, on the back of Crossrail and the Reading rebuild.
GW main line is the obvious rolling extension, and keeps the WAG quiet (well, almost).

By contrast, MML doesn't do a lot for the wider network (unless it reaches Leeds/Doncaster), and there isn't the same rolling stock cascade.
Basingstoke-Exeter might seem logical to NSE folk and 3rd-railers but again has little network benefit. It is also "more spend in the rich SE".
Cross Country is pointless until some of the other building blocks are in place.

I would look to some more "political" authorisations, spreading the largesse around the country, rather than the proposed NR sequence.
And then there is IEP. Currently a bigger sacred cow than electrification.
And HS2.

Sadly I agree - the East Midlands and South Yorkshire don't have the political clout of Cardiff/ Manchester/ Glasgow, so the MML will remain the poor relation of "Main" lines (EMT have more in common with LM than they do with Virgin).

On business case/ stats the MML would have been done well before the GWML.

I always thought a good fill in electrification project could be Coventry - Nuneaton Could then link a the WCML and Cov/Bham line and allow for potential diversions

Yes - a short infill which releases a self contained DMU service as well as creating potential WCML diversions/ additions (Coventry is a big place to have such a poor service to the north, if you exclude one hourly Voyager to Manchester)

Doing Cov-Nuneaton would be a good idea if Cov-Leam was done at the same time, and Kenilworth station was reopened, along with new ones at Bermuda Park, Stivichall, Radford & the Ricoh Arena. Then you could run a regular half-hourly 'coventry Crossrail' service of:

Nuneaton, Bermuda Park, Bedworth, Ricoh Arena, Radford, Coventry, Stivichall, Kenilworth, Leamington Spa

also were the Chiltern to be electrified in future, it gives an entire alternate route from London to Nuneaton.

No. For a start you'd be knackering up the WCML paths at Cov by needing to run four Nuneaton - Leamington services an hour. If you're not going to electrify the whole "gap" in the XC route from Coventry to Basingstoke *and* double the line from Coventry to Leamington then it'd be a waste.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I really think a change of heart and a perfect storm has come so a lot will turn into reality. There is a need to be seen to be "Green- low carbon". The UK is starting to get embarrassed by the state of its railways compared to the rest of Europe. Much stock is due for renewal. There is a genuine desire to be seen to be less "LONDON CENTRIC"
So . . . . .

. . . .

We are in a much better position than ever and I am very optimistic.

I admire your use of language!

In the last couple of years I've seen a lot of strategic planning be discussed in terms in which the conclusions are "recognition", wishes and intentions are "aspirations", research indicates a "change of heart", demands and needs are merely an "appetite" and recommendations are "guidance (if whoever was minded to . . . )".
All that these alternative vocabularies do is to avoid the obvious, that there is no money.

In short. Nothing will happen.
(or not very much)

 

[ainsworth74]

All that these alternative vocabularies do is to avoid the obvious, that there is no money.

In short. Nothing will happen.
(or not very much)

Well, that put a dampener on proceedings

 

[DaveNewcastle]

That's an ability at which I seem to be quite capable. I'm sorry. I realise its not popular!

[For clarity, I didn't intend to stifle conversation, though I'll confess to finding some 'fantasy / my ideas' threads tiresome].

However, I firmly believe that we all have to adjust our prespectives when looking ahead, to accomodate the one simple fact that I quoted: there is no money. Not even to invest now in a venture which may recover capital in 10 years and also e.g. reduce the yield from road fuel taxation.
There's plenty scope for creativity, innovation and change. But it has to be realistic.

 

[John55]

That's an ability at which I seem to be quite capable. I'm sorry. I realise its not popular!

[For clarity, I didn't intend to stifle conversation, though I'll confess to finding some 'fantasy / my ideas' threads tiresome].

However, I firmly believe that we all have to adjust our prespectives when looking ahead, to accomodate the one simple fact that I quoted: there is no money. Not even to invest now in a venture which may recover capital in 10 years and also e.g. reduce the yield from road fuel taxation.
There's plenty scope for creativity, innovation and change. But it has to be realistic.

There are currently 3 major electrification projects in progress as we speak. It seems a little odd to say "nothing will happen" when so much is actually underway.

However there will be some certainty as to any further progress with the July CP5 statement in july when the South Wales, North Pennine and MML situation will become clear.

 

[WatcherZero]

Rumour is the Government will support the Valley Lines but still no support Swansea so WAG will put up the money for that part against the Governments objections that its not value for money.

 

[IanXC]

However there will be some certainty as to any further progress with the July CP5 statement in july when the South Wales, North Pennine and MML situation will become clear.

Is there a date set for the CP5 statement?

