MML Electrification - what hope of further routes being added going forward?

[Peter Sarf]

Worth remembering that most of the wires Cross Country trains run under are currently at electrical capacity and would be unable to take anymore trains (especially brand new 125mph sets) without upgrades to the supply and feeding equipment probably including new grid connections. The most constrained sites are around the north of the ECML and the lines through Birmingham.

This makes me wonder. Does the issue of power supplies needing upgrading on OHLE arise in other countries ?.

 

[Class 317]

Battery bi mode or trimode units make the case for further electrification stronger. The benefits of each scheme will cover a much wider area leading to higher benefits to cost ratio.

 

[GraphitProjekt]

This makes me wonder. Does the issue of power supplies needing upgrading on OHLE arise in other countries ?.

I don't really know to be honest. Whenever new(er) trains come along they typically demand more power than their predecessors so I'm sure lots of PSUs happen on elsewhere. But continental Europe is pretty big on electric freight so installations must be beefier from the outset. BR in the 1980s had a tendency to expect a lot out of feeder stations and typically new grid connections were added in the late 1990s and early 2000s to make supplies more secure. This happened a lot on the southern ECML and WAML+branches. To an extent, older trains were more accepting of lower voltages than modern equipment that uses more electronic components.

 

[deltic08]

Out of the entire route, the section least likely to be electrified is Wigston-Syston, given the clearances. Derby to Sheffield will get done, simply because of the high traffic density, the lack of other electrification in the region, therefore enabling battery trains on local routes and the potential for HS2 to use the route eventually from the Birmingham-Derby line if that is also electrified. (I understand capacity constraints make that difficult). The only way in which I see Wigston-Syston electrified is if Felixstowe-Nuneaton is electrified, which is unlikely to happen in the short to medium term.

I thought Wigston-Syston was already being pegged out for piling?

With Cross Country I wonder if the critical mass of already approved/existing electrification is any where near there yet ?.
The worst/longest hurdles are the ends of the NE-SW route such as beyond Bristol and beyond the Central Lowlands of Scotland. Their existence makes filling in Derby to Birmingham, Sheffield to Leeds/Doncaster and worse still Bromsgrove (Birmingham) to Filton (Bristol) perhaps seem less attractive. Especially if it is felt too tenuous to order new trains that are Bi-Mode for a route with too little electrified sections.

It depends if Cross Country continues operating north of Edinburgh. By the time new trains are needed in 2040ish, I hope Scotrail have electrified the Fife Circle as far as Thornton Junction and Perth-Dundee-Aberdeen. That leaves Thornton Junction-Dundee unelectrified. Still capable with battery bimodes.
Derby -Sheffield should be wired by then and possibly Derby-Birmingham leaving Moorthorpe/Doncaster-Sheffield unelectrified.
Bromsgrove electrification should be extended to Worcester Shrub Hill and Malvern for Birmingham-Hereford BEMU commuter trains, Stoke Works junction to Standish Junction for long distance XC and Nottingham-Cardiff trains leaving only Gloucester-Severn Tunnel Junction unelectrified and Standish Junction to Yate unelectrified for Malvern-Gloucester-Bristol BEMUs and XC trains if Bristol Parkway to Temple Meads is completed. Aberdeen-Bristol trains could become battery bimodes with anything beyond Bristol being diesel bimodes. I would have thought Aberdeen to Bristol is long enough to operate battery bimodes by the time XC needs new trains. Even Manchester-Bournemouth could become battery bimodes or trimodes when Didcot-Oxford and Reading-Basingstoke are wired leaving only Coventry-Oxford unelectrified.
Paddington-Cheltenham trains will only be without OHLE between Swindon and Standish Junction therefore needing a new build of battery bimodes for GWR cascading all 800/0s to XC or Scotrail.

Worth remembering that most of the wires Cross Country trains run under are currently at electrical capacity and would be unable to take anymore trains (especially brand new 125mph sets) without upgrades to the supply and feeding equipment probably including new grid connections. The most constrained sites are around the north of the ECML and the lines through Birmingham.

Isn't Marshall Meadows due on stream soon?
Derby-Birmingham would have its own supply.

 

[I'm here now]

Self rescue - that would also give more resilience at times of power supply failure or in 3rd rail land when someone "trespasses" on the track.

