• 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!

Windermere line electrification progress

Status
Not open for further replies.

59CosG95

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2013
Messages
6,476
Location
Between Peterborough & Bedlington
Amid all the Brexit chaos in Parliament yesterday, there was a debate on electrifying the Lakes Line.

Tim Farron, MP for Westmorland & Lonsdale (the constituency through which the Lakes Line runs) has given it his support.

https://twitter.com/Rail_Elec/status/1169280312599298053?s=19
Campaign to Electrify Britain's Railway‏ said:
We're in Parliament today to discuss something we can all unite behind.
Campaign to Electrify Britain's Railway‏ said:
Electrification on the Lakes Line. Increasing capacity, reducing traffic and pollution in the Lake District.
Campaign to Electrify Britain's Railway‏ said:
Really pleased to discuss enabling affordable electrification on the Lakes Line, with @ timfarron - and a rolling programme of electrification
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham

deltic08

On Moderation
Joined
26 Aug 2013
Messages
2,499
Location
Ripon
Amid all the Brexit chaos in Parliament yesterday, there was a debate on electrifying the Lakes Line. https://twitter.com/Rail_Elec/status/1169280312599298053?s=19
Tim Farron, MP for Westmorland & Lonsdale (the constituency through which the Lakes Line runs) has given it his support.
About time. I hope he succeeded in convincing the minister.

It would only cost £15m or thereabouts and only take 3 months if the branch was closed and bustituted.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,555
Location
Mold, Clwyd
One of the issues with the Lakes line is that the western half (5 miles) is inside the Lake District National Park.
Planning approval for any changes to the infrastructure might be difficult to get in these environmentally-sensitive times.
This was alluded to by Chris Grayling in his decision to cancel the scheme.
Of course we now have 80 miles of wired route from Manchester Airport to Oxenholme being run by DMUs, just so they can spend the final 10 miles on the unwired Windermere branch.
The bi-mode solution once proffered instead of electrification seems to have evaporated.
 

class26

Member
Joined
4 May 2011
Messages
1,123
One of the issues with the Lakes line is that the western half (5 miles) is inside the Lake District National Park.
Planning approval for any changes to the infrastructure might be difficult to get in these environmentally-sensitive times.
This was alluded to by Chris Grayling in his decision to cancel the scheme.
Of course we now have 80 miles of wired route from Manchester Airport to Oxenholme being run by DMUs, just so they can spend the final 10 miles on the unwired Windermere branch.
The bi-mode solution once proffered instead of electrification seems to have evaporated.

This attitude from local authorities (planning permission) is totally nuts. keeping diesel will aid climate change which will destroy the national park much more than a the wires !
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,419
Presumably the linespeed and traffic is low enough for fairly subtle metalwork. Subtle enough less pollution pumped into the park outweighs minor visual intrusion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mollman

Established Member
Joined
21 Sep 2016
Messages
1,211
Presumably the linespeed and traffic is low enough for fairly subtle metalwork. Subtle enough less pollution pumped into the park outweighs minor visual intrusion.

I seem to recall someone proposed using wood instead of metal poles.
 

Joseph_Locke

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2012
Messages
1,878
Location
Within earshot of trains passing the one and half

Bertie the bus

Established Member
Joined
15 Aug 2014
Messages
2,781
Who are Campaign to Electrify Britain's Railway? A small group of rail enthusiasts?
Why would they want to discuss the scheme with Tim Farron? His views on it are already very well known but he has about as much influence as I do when it come to government spending.
 

59CosG95

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2013
Messages
6,476
Location
Between Peterborough & Bedlington
Who are Campaign to Electrify Britain's Railway? A small group of rail enthusiasts?
Why would they want to discuss the scheme with Tim Farron? His views on it are already very well known but he has about as much influence as I do when it come to government spending.
Key industry players in the Overhead Live Equipment sector of rail, amongst other industry players in favour of electric over diesel traction.

