Cladding for EWI should have satisfied BBE Standards (British Board Agrement) standards
We need a review process of why we can't pursue third rail.
-
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!
Are there any ‘Easy Win’ electrification projects that are worth looking at?
- Thread starter WAO
- Start date
- Status
Cladding for EWI should have satisfied BBE Standards (British Board Agrement) standards
We need a review process of why we can't pursue third rail.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Filton-Henbury should be an easy win for when (possibly if) the MetreWest scheme reopens that line for passenger. It does have a short tunnel, one that could possibly be single-tracked given the large reduction in freight on that line since coal import traffic stopped. This is assuming that by the time they get round to it they will have wired Parkway to BTM.
Annetts key
Established Member
Hallen Marsh Junction to Filton West Junction, Originally built as a double track line. Singled in 1970 (or thereabouts). Then doubled again during 1992 - 1993 for the coal traffic at great expense. Which (apart from when the signallers were on strike) never got close to the capacity that the railway and hopper system was designed for. And now you want to spend more money to single part of it as part of electrification!
I don’t think that would be an easy win, as someone will likely say that for that short section (Henbury to Filton Junction) the cost effective solution is for the train to run on battery power.
I’m not against having that line fitted with OHL. I just can’t see any hope of any money being made available to do it anytime soon.
Singling the section through the (short) tunnel may be more cost effective than lowering the trackbed should there not be sufficient clearance to wire both tracks. It’s a solution that’s been employed elsewhere. There is already a single section immediately after Filton West so it could be simple just to extend that by severing the second track and slewing the remaining one at the tunnel. They could probably get away with taking the second track out of use now anyway, save a few quid on maintenance.
That argument could be used for any short stretch, which would render this thread topic pointless! Why go to the expense and extra weight of a dual mode train when a straight electric service could operate throughout with under 5km of added wires. Having said that, I think they are proposing to run Henbury through to Portishead as one service, and since that line won’t be wired anytime soon (lots of tunnels and environmental impact) then I suspect some kind of dual mode will be the result.
I’d agree with this, when they can’t even do parkway to Temple Meads this won’t be a priority. Having electric power up Filton Bank seems a no-brainier, not sure quite why it hasn’t been done.
Full electrification makes most sense for metro-type lines in urban/suburban areas like this, absolutely. Batteries are more for branch extensions in the outer commuter range.
Believe it needed the Bristol TM remodelling to be completed first, so that they didn't have to rip the gantries out straight away.
But TM has now been remodelled and there's no sign of electrification either up Filton Bank or to Bath and Chippenham.
Yes, in between hitting pause and the remodelling being completed some financial potholes have appeared....
Annetts key
Established Member
That’s your view. I disagree. Have a look at this diagram:
As well as the 302 yard tunnel, you want to single the line through where the new North Filton station is going to be built. The plans for this station show the existing double line railway. It would be unwise to remove the ability of one train to pass another at this point. Especially as there are still some freight trains that use this line.
Incidentally, this line was only opened on 9 May 1910. So in railway terms, it’s relatively new compared to all the other railways in the Bristol area (excluding small cut-offs and the Portbury line that joins to the
Portishead line).
I can’t remember how much clearance there is in this tunnel. But at only 302 yards, it’s a lot, lot shorter than Box Tunnel or Chipping Sodbury Tunnel. Also, the railway should have relatively modern records of this tunnel, as when the line was redoubled, extensive work was done to the track bed through the tunnel. And further work has been done since.
I thought Didcot-Oxford was waiting for decisions to be made on capacity improvements, and possibly grade separation of Didcot East junction?
Does Filton bank achieve much unless the Welsh are happy for the Portsmouth and West Country services to stop in Bristol, with an electric Bristol-Cardiff shuttle?
Re suggestions of BEMUs and OHLE islands for Chiltern and Snow Hill would it be cheaper to wire the countryside first and use the batteries for the tricky urban bits with lots of bridges and tunnels?
How much planning and bridge work was done for Westbury (from Newbury and Thingley)? I know its a long way but most of it is open country.
Converting a few DMUs doesn't make great telly, but converting loud, smoky freight trains to electric is something nice for the PM to stand in front of.
How do the jumbo trains work - would you need to electrify to the quarries or have diesel shuttles feeding a Westbury-Acton shuttle?
It is of course in the South so will get a load of moaning, but if it speeds up Cornwall trains that is a bit of levelling up.