Electrification islands may not be that useful. The electrification island needs to be long enough and durable enough to charge the batteries. It is not just about battery range but also about how long it takes to re-charge the battery. So a 150 km section with 50 km in the middle electrified might not work. Certainly needs fast charging which is harder on the batteries and surrounding electricity supply. I wonder how Bristol to Penzance could shape up (probably mainly electric to Plymouth for a start).

Where to locate electrification islands ?.
One idea would be where there is a decent sized town with local services into/out-of it.
Perhaps Exeter and any nearby branches for example.
Being 25kV AC an island would not be small given that the grid feeder would be able to supply a large area and its significant cost is important it will not be justified for short sections.

I think in an ideal world we would continue electrifying main lines until we reach the point where only sub 50 km bits remain between main lines. I am thinking of either side of the MML (Midland Main Line).

The outer reaches of the UK are a different thing.
GW electrified to Swansea would make battery trains for services local to Swansea possible (except we will be relying on cooperation between TfW and DfT).
GW electrified SW beyond Bristol is a big step.
Aberdeen and Inverness might stand more chance !.

In the heart of the UK.
GW to Oxford and beyond might stand more chance as it gets tantalisingly close to Birmingham especially if it benefits the Chiltern route.


I do think that high speed lines should avoid electrification gaps so that changeovers are not an issue.

For other routes it would be nice to get to the point that only batteries are required to make Bi-Mode. Otherwise longer gaps will make diesel tempting. I am thinking diesel will be heavier, messier (in the train) and less ecological.

There’s not too many structures you’d need to modify from Plymouth onwards (lowering track in tunnels?) and it would be useful for battery charging of the branches.

 

[Zomboid]

This makes me wonder. Does the issue of power supplies needing upgrading on OHLE arise in other countries ?.

Obviously it does, grid feeds have a capacity, and if load increases then that might be exceeded.
Maybe it happens less now in countries where they have more electrification and so there's less scope to increase the load, but it'll still happen.

The slam door replacement in Southern replaced electric trains with other electric trains and still significantly increased the electrical load, and there's nothing special about British electric trains that make that kind of thing unique to this island.

 

[Trainbike46]

This makes me wonder. Does the issue of power supplies needing upgrading on OHLE arise in other countries ?.

Absolutely.

For example, a few years ago in the Netherlands a frequency increase was delayed as the OHLE could not handle the extra trains, so the power supply had to be upgraded first.

 

[Brubulus]

The ECML is having it's power supply upgraded anyway so bi modes on XC are entirely viable, and would ensure the new infrastructure is properly used.

 

[edwin_m]

Need to consider also that an electric train running and charging batteries will use more power, which may be a factor when the supply is a bit marginal.

 

[zwk500]

Need to consider also that an electric train running and charging batteries will use more power, which may be a factor when the supply is a bit marginal.

That can also be mitigated with the on-board power management system or geofencing, if required.

 

[GraphitProjekt]

The ECML is having it's power supply upgraded anyway so bi modes on XC are entirely viable, and would ensure the new infrastructure is properly used.

There's no way of knowing if the ECML PSU had any allowance for XC traffic since no official noise has ever been made regarding XC getting new trains. Also the PSU around Edinburgh has been postponed and the English stuff north of Newcastle has been seemingly descoped. Power control balises have been fitted north of Newcastle Station so bimodes run on diesel until some point around Berwick.

 

[zwk500]

Power control balises have been fitted north of Newcastle Station so bimodes run on diesel until some point around Berwick.

This is more than slightly depressing and insane. For once I'd agree with the usual suspects on twitter getting up in arms about that bit.

 

[Zomboid]

There's no way of knowing if the ECML PSU had any allowance for XC traffic since no official noise has ever been made regarding XC getting new trains. Also the PSU around Edinburgh has been postponed and the English stuff north of Newcastle has been seemingly descoped. Power control balises have been fitted north of Newcastle Station so bimodes run on diesel until some point around Berwick.

The modelling to determine the likely demand will have used projections of a timetable some way in the future, you don't spend large sums on grid connections without knowing that you won't have to go back in 5 years. I've no idea if that would include XC trains, but since Bi Modes are nothing new now you'd have to assume that the eventual voyager replacement will be a bi mode.

Which is not to say that everything that's being built is everything that's needed for 2040 or whatever, but that whoever is specifying that substation A needs to be upgraded to 18MVA (for example) knows that it won't be necessary to go back and upgrade it again in the foreseeable future.

