Decarbonising the Western (Great Western Electrification - Part 2)

[tomuk]

It seems sensible to have a plan of electrification priorities, so that when funds and resources are available, you've already decided your priorities. Of course such plans can easily be overturned by events, or indeed political desires...

Having a plan is sensible but this reports just seems to repeat the national one but comes to worse conclusions as it takes a too parochial view. Looking at the Welsh part of the plan it seems pander to the long political desire to electrify the north wales coast and the bone of contention Cardiff to Swansea and then proffers various pseudo technical reasons to support the extant priorities.

If only NR got to determine where those funds and resources were allocated... Sadly, it's the Dft that decide if a scheme is worth it or not. Hopefully something similar to the scottish funding system comes in soon (AIUI 5 year budgets reviewed every 12 months but open to correction).

We tried that its called NR control periods but NR completely blew the budgets with GWEP so we have the current buried unflowing enhancements pipeline.

 

[Snow1964]

It seems sensible to have a plan of electrification priorities, so that when funds and resources are available, you've already decided your priorities. Of course such plans can easily be overturned by events, or indeed political desires...

I also suspect the area has a lot of relatively good returns as a lot of trains work partly over electrified routes. Clearly a business case is much easier if only need to electrify a part of a route to be able to operate electric trains throughout.

There is also an advantage that some of the masts are already up and clearance work done. I vaguely remember someone saying you could restart work on the Chippenham-Bathampton section really quickly (in theory, although mustering teams and equipment would be practical limit to startup speed).

Of course every politician knows that Wiltshire /Mendips / Gloustershire is an area of increasing population (otherwise why would boundary commission be adding constituencies) and unlike London commuter routes, it needs more or longer trains quickly. It must also be obvious that even if all the 769s go into service then still haven’t got enough diesel trains.

 

[anthony263]

Cardiff to Swansea electrification would help GWR in reducing their fuel bill plus also allows TFW to use Emus to run a Swansea to Cardiff swanline local service with reduced journey times too.

Could perhaps allow some freight to be hauled by electric locomotives

 

[Grecian 1998]

At least the big hills (Westbury-Warminster, Filton, Bromsgrove, Weymouth-Dorchester etc) would all be electrified.

Evershot bank on the Heart of Wessex is a pretty big hill - 2 miles at 1 in 51 soutbound. Don't see that being electrified for decades if ever.

 

[irish_rail]

This is going to be one of those politics questions, do they want to look good to electorate in marginals. So need some projects that are shovel ready to impress.

The Conservatives are likely to struggle to hold onto some of the gained northern seats, but more relevant is their potential loss in SW England to Lib Dems. Whole swathes of Devon, Somerset, Bath, bits of Wiltshire etc. Really need to be seen to be doing something in areas of phase 0 and phase 1, especially with the perception that levelling up means taxing the south more, and allowing SW to feel abandoned from projects

Slightly off topic but the Tories have almost certainly done themselves out of the next election because of the way they have ignored the entire South west by always seeming to look after the affluent south east whilst pandering to "hard done by" northerners through "levelling up". All the while, nothing for the south west and its going to bite them very very hard in 2024 methinks....

 

[Birmingham]

Slightly off topic but the Tories have almost certainly done themselves out of the next election because of the way they have ignored the entire South west by always seeming to look after the affluent south east whilst pandering to "hard done by" northerners through "levelling up". All the while, nothing for the south west and its going to bite them very very hard in 2024 methinks....

Yeah, similar picture in the midlands. Not south enough for them to care but not north enough for them to posture for political points.

 

[irish_rail]

Yeah, similar picture in the midlands. Not south enough for them to care but not north enough for them to posture for political points.

Agreed. They do seem to quite like the east Midlands mind , but the way whole swathes of the country have been ignored is disgusting and they will pay at the ballot box. Just a shame we have 2 years to wait.......

 

[WAO]

Electrification would have been a way of convincing the regions that levelling up was serious. Even finishing the Oxford wiring would have released 165's and some 5 car IET's for regional use. The snail-like progress of TPE/MML wiring with nothing for the other connurbations or our GWR "loose ends" merits an electoral "null pointes" for Grant Shapps ineffectiveness. Boris's replacement looks more interested in cuts than infrastructure.

WAO

 

[contrex]

Slightly off topic but the Tories have almost certainly done themselves out of the next election

We can but hope...

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

There was a project called the “Reading Independent Feeder (Bramley)” described in the final CP5 enhancement plan in early 2019, which would add an along track feeder from Bramley to the Reading area, for increased resilience. But it was described as an investigation, for ”indicative” implementation during CP6 - but I don’t think any work on the ground has ever started.

That project is under construction by National Grid currently

https://www.nationalgrid.com/electricity-transmission/infrastructure-projects/bramley-network-rail

To support Network Rail in the decarbonisation of its network, we are installing a 400/25kV Supergrid transformer at Bramley substation and connecting it to a new trackside substation at Holly Cross, via 1.4km of 25kV underground cabling.