Does Filton bank achieve much unless the Welsh are happy for the Portsmouth and West Country services to stop in Bristol, with an electric Bristol-Cardiff shuttle?
Re suggestions of BEMUs and OHLE islands for Chiltern and Snow Hill would it be cheaper to wire the countryside first and use the batteries for the tricky urban bits with lots of bridges and tunnels?
How much planning and bridge work was done for Westbury (from Newbury and Thingley)? I know its a long way but most of it is open country.
Converting a few DMUs doesn't make great telly, but converting loud, smoky freight trains to electric is something nice for the PM to stand in front of.
How do the jumbo trains work - would you need to electrify to the quarries or have diesel shuttles feeding a Westbury-Acton shuttle?
It is of course in the South so will get a load of moaning, but if it speeds up Cornwall trains that is a bit of levelling up.
Doesn't look as though the Yanks have any inhibitions: see https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...al-way-beneath-grand-central-terminal.242758/
Has Morecambe been mentioned?
Only a couple of miles of single track (could even bin the other one in the process).
Replace Heysham with a direct bus from Lancaster. Stop sending the Leeds trains via Morecambe. Just a simple electric shuttle.
Get someone else to fund a longer platform and charters or long distance services could go in for the Eden project.
Only a couple of miles of single track (could even bin the other one in the process).
Replace Heysham with a direct bus from Lancaster. Stop sending the Leeds trains via Morecambe. Just a simple electric shuttle.
Get someone else to fund a longer platform and charters or long distance services could go in for the Eden project.
For a line entirely in a tunnel. We didn't have any problem installing third rail in very similar circumstances about 15 years ago on the ELL extension which was entirely elevated or underground either.
America can third-rail the rare newly built passenger line, but conversely commuter rail is usually entirely unelectrified, and even in places like New York where parts are electrified, this tends to end about fifty miles out so they still rely heavily on diesel locomotives, and intercity OHLE electrification is actively opposed by the freight railroads that own the tracks.
Lancaster Morecambe isn't busy enough to justify an electric service, Apart from the Schoolie trains of a morning and evening, you could fit all the passengers into a couple of bays of four on a 153...
There are far more busier lines in the North West that should be done. For example, as already metioned Oxenholme-Windermere, then there's Barrow-Carnforth, Liverpool-Manchester Oxford Road via Warrington Central and Manchester-Atherton-Southport. Even Blackpool South to Colne, and if you are doing that, then you may as well do Victoria- Clitheroe and when you've done that do Copy Pit towards Leeds and Todmorden to Manchester Victoria.
GRALISTAIR
Established Member
I agree.
But this is about easy wins. Two miles is about as easy as it gets surely, and if its not heavily used it can be done in a blockade.
Gets rid of a diesel shuttle (I assume its idling in the station all the time it isnt running??), gets rid of a diesel running up there and back. Allows electric trips into the Eden project.
However admittedly if it is rather empty then the issue of not having 2 car electrics will make that look wasteful.
Morecambe is perfect for Battery Trains. Fit a fast charge in the bay at Lancaster and at Morecambe, you have 10 mins turnround at either end to charge up for 10 mins runtime, with the short bit of wires on the WCML assisting.
The Heysham freight link is going to stay open for the Nuclear Power Plant and the Heysham branch doesn't really cost anything on top of that and other posters have reported it is used.
A typical charter is Top/Tail Load 11 or 260m long, which means you'd need to extend the platform about to the next overbridge, which I suspect isn't wide enough to take the flare of the tracks for the island. Also you'll struggle to tank and service the half of the set furthest from the buffers. Charters could call at Lancaster to serve Morecambe without needing to fiddle with the Morecambe platforms for 1 train a year.
By all accounts the Leeds trains are popular for travel to Morecambe beachgoers, so getting rid of them doesn't really help.
This is only an easy win if you don't touch the track layout, as then your only problem is Bare Lane LX. If you are extending platforms or changing tracks then it suddenly becomes a lot more expensive due to the resignalling involved.
Would a fast charge battery train be efficient in Morecambe, unless you are running a mini fleet of them out of Preston for Morecambe/Windermere/Ormskirk/Colne/Blackpool South? Otherwise you will need a spare etc for one service.