 

[Trainbike46]

There's no way of knowing if the ECML PSU had any allowance for XC traffic since no official noise has ever been made regarding XC getting new trains. Also the PSU around Edinburgh has been postponed and the English stuff north of Newcastle has been seemingly descoped. Power control balises have been fitted north of Newcastle Station so bimodes run on diesel until some point around Berwick.

This is more than slightly depressing and insane. For once I'd agree with the usual suspects on twitter getting up in arms about that bit.

Are you suggesting that the TPE units will continue to use diesel on Newcastle-Berwick?

Because it is absolutely insane to have Bimodes running on diesel on Electrified lines as a permanent solution.

I've no clue who "the usual suspects on twitter" are, but that would certainly be something to get up in arms about!

 

[edwin_m]

That can also be mitigated with the on-board power management system or geofencing, if required.

You can, but if the battery train isn't able to pick up charge in a particular area then it may be unable to get through the next non-OLE area.

 

[swt_passenger]

Out of the entire route, the section least likely to be electrified is Wigston-Syston, given the clearances.

Yet there are explicit rebuttals of the mythology about clearances through Leicester over in the main MML electrification thread. There have even been discussions about why people keep posting about the ‘problem’ despite those rebuttals…

For example, one of the discussions starts here:

MML Electrification: progress updates

Nevermind the increased track wear due to the increased weight of lugging a diesel engine and gen set around 100% of time. Sure. And a battery EMU with a diesel range extender only needs a tiny diesel engine (about the size and weight used in a family car), as it can run at full power for the...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Brubulus]

Yet there are explicit rebuttals of the mythology about clearances through Leicester over in the main MML electrification thread. There have even been discussions about why people keep posting about the ‘problem’ despite those rebuttals…

Never said it would be impossible, just that it's likely to be more expensive than the rest of the line, and therefore less likely to be done though if there's already preparations for piling taking place, I take that back.

 

[GraphitProjekt]

Never said it would be impossible, just that it's likely to be more expensive than the rest of the line, and therefore less likely to be done though if there's already preparations for piling taking place, I take that back.

There are pegs in the ground around Leicester a few months ago. So the design work is at least fairly mature.

Are you suggesting that the TPE units will continue to use diesel on Newcastle-Berwick?

Because it is absolutely insane to have Bimodes running on diesel on Electrified lines as a permanent solution.

It's all about Marshall Meadows FS which has all appropriate planning planning permissions etc for the new 132kV circuit and some (state of the art for the UK) SFC equipment to balance the grid supplieswith the single phase traction feeds allowing much more power. The work was actually under construction until it all went quiet after covid. There was some suggestion about "everyone works from home nowadays and freight won't be coming here"

I've no clue who "the usual suspects on twitter" are, but that would certainly be something to get up in arms about!

I don't know either but I wouldn't be surprised if I was one of them.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 May 2025 ==

I thought Wigston-Syston was already being pegged out for piling?

There's also an SPL works compound around Loughborough. Although that is a different RS

Isn't Marshall Meadows due on stream soon?

https://www.hexham-courant.co.uk/news/24042584.wansbeck-mp-ian-lavery-railway-timetable-changes/
it so isn't that it made local press. There is specific mention of

"Lumo have wanted to lengthen their trains to increase supply but this has been thwarted by Network Rail cancelling the power supply upgrade at Chathill and decoping [sic] the one at Marshall Meadows (near Berwick)."

The upgrade to Chathill MPTSC did go ahead but that doesn't address the lack of electrical capacity.

You never know though, there's no real reason why they couldn't start up work again - at least before the planning permissions expire.

Derby-Birmingham would have its own supply.

Yeah most likely, and the MML project is seemingly being done with passive provision for AT feeding, and all the grid connections were originally agreed with AT in mind so that'll be quite strong

 

[Technologist]

Need to consider also that an electric train running and charging batteries will use more power, which may be a factor when the supply is a bit marginal.

The whole issue of over loading the OHLE is when you end up with unfortunate combinations of peak loadings rather than sustained overloading of the system. Battery trains would be able to adjust their current draw to match line capacity in a way you can't do if you actually need the power at that point in time. E.g. it might be sat in a station furiously charging.

Regarding batteries we are now seeing LFP types in cars charging at a peak rate of 10C, which is a full charge in 6 minutes. In practice its more like a 20-80% charge in 6 minutes but it's still a significant development. We can now charge a battery system at about the same speed it takes to put liquid fuel in it. While that probably shortens battery life today, that probably won't be the case in a few years time and LFP types have lives in the thousands of cycles already.

