Disruption On The East Coast Mainline

[alex17595]

Nope. A bad pantograph can pull down any OHLE.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgCPPeYmyKw#t=25

Its quite amazing how much damage they do cause.

 

[wensley]

.
Probably not all that many bus companies in that particular area - let alone finding drivers who had enough hours left to drive legally.

And running any number of buses from Kings Cross just isn't practical. Hundreds of taxis were hard enough! Five coaches did help ease the load of people for Peterborough only, with the handful of departures carrying the long distance traffic.

 

[najaB]

Yes that was my point. I thought it was obvious but perhaps @najaB is thinking about something else?

Even if only one wire comes down, it can still cause multiple lines to be blocked for re-wiring.

 

[Intercity91]

I think south of Alexandra palace station and the flyover they removed some of the head span and replaced with portal
2012
https://www.flickr.com/photos/tetramesh/6930416260/
2013
https://www.flickr.com/photos/68628359@N04/8968405542/

If you look carefully there weren't any headspans there before, it is all cantilever supports. They put in the gantries when remodelling the station - strangely they support the up lines but the down lines are still on the cantilevers.

They have replaced a single headspan recently at Potters Bar using the existing uprights with a new cross beam.

 

[Chris Wallis]

Even if only one wire comes down, it can still cause multiple lines to be blocked for re-wiring.

This is why I've never quite understood the enthusiasm for electrification.

But I appreciate I'm almost alone in that view....

 

[Shimbleshanks]

This is why I've never quite understood the enthusiasm for electrification.

But I appreciate I'm almost alone in that view....

I think you would have been in the majority on the 21.17 from York that evening - yours truly included.

 

[westv]

I thought I read somewhere that electrification of the ECML was done on the cheap? Is that true?
What are the advantages of electric over diesel traction?

 

[najaB]

I thought I read somewhere that electrification of the ECML was done on the cheap? Is that true?

That's a matter of opinion. It is a fact that it was less expensive than other, earlier projects, but there's debate over if that means the ECML was done on the cheap, or that the other projects were over-engineered.

What are the advantages of electric over diesel traction?

The main one is faster acceleration since electric trains don't have to lug dense fuel and heavy engines around with them. There's also the environmental considerations - depending on how the electricity is generated, electric trains can be carbon neutral.

 

[Chris Wallis]

How does the compensation, that NR pay to TOC's for delays, work?

For instance, if an EMU goes over a set of Points too fast and damages the wires, or a Freight loco damages the Point itself by doing the same thing, leading to long delays to passenger services, does NR still have to pay the compensation?

What if work by a Private Contractor led to engineering works over running and causing long delays, who pays the compensation to the TOC(s) then?

 

[carriageline]

With regards to the engineering works, NR will pay the compensation as the TOCs have a contract with NR, not the contractor. Whether or not the contractor gets a charge I don't know.

If a train derailed due to overspeeding, I would imagine the TOC would pay


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wensley]

TOCs are compensated for delays under Schedule 8 contracts with NR. TOCs pay for the delay they cause to their own trains to NR high is measured in Average Minutes Late (AML) against a set target (benchmark). NR pay TOCs in the same way for the delay they cause. In the event of a TOC delaying third parties they pay their chunk in to NR and money is paid to other TOCs by NR, bus system called the STAR model. This all stems from the allocation of delay minutes on an incident by incident basis is actual delay minutes - the 'owner' of the delay is decided during attribution/dispute/resolution between NR and the TOCs in accordance with the Delay Attribution Guide which can be found online. Delays can be split cause - e.g. A wrong-routing taken by the Driver, here some minutes will go to NR (OC - Signaller) and the TOC (TG - Driver). Hopefully that makes some sort of sense...

 

[Chris Wallis]

Brilliant....thank you so much Wensley.

 

[westv]

That's a matter of opinion. It is a fact that it was less expensive than other, earlier projects, but there's debate over if that means the ECML was done on the cheap, or that the other projects were over-engineered.
The main one is faster acceleration since electric trains don't have to lug dense fuel and heavy engines around with them. There's also the environmental considerations - depending on how the electricity is generated, electric trains can be carbon neutral.

Many thanks.