I wasn't necessarily thinking steam charters - more extending a 390/807 electric in, or running specials in from Liverpool/Manchester. I would plan on getting someone else to pay for a platform extension as part of the travel plan for Eden North (and I think the nearest bridge had a number of lines through it back in the day?).
How much signalling is there - isnt it effectively two sidings from the join and split at Bare Lane?
I wasn't necessarily thinking steam charters - more extending a 390/807 electric in, or running specials in from Liverpool/Manchester. I would plan on getting someone else to pay for a platform extension as part of the travel plan for Eden North (and I think the nearest bridge had a number of lines through it back in the day?).
How much signalling is there - isnt it effectively two sidings from the join and split at Bare Lane?
The answer to that is to fit batteries to a significant part of your EMU fleet and rotate the Morecambe units through.
Normal TOCs don't really have the spares to do that. Avanti might extend 1tpd each way on Saturdays but I would be surprised if they did.
Who? No business is going to pay that cost as they won't see the ROI. An extension to 6 cars (if it's not already that long) would make sense to allow Northern to double up units on busy days but not for an intercity length.
At the moment there's no signalling beyond Bare Lane, the two running lines are independent from there. However the Heysham Connection has a train staff instrument and Ground frame at Morecambe. But modern standards would probably not allow such a simple setup today, so if you are changing things like points positions or binning off one of the single lines then you'll trigger signalling changes.
Any changes to the layout are best left until Preston PSB area goes over to ETCS in a couple of Control Periods.
Personally I am a bit averse to building and lugging around batteries unless they are really necessary.
I was thinking in terms of local authorities and the myriad of grants they can try to get. That area is also a bit inefficiently laid out so maybe as part of a redevelopment
That is fair comment. I don't think you could extend the current platform beyond 6x195 without track changes. If you redeveloped you might get a 200m plus platform on the road side of the track without moving any track.
Even without track changes you would only need to electrify a single line - dont even have to do the north curve. No idea if you would have to resignal anyway for immunisation reasons.
I guess the Heysham branch will be tied to the nuclear PS future. If it shuts and isnt replaced there then presumably the reason for the branch will disappear after a few years.
Really there's no particular reason to be. I'd say batteries capable of about 10 miles or so should be standard on EMUs for emergency use, and the Morecambe Branch is 2 miles long.
You'll really struggle to get a LA grant to extend platforms. The main grants are available for step-free access.
If you want additional trains you need both lines, so the regular service uses the northern track and the extras use the southern. FWIW, not doing the North Curve would be penny wise and pound foolish, given it could probably be done in 1 tension length. A 150m platform (6x25m cars) would fit in quite comfortably on the existing platform. I'm guessing the car park spaces you'd need to take out would be more valuable than a 200+m platform.
If you want extras, given the way the signalling set up is, I'd just use SDO. As there's no signal to fit behind, an overlength train can just poke out the end. As long as the driver can get to the far cab through the train you don't even need a walking route. As It's a terminus the pressure on dwell times wouldn't be so intense (and it's unlikely the train would be 100% full at Morecambe), although you wouldn't be able to run Double Units with no gangway unless you also did the 6-car extensions.
If the power station shuts then I would imagine the branch will also shut and a Shuttle bus put on from Lancaster. But that's a way in the future.
I was thinking in terms of all the various levelling up, town deals etc etc. Stupid number of different pots these days. But it certainly wouldn't be a given.
I did ponder that. I was thinking more of the additional train being from a TOC and replacing the shuttle, but that might be an issue with turnaround times maybe.
The principle was that we were looking for easy wins. In absolute terms is there anything quicker and cheaper (for rail) that you can complete on time and budget, stick a politician in front of, and prove electrification can be done?
Windermere.
Maybe rose hill marple. But Windermere is better
Just what I was going to say. Probably the only answer to the question if 3rd rail is verboten.
There’s already charging equipment at Lancaster - it’s in the air at 25kV!
That needs doing more, but is it really quicker and cheaper? Quite a few bridges, four stations, and some awkward level crossings aren't there?
The one that really grates is London Gateway - why wasn't it a condition of the original port!!?!!
I assume there are issues around needing a shunter under the gantries. Are there now complications around who would pay and who benefits - who owns the branch?
Electric freight is a really awkward one. Logically you would ban diesels through north London.....but we don't want to price freight off rail.
Are there any issues with sitting stationary and drawing a load off the overhead to charge the batteries?
Nope.
- Status