I'd suggest that the strategy should be to only partially electrify some gaps, while also expecting that in the medium term we might actually end up not replacing OHLE in some locations. At 10C charging rates plenty of lines could just have fast chargers at stations.

 

[edwin_m]

The whole issue of over loading the OHLE is when you end up with unfortunate combinations of peak loadings rather than sustained overloading of the system. Battery trains would be able to adjust their current draw to match line capacity in a way you can't do if you actually need the power at that point in time. E.g. it might be sat in a station furiously charging.

Regarding batteries we are now seeing LFP types in cars charging at a peak rate of 10C, which is a full charge in 6 minutes. In practice its more like a 20-80% charge in 6 minutes but it's still a significant development. We can now charge a battery system at about the same speed it takes to put liquid fuel in it. While that probably shortens battery life today, that probably won't be the case in a few years time and LFP types have lives in the thousands of cycles already.

I'd suggest that the strategy should be to only partially electrify some gaps, while also expecting that in the medium term we might actually end up not replacing OHLE in some locations. At 10C charging rates plenty of lines could just have fast chargers at stations.

It's a case of horses for courses. Naturally you can have the train manage its charging demand but this is inevitably going to affect its range, and may increase its dwell time if at a station. And station charging only works if the train stops there.

 

[Technologist]

It's a case of horses for courses. Naturally you can have the train manage its charging demand but this is inevitably going to affect its range, and may increase its dwell time if at a station. And station charging only works if the train stops there.

I modelled a battery electric 801 and it was able to do the cross country routes from Penzance with existing electrification and some chargers in major stations. That was with the charging curve of a Tesla Model 3 SR+ which has LFP batteries but is nowhere near the current state of the art of fast charging. With fast charging such a locomotive would be able to do pretty much any service pattern on the network that spends a tiny proportion of its time under wires.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The whole issue of over loading the OHLE is when you end up with unfortunate combinations of peak loadings rather than sustained overloading of the system. Battery trains would be able to adjust their current draw to match line capacity in a way you can't do if you actually need the power at that point in time. E.g. it might be sat in a station furiously charging.

Regarding batteries we are now seeing LFP types in cars charging at a peak rate of 10C, which is a full charge in 6 minutes. In practice its more like a 20-80% charge in 6 minutes but it's still a significant development. We can now charge a battery system at about the same speed it takes to put liquid fuel in it. While that probably shortens battery life today, that probably won't be the case in a few years time and LFP types have lives in the thousands of cycles already.

I'd suggest that the strategy should be to only partially electrify some gaps, while also expecting that in the medium term we might actually end up not replacing OHLE in some locations. At 10C charging rates plenty of lines could just have fast chargers at stations.

Fast chargers at stations implies a heavy current demand so it might be better to string up some knitting for a few dozen miles to smooth out the demand - yeah going round in circles !. Possibility is if the fast charger at West Ealing can be scaled up for a ten coach train without knocking the local areas domestic power too hard. But then how quickly will it be ready for the next ten coach train.

If we are running long trains frequently enough it suggests we need proper electrification.

 

[duffield]

On the MML electrification progress thread the issue of which diversions might be used during electrification of future sections of the MML arose so as that's speculation I thought I'd reply here and pose the question as to whether this will happen for the specific diversion below and what other diversions could be used.

To reply to the specific question on the other thread as to whether Sheet Stores to Stenson Junction to Derby could be used (when Sheet Stores to Derby via Long Eaton is closed):

It's certainly possible. There are a limited number of services that currently use this diversion, for example
1B04 0428 Derby to St Pancras International
Departing on 10th June 2025
Link to RTT for this service

Realtime Trains | 1B04 0428 Derby to St Pancras International | 10/06/2025

Real-time train running information for 1B04 0428 departure from Derby to St Pancras International on 10/06/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

However, performing the reversal on the main line at Stenson sounds potentially problematic at busier times.

 

[tram21]

On the MML electrification progress thread the issue of which diversions might be used during electrification of future sections of the MML arose so as that's speculation I thought I'd reply here and pose the question as to whether this will happen for the specific diversion below and what other diversions could be used.