 

[Muzer]

The main issue with the East Cost electrification is that, because the way the wires are supported, bringing one down (which shouldn't happen anyway, but does) is more likely to bring all of them down, whereas in other areas (like the West Coast), though this probably still happens as frequently per train (does anyone have stats on this?), pulling down one wire tends to keep problems isolated to that line since the wires aren't quite as interconnected. The question is whether the extra construction cost is worth the ability to keep more lines open when wires come down. I've probably massively simplified the issue, but that's the basic gist of it - it depends on how you interpret it, really, since you could argue that the East Coast wasn't done on the cheap as such, but the benefits of the cheaper construction were weighed up against the drawbacks of the increased disruption and they decided it was worth the trade-off (or maybe they didn't even envisage the problems that have occurred). It's like any other trade-off between price and reliability, really.

 

[hassaanhc]

With headspans, everything is supported on wires between two posts. This was used on ECML and London-area GWML in most places, however there are single-track cantilevers and solid gantries mixed in in various places.

East Coast headspans:

Les Be Having You by Feversham Media, on Flickr
London-area Great Western headspans:

165131+165114 on the 1628 Southall to Maidenhead by hassaanhc, on Flickr

Also note the use of both gantries and cantilevers in various places on both the
East Coast route:

East Coast Main Line Company 91110 by Ingy The Wingy, on Flickr

A Class 43, East Coast Main Line, January 2013 by Lynn Patrick, on Flickr

And London-area Great Western route:

Heathrow Connect . 360204 . Paddington . Thursday 21st-April-2011 . by AndrewHA's, on Flickr

Wharncliffe Viaduct from the south fields by IanVisits, on Flickr


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

The main issue with the East Cost electrification is that, because the way the wires are supported, bringing one down (which shouldn't happen anyway, but does) is more likely to bring all of them down, whereas in other areas (like the West Coast), though this probably still happens as frequently per train (does anyone have stats on this?), pulling down one wire tends to keep problems isolated to that line since the wires aren't quite as interconnected. The question is whether the extra construction cost is worth the ability to keep more lines open when wires come down. I've probably massively simplified the issue, but that's the basic gist of it - it depends on how you interpret it, really, since you could argue that the East Coast wasn't done on the cheap as such, but the benefits of the cheaper construction were weighed up against the drawbacks of the increased disruption and they decided it was worth the trade-off (or maybe they didn't even envisage the problems that have occurred). It's like any other trade-off between price and reliability, really.

I think the explanation is fine

 

[Shimbleshanks]

The question is whether the extra construction cost is worth the ability to keep more lines open when wires come down. It's like any other trade-off between price and reliability, really.

I for one am going to start avoiding the East Coast main line - I have so many problems with it over the years culminating in the Journey from Hell on Monday night.

I do hope the current electrification schemes aren't similarly being done on the cheap. A few more incidents like that could result in electrification actually driving passengers off the railway rather than increasing business - unless perhaps that's the idea?

 

[najaB]

I for one am going to start avoiding the East Coast main line - I have so many problems with it over the years culminating in the Journey from Hell on Monday night.

I do hope the current electrification schemes aren't similarly being done on the cheap. A few more incidents like that could result in electrification actually driving passengers off the railway rather than increasing business - unless perhaps that's the idea?

To provide a counterpoint: the only time I've had a delay due to the wires coming down was on the West Coast Main Line, which is often held up as the gold-standard electrification project.

 

[HSTEd]

The amount of times people bring up the ECML electrification project being rubbish you would think it falls over every five minutes.

This happens a few times a year - and the project cost less than half what the modern schemes cost per track kilometre, even adjusted for inflation.
I would rather have 2km of ECML wire than 1km of the 'Gold standard' WCML style stuff that attempts to use all the steel in the world.

 

[Aictos]

The amount of times people bring up the ECML electrification project being rubbish you would think it falls over every five minutes.

This happens a few times a year - and the project cost less than half what the modern schemes cost per track kilometre, even adjusted for inflation.
I would rather have 2km of ECML wire than 1km of the 'Gold standard' WCML style stuff that attempts to use all the steel in the world.

Not forgetting that the WCML and the ECML were both electrified in different ways, IIRC as a former WCML driver explained to me a few years ago if the OHL prevented one line being used on the WCML then you could easily use the other remaining lines as opposed to a OHL issue on the ECML meaning all other remaining lines remain out of use.

 

[HSTEd]

Not forgetting that the WCML and the ECML were both electrified in different ways, IIRC as a former WCML driver explained to me a few years ago if the OHL prevented one line being used on the WCML then you could easily use the other remaining lines as opposed to a OHL issue on the ECML meaning all other remaining lines remain out of use.

Yes, but this is not a common occurence.
The extra cost of the WCML equipment doesn't actually grant that much more capability in real life (instead of theoreticals) because incidents are rather rare.