Scottish Electrification updates & discussion

59CosG95 · 19 Feb 2019

NotATrainspott said:
Narrow pantographs are almost certainly not going to happen. If you want an electrification method that is appropriate for short stretches of difficult track, the obvious and best solution is to use batteries so you need no extra lineside infrastructure at all. Narrow pantographs don't solve all clearance issues while needing no pantograph for that stretch clearly solves all of them. Adding enough batteries to EMUs for them to run over the bridge at line speed, plus extra capacity for emergencies, would cost almost nothing in the grand scheme of things and would be useful all across the network for backup purposes.

Worth mentioning that OLE in Switzerland requires smaller pantograph heads - any locomotive equipped to operate in Switzerland as well as other EU countries (e.g. Germany) requires an additional 15kV AC pan with a smaller profile. Not entirely sure on the reason why the Swiss require smaller pans, but it's certainly something worth considering.

RailUK Forums

Kite159 · 19 Feb 2019

Would having a fixed bar for the bridge work better? (i.e. the same style as installed in the Severn Tunnel/St Pancras Thameslink)?

Southsider · 19 Feb 2019

Kite159 said:
Would having a fixed bar for the bridge work better? (i.e. the same style as installed in the Severn Tunnel/St Pancras Thameslink)?

That may well be what is ultimately fitted but, as mentioned in various posts, the problem is likely to be with the pantograph fouling diagonal crossmembers not clearance for the wires or bar.

CEN60 · 19 Feb 2019

EK - Electrification is being looked at by a Railway Consultancy as I type this.

Aictos · 19 Feb 2019

Edinburgh to Aberdeen EMUs could avoid the Forth Bridge however that would mean going via Dundee and Stirling or via Alloa then onto the Fife Circle which seems to be slower then just going via the Fife Circle direct?

That is only a temporary measure though as the HSTs and DMUs can still go via the Forth Bridge.

That being said, I don't see any point in either the Fife Circle or Stirling to Dundee being wired up until 1. Perth gets remodelled and 2. They solve the issue of the Forth Bridge only then once both can/will be done do I see the point in both being wired up.

Saying that though, would it not be a good idea to wire up one route first and use the other route for diversions for example they could wire up Dunblane to Dundee and send any Aberdeen/Dundee to Glasgow services via the Fife Circle which could then go to EMU operation immediately after then work on the Fife Circle.

With the Fife Circle though, it's slightly easier as you could split the Circle so the Up/Down Fife lines get done first followed by the Up/Down Cowdenbeath lines or just go the whole hog and go with a block from Haymarket West Junction/Winchburgh Junction to Hilton Junction/Dundee?

Apart from the Forth Bridge, are there much issues with the Fife Circle being wired up?

AndrewE · 19 Feb 2019

NotATrainspott said:
A good point to remember is that the remodelling of Rugby junction did as much to improve journey times on the southern WCML as the entire idea of 140mph running. The most beneficial changes are the ones which remove or reduce short speed bottlenecks which require trains to slow down and then accelerate again, rather than passing through at a constant speed.
If you want an electrification method that is appropriate for short stretches of difficult track, the obvious and best solution is to use batteries so you need no extra lineside infrastructure at all. Narrow pantographs don't solve all clearance issues while needing no pantograph for that stretch clearly solves all of them.

Good points, but I don't believe the the speed limit over what my grand-daughter calls "the Red Bridge" will be increased any time soon, hence the suggestion for a special low wobble/clearance pan.

Adding enough batteries to EMUs for them to run over the bridge at line speed, plus extra capacity for emergencies, would cost almost nothing in the grand scheme of things and would be useful all across the network for backup purposes.

Except that we have yet to see one of these fabled beasts, even though batteries are a century old and recent publicity keeps telling us they are now viable...

route101 · 19 Feb 2019

CEN60 said:
EK - Electrification is being looked at by a Railway Consultancy as I type this.

Hoping theres an announcement for yay

59CosG95 · 19 Feb 2019

Kite159 said:
Would having a fixed bar for the bridge work better? (i.e. the same style as installed in the Severn Tunnel/St Pancras Thameslink)?