Construction work will begin in April 2022 with completion expected in mid-2023.

Not sure why they need extra power at Reading currently mind you but maybe contracted years back as probably 18-24mth lead time.

From diagram looks like its a single circuit with provision for a 2nd circuit

 

[swt_passenger]

That project is under construction by National Grid currently

https://www.nationalgrid.com/electricity-transmission/infrastructure-projects/bramley-network-rail

Not sure why they need extra power at Reading currently mind you but maybe contracted years back as probably 18-24mth lead time.

From diagram looks like its a single circuit with provision for a 2nd circuit

Ah, that’s started since I was last along there. The reasons given in the enhancements plan for the independent feeder were to:
“Provide resilience to the GWML in the event of an isolation of the Didcot - Reading section of the route;
“Provide redundancy, such that maintenance can be carried out on the main line without isolating Reading depot;
“Provide additional capacity for future electrification schemes, e.g. Southcote Junction to Basingstoke.”
That suggests the supply being installed does the first two items, and will probably be in cable trunking to at least Southcote Jn, and the future provision will be for Basingstoke - Reading OHLE if ever installed?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Ah, that’s started since I was last along there. The reasons given in the enhancements plan for the independent feeder were to:
“Provide resilience to the GWML in the event of an isolation of the Didcot - Reading section of the route;
“Provide redundancy, such that maintenance can be carried out on the main line without isolating Reading depot;
“Provide additional capacity for future electrification schemes, e.g. Southcote Junction to Basingstoke.”
That suggests the supply being installed does the first two items, and will probably be in cable trunking to at least Southcote Jn, and the future provision will be for Basingstoke - Reading OHLE if ever installed?

Thanks for clarity but the first two requirements should have been considered as part of system design in the first place you would have thought or was it descoped to save cash when the project costs were spiralling out of control.

 

[kevin_roche]

Thanks for clarity but the first two requirements should have been considered as part of system design in the first place you would have thought or was it descoped to save cash when the project costs were spiralling out of control.

It was in the original plan. It was descoped when they ran out of cash.

 

[Snow1964]

Ah, that’s started since I was last along there. The reasons given in the enhancements plan for the independent feeder were to:
“Provide resilience to the GWML in the event of an isolation of the Didcot - Reading section of the route;
“Provide redundancy, such that maintenance can be carried out on the main line without isolating Reading depot;
“Provide additional capacity for future electrification schemes, e.g. Southcote Junction to Basingstoke.”
That suggests the supply being installed does the first two items, and will probably be in cable trunking to at least Southcote Jn, and the future provision will be for Basingstoke - Reading OHLE if ever installed?

If they are serious about phase 1 and converting Mendip stone trains to electric haulage, then anything double headed could easily be 10-12 Mw on full acceleration. (A pair of Stadler class 99s would be 2 x 6MW, or roughly same as 3 x 12car class 387)

The pared down schemes of yesteryear where some trains have to run on diesel due to lack of capacity aren’t really compatible with the green agenda.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

If they are serious about phase 1 and converting Mendip stone trains to electric haulage, then anything double headed could easily be 10-12 Mw on full acceleration. (A pair of Stadler class 99s would be 2 x 6MW, or roughly same as 3 x 12car class 387)

The pared down schemes of yesteryear where some trains have to run on diesel due to lack of capacity aren’t really compatible with the green agenda.

Heavy haul also has much higher constant demand on the distribution system than EMUs accelerating and decelerating between stops so one hopes they've stuck in a 40/80MVA transformer

 

[swt_passenger]

It was in the original plan. It was descoped when they ran out of cash.

In fact around the 2016 EDP updates (the oldest I have to hand), it was still undecided whether it was needed, they were still considering a separate supply from Didcot as an alternative. Also in 2016 it was already pushed into CP6, it would be interesting, (if anyone has the prior updates), to see if it ever had an earlier in service date…

 

[WAO]

A wiring plan was published by ABB, link below. (I hope that the link satisfies the mods.)
This shows the Reading ATFS and its extent of supply. The large switchgear and ATS enclosure appears to have been built already and partly in use - check Google Earth for Reading and trace Hodsoll Road northwards. I'm not sure of the progress of the link from Bramley substation transformer/s.

https://new.abb.com/news/detail/13013/abb-and-consortium-partner-win-145

 

[ac6000cw]

If they are serious about phase 1 and converting Mendip stone trains to electric haulage, then anything double headed could easily be 10-12 Mw on full acceleration. (A pair of Stadler class 99s would be 2 x 6MW, or roughly same as 3 x 12car class 387)

But why would you need to double head them when a single class 59 has handled 4000+ tonne trains for many years (and I fully expect the class 99 to be even more capable machines)?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

But why would you need to double head them when a single class 59 has handled 4000+ tonne trains for many years (and I fully expect the class 99 to be even more capable machines)?

If you wanted to reduce SRTs for the trains to release capacity?

 

[ac6000cw]

If you wanted to reduce SRTs for the trains to release capacity?