To reply to the specific question on the other thread as to whether Sheet Stores to Stenson Junction to Derby could be used (when Sheet Stores to Derby via Long Eaton is closed):

It's certainly possible. There are a limited number of services that currently use this diversion, for example
1B04 0428 Derby to St Pancras International
Departing on 10th June 2025
Link to RTT for this service

Realtime Trains | 1B04 0428 Derby to St Pancras International | 10/06/2025

Real-time train running information for 1B04 0428 departure from Derby to St Pancras International on 10/06/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

However, performing the reversal on the main line at Stenson sounds potentially problematic at busier times.

That will definitely be used at some point (which i would be happy about!!)

They will also do Toton diversions when the area around Beeston is closed (NOT- Ilkeston Jn (reverse)- Toton- EMD)

 

[zwk500]

Fast chargers at stations implies a heavy current demand so it might be better to string up some knitting for a few dozen miles to smooth out the demand - yeah going round in circles !. Possibility is if the fast charger at West Ealing can be scaled up for a ten coach train without knocking the local areas domestic power too hard. But then how quickly will it be ready for the next ten coach train.

AIUI the concept behind the Greenford arrangement is that it trickle charges some battery storage so that the heavy demand is not transferred to the grid.

If we are running long trains frequently enough it suggests we need proper electrification.

Agreed.

Going forward, there will be a place for both types of charging, I feel. Some services will be able to 'skip' between sections of OLE from which they can top up the batteries, and some services will be running down dead ends where it is more viable to focus on a ground-mounted system. Regenerative braking, Power management controls on the trains and other elements such as geofencing will also be part of the puzzle to get a mostly battery/electric railway without overloading the grid at a local or wider level.

 

[duffield]

That will definitely be used at some point (which i would be happy about!!)

They will also do Toton diversions when the area around Beeston is closed (NOT- Ilkeston Jn (reverse)- Toton- EMD)

So my list of likely diversions is as follows:

• Corby diversion, with the usual Leicester reversal when Wigston South to just south of Leicester station is shut
• Corby diversion, skipping Leicester and running north via Syston East and North junctions when Leicester station to Syston South is shut
• Sheet Stores to Stenson junction via Castle Donnigton, reverse at Stenson to reach Derby, when Sheet Stores to Derby via Long Eaton is shut
• Derby to Chesterfield (and maybe direct services skipping Derby) via Toton for Sheffield when Derby to Clay Cross is shut
• Chesterfield to Sheffield via Barrow Hill when Chesterfield to Sheffield via Dore is shut

Other possibilities:

• Nottingham to Trent South via Ilkeston, reversal, Toton and high level goods line when Mansfield Junction to Trent East is shut (has been used in the past)
• And a fanciful one: When Clay Cross to Tapton Junction is shut, divert trains to Sheffield via the Robin Hood line through Mansfield, either via Hucknall or via Langley Mill and the freight line to Kirky in Asfield (probably totally impractical!).

Are there any other possibilities I've missed?

The worst area seems to be Syston North to Trent South, since this is a long section affecting both intercity routes with no viable diversions (with the Coalville line seemingly being out of the question).

 

[edwin_m]

The worst area seems to be Syston North to Trent South, since this is a long section affecting both intercity routes with no viable diversions (with the Coalville line seemingly being out of the question).

Also of course Kettering to Wellingborough and Sharnbrook into London. But all of these are four-track, so will require full closures less often as some work can be done with two tracks remaining open.

 

[Zomboid]

Also of course Kettering to Wellingborough and Sharnbrook into London. But all of these are four-track, so will require full closures less often as some work can be done with two tracks remaining open.

They're also already electrified so won't need to be closed for electrification.

 

[zwk500]

Are there any other possibilities I've missed?

The worst area seems to be Syston North to Trent South, since this is a long section affecting both intercity routes with no viable diversions (with the Coalville line seemingly being out of the question).

Sheffield via Retford and Nottingham via Grantham to London? I personally can't see diversions via Mansfield but stranger things have happened.

I can also see big issues for XC when (if) Clay Cross-Chesterfield is shut, although that section is also 4-track so there's more chance of keeping something open for longer there.

 

[Nottingham59]

I can also see big issues for XC when (if) Clay Cross-Chesterfield is shut, although that section is also 4-track so there's more chance of keeping something open for longer there.

Clay Cross to Chesterfield is surprisingly busy. 2 XC, 2 London, 1 Leeds, 1 Liverpool gives 6tph plus lots of freight, which makes it one of the busier pieces of non-electrified track. (Though not as busy as Dore-Sheffield with I think 9tph.)