I was fortunate enough to attend their 'town hall' meeting at the University of Birmingham (my alma mater) back in April, and a number of prominent industry speakers were there (David Shirres of The Rail Engineer among them).
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
7,806
Location
Dalton GA USA & Preston Lancs
Who are Campaign to Electrify Britain's Railway? A small group of rail enthusiasts?
Why would they want to discuss the scheme with Tim Farron? His views on it are already very well known but he has about as much influence as I do when it come to government spending.

https://www.railwayelectrification.org/

I am also writing a Wikipedia article with references etc. I was rejected but I am editing heavily to improve and be accepted. Feel free to improve please

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Campaign_to_Electrify_Britain’s_Railways
 
Last edited:

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,433
Location
Yorkshire
Last edited:

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,072
One of the issues with the Lakes line is that the western half (5 miles) is inside the Lake District National Park.
It is NOT an issue
This was alluded to by Chris Grayling in his decision to cancel the scheme.
Of course we now have 80 miles of wired route from Manchester Airport to Oxenholme being run by DMUs, just so they can spend the final 10 miles on the unwired Windermere branch.
The bi-mode solution once proffered instead of electrification seems to have evaporated.
I haven't seen any evidence yet that the national park might try to obstruct electrification, in fact https://www.thecumbrialep.co.uk/wp-...y-of-Lake-District-line-rail-improvements.pdf says
The Lake District National Park Authority, as members of the LEP board, are supportive of the electrification of the Lakes Line. They have confirmed that electrification is wholly consistent with the management plan for the National Park and World Heritage Site and would make a significant and positive contribution to supporting the regional economy and enabling low carbon, sustainable transport.
and
Cumbria LEP is asking the Secretary of State for Transport to engage in further discussions as soon as possible and look at further development opportunities.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Grumpy

Member
Joined
8 Nov 2010
Messages
1,064
https://www.mottmac.com/releases/mo...innovative-integrated-overhead-line-structure

The last estimate for electrification was quite a bit more than £15m, and you'd put the loop in the middle (unless you were going to re-create the connection from the Down Main onto the Branch, north Oxenholme, to allow trains to pass there).
Is that "quite a bit more than £15m" for putting the wire above the existing track, with a further add-on for the loop/re-created connection, or add-on included?
I suspect many of us outsiders are confused by the costs of electrifying. The RIA cost challenge report published earlier this year suggested a cost of £750k-£1m per single track kilometre. I believe the branch is approx. 16stk which equates to a cost of £12m-£16m. As suggested up thread people seem to expect that the physical features of the branch should make it a relatively cheap scheme. No coalfields, former double track, potential for 7 day access etc
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
7,806
Location
Dalton GA USA & Preston Lancs
The potential for 7 day access especially over say xmas-new year but well clear of main tourism season should make it far easier than Manchester to Preston for example.
 
Joined
7 Feb 2008
Messages
285
It is NOT an issue

I haven't seen any evidence yet that the national park might try to obstruct electrification, in fact https://www.thecumbrialep.co.uk/wp-...y-of-Lake-District-line-rail-improvements.pdf says
and
Sorry, the mods (or an automated system) have Bowdlerised the discussion above which is why it doesn't really make sense now. The comments that I said were cr*p and my replies have disappeared. I said that a rail industry or government apologist was trotting out rubbish to justify not developing the scheme - and blaming others who were completely innocent. It's a bit like the repeated assertions that wiring Standedge tunnel would be "difficult."
Well said.
It is simple common sense to electrify it. That, however, is in very short supply at the DfT.
 

td97

Established Member
Joined
26 Jul 2017
Messages
1,292
Environmental concerns definitely aren't a problem. Every project, National Park locality or not, has in depth and detailed environmental studies and reviews etc., which always aim to completely minimise any distruption to the environment. More comprehensive than most on here could imagine.
Even the local MP, who whinged beyond belief when there were no train services in the aftermath of the May 2018 TT change, advocates the electrification which clearly brings about temporary distruption/closures.
Time will tell. Nothing electrification-related has happened on the ground in the North for almost a year now (apart from renewals). Although Windermere isn't next (to the best of my knowledge).
 

fulmar

Member
Joined
12 Feb 2016
Messages
82
Some track realignment would be required. There are three locations where the track passes through one side of an arch overbridge where there is insufficient clearance for the wires. Adding a loop would also significantly increase the complexity of the signalling system.
 