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Rumour is the Government will support the Valley Lines but still no support Swansea so WAG will put up the money for that part against the Governments objections that its not value for money.

Sounds about right, nice bit of fudge and everyone saves face. Perfect!

 

[D365]

I really hope that the gauge-clearance works on the Felixstowe-Nuneaton scheme took the possibility of OHLE into account... I would electrify the entire route as part of the general aim to encourage freight off the dangerously congested A14. With that would go a fleet of electric locomotives, featuring smaller diesel engines for low-speed shuntig etc (like the Class 73 but AC OHL).

For the Birmingham-Stansted Cross Country services, a new batch of 379s with further units for Greater Anglia too should be procured. Plus Hitchin-Peterborough would provide an important diversion route for InterCity trains!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Back in reality, the Network Rail RUSs are a good read. GWML (and Crossrail initially to Maidenhead) is mostly going ahead, along with a northern scheme that I can't be bothered to remember! Keep the process going and wire more rails, I say!

 

[Aictos]

Not sure what other people's views are but does anyone think Norwich to Liverpool or Stansted to Birmingham will ever be converted to EMU operation and if so what type of EMU ought to be used?

I class them as secondary Inter City services where a 5 coach Class 380 based upon the Class 444 would be quite at home.

 

[Bald Rick]

I really hope that the gauge-clearance works on the Felixstowe-Nuneaton scheme took the possibility of OHLE into account...

Well, yes and no.

Where bridges need reconstruction for gauge clearance, electrification clearances are provided for as standard. But there are plenty of locations that needed no (or very little) work for gauge clearance but do need major work for the wires. Clearly the gauge clearance project isn't going to pay for that, so it didn't. Bear in mind that the cross country gauge clearance project was specified 6-7 years ago when any main line electrification was a pipe dream.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Is there a date set for the CP5 statement?

"Shortly" (Justine Greening in Transport Questions in the Commons on Thursday).
She batted away all the interesting questions.
More mention of the IEP programme, wires to Cardiff, Northern Hub etc.
No hints of anything new.

 

[LE Greys]

Not sure what other people's views are but does anyone think Norwich to Liverpool or Stansted to Birmingham will ever be converted to EMU operation and if so what type of EMU ought to be used?

I class them as secondary Inter City services where a 5 coach Class 380 based upon the Class 444 would be quite at home.

I agree with that. It's really a fault of BR management that a number of genuinely inter-city services found themselves in the 'wrong' sector (Regional Railways in this case) for various reasons. Currently, including them in Cross-Country has gone half-way to rectifying that.

A further consequence is that any upgrades since sectorisation have been Sprinter-based, meaning that the best one can hope for on those routes is a 170. Even if they do not get wired, then the next relaying cycle should upgrade them to DMU or HST status, meaning that we could expect Voyagers, a modified 185 with a 444 body (call it a 186 perhaps) or whatever design replaces the 175s to take over. Voyagers would be most likely, since wiring XC might or might not result in them being replaced with EMUs.

 

[HSTEd]

A further consequence is that any upgrades since sectorisation have been Sprinter-based, meaning that the best one can hope for on those routes is a 170. Even if they do not get wired, then the next relaying cycle should upgrade them to DMU or HST status, meaning that we could expect Voyagers, a modified 185 with a 444 body (call it a 186 perhaps) or whatever design replaces the 175s to take over. Voyagers would be most likely, since wiring XC might or might not result in them being replaced with EMUs.

But a Class 185 cannot use any differentials whatsoever, so you would have to spend vast sums of money upgrading to non-differential speed limits while gaining practically nothing at all. Would it not be better to spend this money on routes with very low speed limits like sections of the Breckland line with an 60/SP75 speed limit, perhaps attempting to increase it to SP90?

Would it not be better to put a new bodyshell on a Class 172 if you really must have end doors on the train?

 

[LE Greys]

But a Class 185 cannot use any differentials whatsoever, so you would have to spend vast sums of money upgrading to non-differential speed limits while gaining practically nothing at all. Would it not be better to spend this money on routes with very low speed limits like sections of the Breckland line with an 60/SP75 speed limit, perhaps attempting to increase it to SP90?

Would it not be better to put a new bodyshell on a Class 172 if you really must have end doors on the train?

That's probably true, I was suggesting that for a Super Sprinter replacement on another thread. Thing is, I was thinking of something more inter-city based for this, more like a 175, or even a 180/Voyager equivalent as a fallback plan if these routes were not electrified. Cascading Voyagers would be another option, although 125 performance would only be needed on short sections. The idea is to bring XC's Turbostar routes up to full inter-city standard (or at least Voyager standard with the Voyager routes returning to full inter-city with buffets).

BTW, I thought 185s could use HST/DMU differentials, is that not the case?