Note that the 'power at rail' of a class 99 on electric should be nearly three times that of a class 59 anyway (6000 kW versus around 2200 kW), so that will have a big impact on maintaining acceleration and speed on hills - a 99 should be able to maintain its maximum (adhesion limited) tractive effort up to 30-35 mph.

What's the maximum speed allowed for loaded stone trains on the B&H?

 

[ABB125]

Note that the 'power at rail' of a class 99 on electric should be nearly three times that of a class 59 anyway (6000 kW versus around 2200 kW), so that will have a big impact on maintaining acceleration and speed on hills - a 99 should be able to maintain its maximum (adhesion limited) tractive effort up to 30-35 mph.

What's the maximum speed allowed for loaded stone trains on the B&H?

Some of them run as class 7 so limited to 45mph. Some are class 6 (60mph) though. I think the speeds depend on the type of wagon being used rather than weight, but I'm happy to be corrected.

 

[Snow1964]

Some of them run as class 7 so limited to 45mph. Some are class 6 (60mph) though. I think the speeds depend on the type of wagon being used rather than weight, but I'm happy to be corrected.

The vast majority of stone trains via Westbury area are 60mph, but some are 45mph. I think the 45mph ones tend to be on Berks and Hants and not the wide variety of other destinations

The 02:18 (Mondays) Wheatley quarry - Theale is timed as 4200 tonnes at 60mph. I am guessing you need lot of power to get that weight to 60mph.

 

[Elecman]

Small point of order:
According to the SA, the Western/Central border on the Birmingham-Bristol line is now at MP 77.40, which is at Bredon just north of Ashchurch.
This is now the interface between West Midlands and Gloucester signalling control areas.
The Worcester loop (Stoke Works-Droitwich-Worcester-Norton Jn) is still Western.

The Worcester loop is Central Route not Western

 

[JacobWrenn]

I have made a FOI request to receive the comparable decarbonisation strategy document for the Southern region should anyone be interested on this thread https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/network-rail-southern-region-decarbonisation-strategy.237996/.

 

[cslusarc]

Is there a Regional Traction Decarbonisation Strategy for the other regions?

 

[59CosG95]

Is there a Regional Traction Decarbonisation Strategy for the other regions?

Possibly, though I'm sure such strategies will only be available through FoI requests.

 

[Trainbike46]

There are no 'standard' EMUs suitable for Marlow unfortunately. Unless you managed to get permission to do 3rd rail and got it fitted before the 466s get sent off to Sims at Newport.

Replying here as off topic in original thread.

Is the issue the reverse at bourne end preventing a 4-car 387 from running in there? If not what is?

If it wasn't obvious, I was suggesting either building new battery EMUs that charge at the mainline end, these could then charge when at the mainline end. As new builds they could be build to fit the lines.

The alternative would be to electrify the thames valley branches and use existing 4-car EMUS (probably 387s) on them, but obviously this woould require more infrastructure work in electrification and possibly other works, such as extending bourne end to allow the 4 car 387 to reverse towards Marlow. New EMUs would be an option, but would further add to cost and mean more fleet types than just using the 387s.

The main advantage of the first option is that it could be quickly implemented and would reduce diesel use east of reading. In addition, the displaced units could be used further west. The main disadvantage is that it would still need a dedicated fleet.

The main advantage of the second option is that it would reduce the number of train types east of reading, increase capacity and reduce operational costs in the long term. It would require more infrastructure investment in the short term though.

 

[dciuk]

Replying here as off topic in original thread.

Is the issue the reverse at bourne end preventing a 4-car 387 from running in there? If not what is?

If it wasn't obvious, I was suggesting either building new battery EMUs that charge at the mainline end, these could then charge when at the mainline end. As new builds they could be build to fit the lines.

The alternative would be to electrify the thames valley branches and use existing 4-car EMUS (probably 387s) on them, but obviously this woould require more infrastructure work in electrification and possibly other works, such as extending bourne end to allow the 4 car 387 to reverse towards Marlow. New EMUs would be an option, but would further add to cost and mean more fleet types than just using the 387s.

The main advantage of the first option is that it could be quickly implemented and would reduce diesel use east of reading. In addition, the displaced units could be used further west. The main disadvantage is that it would still need a dedicated fleet.

The main advantage of the second option is that it would reduce the number of train types east of reading, increase capacity and reduce operational costs in the long term. It would require more infrastructure investment in the short term though.

Could 1 or 2 center cars be removed from a 387 to make it fit? Obviously it would create a microfleet of smaller units, but at least they would be the same mechanically and if this were to happen could the removed cars be added to 4 car units to either make some 8 car units or some 5 car units?

 

[JonathanH]

Could 1 or 2 center cars be removed from a 387 to make it fit?

Not without making substantial changes to put a pantograph on one of the driving cars. Easier to put a 230 on the route.

 

[Mikey C]

It would be a waste of a 387 to put it on such a slow and short route as Marlow anyway