bluenoxid

Established Member
Joined
9 Feb 2008
Messages
2,459
Has anyone stated that they want to operate a second train on the line
 

twpsaesneg

Member
Joined
21 Jul 2009
Messages
417
Design started on this about 2 years ago but was stopped again almost immediately. At that time the scheme was to allow "passive provision" for a passing loop near but not at Burneside if memory serves. There was some upgrade work required to one of the crossings too.
 

alangla

Member
Joined
11 Apr 2018
Messages
1,178
Location
Glasgow
As suggested up thread people seem to expect that the physical features of the branch should make it a relatively cheap scheme. No coalfields, former double track, potential for 7 day access etc

In previous discussions, the big feature that reduces costs is that it could be end-fed from the OHLE at Oxenholme with no feeder station required. I’m still surprised it wasn’t done in the 1970s when the WCML was wired, similar to how North Berwick was done with the ECML electrification
 

Steamysandy

Member
Joined
29 Jan 2018
Messages
250
Location
Longniddry
In previous discussions, the big feature that reduces costs is that it could be end-fed from the OHLE at Oxenholme with no feeder station required. I’m still surprised it wasn’t done in the 1970s when the WCML was wired, similar to how North Berwick was done with the ECML electrification
The 1970s Electrification was to do only what was necessary for the WCML, and no more. Done properly, the entire Blackpool - Manchester - Bolton - Preston and the Liverpool lines should have been done at that time - not nearly 50 years later!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
The potential for 7 day access especially over say xmas-new year but well clear of main tourism season should make it far easier than Manchester to Preston for example.

Yes, strikes me as an 'obvious' candidate for a blockade in a quiet period of the year to do in a big bang.

In previous discussions, the big feature that reduces costs is that it could be end-fed from the OHLE at Oxenholme with no feeder station required. I’m still surprised it wasn’t done in the 1970s when the WCML was wired, similar to how North Berwick was done with the ECML electrification

Presumably there wasn't much point without Manchester, Liverpool etc. being done, unless you wanted a lonely no-mates EMU just for the purposes of working the branch shuttle. Better to keep a common pool of DMUs with Barrow, Morecambe, etc.
 

Elecman

Established Member
Joined
31 Dec 2013
Messages
2,880
Location
Lancashire
In previous discussions, the big feature that reduces costs is that it could be end-fed from the OHLE at Oxenholme with no feeder station required. I’m still surprised it wasn’t done in the 1970s when the WCML was wired, similar to how North Berwick was done with the ECML electrification

Oxenholme ATFS is a Traction Feeder station so very little voltage drop to feed the Windermere Branch
 

Class 170101

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
7,909
Oxenholme ATFS is a Traction Feeder station so very little voltage drop to feed the Windermere Branch

Presumably there is spare capacity at said feeder station to cover electric services on the branch?
 

alangla

Member
Joined
11 Apr 2018
Messages
1,178
Location
Glasgow
A 4 car 350 type unit at Windermere branch speeds isn’t likely to tax an overhead feeder sized for 92s or 2x86/90 on heavy container trains or multiple Pendolini doing standing starts from Oxenholme station
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,072
Then why did the SoS use it as one of the reasons (or benefits) for cancelling the scheme and using bi-modes?
As somebody once said "Well, he would say that, wouldn't he?"
Has he produced (or has anyone else got) any evidence to back up the claim? Even today I'm not aware that politicians are noted for their truthfulness! Presumably you didn't read https://www.thecumbrialep.co.uk/wp-...y-of-Lake-District-line-rail-improvements.pdf which says
“The Lake District National Park Authority, as members of the LEP board, are supportive of the electrification of the Lakes Line. They have confirmed that electrification is wholly consistent with the management plan for the National Park and World Heritage Site and would make a significant and positive contribution to supporting the regional economy and enabling low carbon, sustainable transport.
“The electrification upgrades which were promised for this line would have made a huge difference to achieving these goals, so we are seeking a commitment from Government to look into the matter again, together with the partnership, in much more detail.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top