It could, but the thorny issue of electrical clearances, isolation, earthing & bonding remains.

gingertom · 19 Feb 2019

59CosG95 said:
It could, but the thorny issue of electrical clearances, isolation, earthing & bonding remains.

asked before on this thread but has a proper survey from an electrification point of view been carried out on the bridge to establish exactly what is required so it can be costed?

MadMac · 19 Feb 2019

gingertom said:
asked before on this thread but has a proper survey from an electrification point of view been carried out on the bridge to establish exactly what is required so it can be costed?

Not in the recent past, at least that I've heard of: I recall it being mentioned in the 80s that you couldn't even get an electric across with the pan down, but presumably clearances etc. have been reassessed.

themiller · 20 Feb 2019

MadMac said:
Not in the recent past, at least that I've heard of: I recall it being mentioned in the 80s that you couldn't even get an electric across with the pan down, but presumably clearances etc. have been reassessed.

68s go across on a daily basis so an 88 should be OK with it’s pan down! This is all just speculation about clearances. Best to let it drop until someone comes up with a definitive answer.

59CosG95 · 20 Feb 2019

themiller said:
68s go across on a daily basis so an 88 should be OK with it’s pan down! This is all just speculation about clearances. Best to let it drop until someone comes up with a definitive answer.

You missed a trick there by not saying "Best to drop the pan..."

Highlandspring · 20 Feb 2019

Compatability certificate issued this morning clearing class 86s from Holytown Jn - Midcalder Jn via Shotts "for testing purposes".

59CosG95 · 20 Feb 2019

Highlandspring said:
Compatability certificate issued this morning clearing class 86s from Holytown Jn - Midcalder Jn via Shotts "for testing purposes".

Oooooo.
Seems GBRf's hired 86s might come in useful here...

Tobbes · 20 Feb 2019

And the NR 86 loadbanks, presumably?

{Edit: Not, presumably, as they've been scrapped. My bad.}

alangla · 20 Feb 2019

FL 86s snaffled from Coatbridge more likely

Train man · 20 Feb 2019

When are the test runs on the Shotts line due to start its been a bit quiet for a while. I know the 86's have been cleared in recent posts iirc.

Southsider · 21 Feb 2019

According to the BBC and others, £1.7Bn set aside for transport in the budget for next year. Presumably the Greens will have pushed hard for rail related schemes.

themiller · 21 Feb 2019

59CosG95 said:
Worth mentioning that OLE in Switzerland requires smaller pantograph heads - any locomotive equipped to operate in Switzerland as well as other EU countries (e.g. Germany) requires an additional 15kV AC pan with a smaller profile. Not entirely sure on the reason why the Swiss require smaller pans, but it's certainly something worth considering.

CH-TSI LOC&PAS-001 of Federal Office of Transport FOT Approvals and Rules Section states:
"The pantograph head width on most lines in Switzerland is restricted to 1450 mm.
On some lines, in particular border traffic lines, wider heads up to 1950 mm are possible."
What is the UK standard pantograph width? If it's too small, overhead line stagger to even out contact strip wear becomes problematic. (I did have the measurement but can't seem to find it, now)

James James · 21 Feb 2019

59CosG95 said:
Worth mentioning that OLE in Switzerland requires smaller pantograph heads - any locomotive equipped to operate in Switzerland as well as other EU countries (e.g. Germany) requires an additional 15kV AC pan with a smaller profile. Not entirely sure on the reason why the Swiss require smaller pans, but it's certainly something worth considering.

Given the many tunnels, narrower pantographs are probably rather cost effective.

It's not just Switzerland though: Luxembourg, and parts of France (the AC parts?) have the same width. (Which is also why the TGV doesn't need anything extra for Switzerland - but they already have 2 pantographs because their DC lines use a wider pantograph from what I remember.)

gsnedders · 21 Feb 2019

James James said:
Given the many tunnels, narrower pantographs are probably rather cost effective.

It's not just Switzerland though: Luxembourg, and parts of France (the AC parts?) have the same width. (Which is also why the TGV doesn't need anything extra for Switzerland - but they already have 2 pantographs because their DC lines use a wider pantograph from what I remember.)

I presume the DC lines use a wider pantograph given the higher currents and presumably wear quicker?

clc · 21 Feb 2019

Southsider said:
According to the BBC and others, £1.7Bn set aside for transport in the budget for next year. Presumably the Greens will have pushed hard for rail related schemes.

The Scottish Govt has already set out its rail priorities for 2019/20:

Rail Services priorities

We will continue our significant investment in Scotland's railways to support a safe and high-performing railway through the delivery of new and better services, new and refurbished trains, and substantial improvements to the infrastructure to increase capacity and reliability.

In 2019-20 we will:

Continue the delivery of the rolling programme of electrification, including the line between Edinburgh and Glasgow via Shotts.

Continue the redevelopment of Glasgow's Queen Street station, creating a bigger and brighter, modern station with additional platform capacity to accommodate longer electric trains and an expanded concourse.

Continue delivery of improvements to the route between Aberdeen and Inverness, and on the Highland Main Line between Inverness and Perth.

Continue the development work for projects to be delivered during Control Period 6 (2019 to 2024) and beyond.

Continue to tackle overcrowding with 200 extra carriages to be added to the ScotRail fleet increasing it to more than 1,000 carriages and the roll out of new sleeper rolling stock, delivering a step change in overnight rail travel for passengers.

Complete the introduction of 26 refurbished High Speed Trains to operate on inter-city routes, with 40 per cent more seats on those routes.

Continue to support the redevelopments planned for Aberdeen, Inverness and Stirling Stations and the delivery of new stations at Robroyston, Kintore, Dalcross, Reston and East Linton.

Continue development work to increase movement of goods by rail, supporting local businesses and communities.

Continue our work to identify a suitable body to make a robust bid for a future rail franchise and take initial steps to ensure that the body is in a position to make such a bid

https://www.gov.scot/publications/scottish-budget-2019-20/

themiller · 21 Feb 2019

gsnedders said:
I presume the DC lines use a wider pantograph given the higher currents and presumably wear quicker?

No. DC overhead lines use a contact wire of greater cross-section in order to transmit current. The width of the pantograph has no bearing on this. As far as I understand, it's down to national standards.

68000 · 21 Feb 2019

Train man said:
When are the test runs on the Shotts line due to start its been a bit quiet for a while. I know the 86's have been cleared in recent posts iirc.

Sunday, 24th Feb

InOban · 21 Feb 2019

Am I right that the electrification was complete before Christmas, but they are still working on platform extensions, bridges and lifts?

I am mystified why this project appears in next year's budget.

Macwomble · 21 Feb 2019

InOban said:
Am I right that the electrification was complete before Christmas, but they are still working on platform extensions, bridges and lifts?

From what I saw on the Shotts line yesterday platforms & lifts are certainly still to complete.

InOban · 21 Feb 2019

There are regular pictures of the work on their Twitter. According to the timetable, Sunday services resume on 31st March, so I take it that the works are scheduled to be completed by then. That's why I don't understand why the project appears in next year's budget.

Southsider · 21 Feb 2019

InOban said:
There are regular pictures of the work on their Twitter. According to the timetable, Sunday services resume on 31st March, so I take it that the works are scheduled to be completed by then. That's why I don't understand why the project appears in next year's budget.

Could be a case of just ‘say something’ to populate the document as they have still to decide on the specifics.

Joseph_Locke · 21 Feb 2019

AndrewE said:
We have. The problem is the limited width at wire height because of the diagonal bracing on the bridge. Given the speed restriction that applies it could be wired to be used by new narrow low-reach pantographs. Most locos have 2 pantograph wells and 11-car Pendolinos have 3! One of these could easily have the limited-clearance version, which (if it was adopted as a second standard) would solve a lot of difficult-to-do electrification problems. New trains will be needed for the expanded services anyway, so the limited-clearance pans can be designed in for not much extra cost.

A 3-panto Pendo? Picture?

Highlandspring · 21 Feb 2019

11 car class 390s have 3x pan wells (and transformers) but only 2 of them contain pans.

Scottish Electrification updates & discussion

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member