• 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!

Future of the GWR electrification

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
4,118
These table scraps of what will use the wires are pretty thin and tenuous.

With the 'super fasts' gone, it really doesn't get that impactful until Chippenham is done, and then maybe a full EMU Cardiff service is added (had been mentioned - to Swansea previously)

Didcot-Oxford on the other hand is an instant winner. 4tph each direction on day one, once the stopper/semi is reinstated. And gets it ready for either Coventry or Bletchley - I would say the latter is more important as again, you'd have 2tph EWR fully electric and self-contained - vs XC mess - and it kicks off Marylebone...
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

The exile

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Messages
2,941
Location
Somerset
If you wire beyond the signal the Filton Abbey Wood terminator could also go electric, as well as the ECS moves up Filton Bank. It would also lend strong impetus to finishing off Chippenham-Bristol. Agree with Oxford-Didcot being higher priority though.
The Filton Abbey Wood terminator is only that in the short / medium term. It’ll eventually be going on to Henbury (and already disappears off up the branch to turn round).
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
13,671
Location
Bristol
The Filton Abbey Wood terminator is only that in the short / medium term. It’ll eventually be going on to Henbury (and already disappears off up the branch to turn round).
At the moment it turns round behind the signal on the chord (Normally). Wire that bit now, then when Henbury and Filton North (or whatever they're being called) are built, extending the OLE a couple of miles will be perhaps the simplest electrification job on the GW region.
The bigger problem is that it means Filton trains can't interwork with Severn Beach line trains, which has a small impact on diagramming and Temple Meads Platforms.

These table scraps of what will use the wires are pretty thin and tenuous.

With the 'super fasts' gone, it really doesn't get that impactful until Chippenham is done, and then maybe a full EMU Cardiff service is added (had been mentioned - to Swansea previously)
Strategic reasons to wire to TM include connecting the rather large substation at Bristol East as well as giving IETs laying over at Bristol the chance to put the pan up for hotel power, improving air quality. It also does by far the most difficult bit of Chippenham-Bristol.
Didcot-Oxford on the other hand is an instant winner. 4tph each direction on day one, once the stopper/semi is reinstated. And gets it ready for either Coventry or Bletchley - I would say the latter is more important as again, you'd have 2tph EWR fully electric and self-contained - vs XC mess - and it kicks off Marylebone...
100% agree. Wire Didcot-Oxford and then EWR is a natural follow-on. By the time the wires are up through Winslow hopefully a decision will have been made about Bletchley-Bedford and that can then follow on again.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,647
Location
West Wiltshire
Didcot-Oxford is the easy one, and there are actually some block closures of the line in 2025 related to Botley underbridge rebuild, during which could put up portal spans in Oxford area (even if wires are many months later). From memory a new track layout at Oxford is being installed in stages 2025-2026

West of England combined Authority (WECA) wants to do Filton bank to Temple Meads, but with current rolling stock, as others have pointed out is rather pointless. Work is currently taking place on Bristol Temple Meads roof until 2026, due to scaffolding not practical to put wires up until then.

South of Temple Meads to Parson Street area, there is still track layout and signalling alterations needed, but ultimately there are groups who would like to see electrification extended to Portbury/Portishead, Weston super Mare or even to the huge new factory at Gravity (near Puriton, south of Highbridge). But again without EMUs or BEMUs or electric freight locos, nothing could use it.

WECA is looking at another possible reopened station, St Anne's on line towards Bath. Filling in Chippenham (actually about mile east of Chippenham) to Bristol allows the bi-modes IETs to run as electric. A reopened station at Corsham is also possible. So is probably more usable short term than wiring Filton bank.

Realistically to utilise the section through Bath properly, need to have BEMUs on local trains too (and line through Bath typically sees 4-6 trains each way per hour). There have been suggestions that wiring to Warminster and Frome is logical as could use spare EMUs on local services.

There is a bit of muddle about platform lengths associated with Bristol area electrification, WECA seems to be opting for 150m (to allow pairs of 3car units) on newer work, many stations are currently nearer 125m (which allows 5 x 23m, but means need a messy mix of 2car and 3car units), and some want 165-170m (and I think the proposed new South Wales services which might hourly extended to Bristol) will be built to this (giving option of pairs of 4car EMUs).

From memory project Churchward was not getting 2car units, just 3car local units, and a longer regional unit (5 or 6car) with common equipment. To me being able to operate pairs of standard EMUs on the fully wired sections justifies 170m platforms, even if 150m on unwired extensions where BEMUs will operate is normal length.

One final thing to note there are already some masts up near Chippenham, and a number of mast foundations already installed in the area. I think all the clearance work (bar one) has been completed between Chippenham and Bristol, and only a handful of structures from Bathampton to Warminster that need either raising or track lowered.
 

The exile

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Messages
2,941
Location
Somerset
Didcot-Oxford is the easy one, and there are actually some block closures of the line in 2025 related to Botley underbridge rebuild, during which could put up portal spans in Oxford area (even if wires are many months later). From memory a new track layout at Oxford is being installed in stages 2025-2026

West of England combined Authority (WECA) wants to do Filton bank to Temple Meads, but with current rolling stock, as others have pointed out is rather pointless. Work is currently taking place on Bristol Temple Meads roof until 2026, due to scaffolding not practical to put wires up until then.

South of Temple Meads to Parson Street area, there is still track layout and signalling alterations needed, but ultimately there are groups who would like to see electrification extended to Portbury/Portishead, Weston super Mare or even to the huge new factory at Gravity (near Puriton, south of Highbridge). But again without EMUs or BEMUs or electric freight locos, nothing could use it.

WECA is looking at another possible reopened station, St Anne's on line towards Bath. Filling in Chippenham (actually about mile east of Chippenham) to Bristol allows the bi-modes IETs to run as electric. A reopened station at Corsham is also possible. So is probably more usable short term than wiring Filton bank.

Realistically to utilise the section through Bath properly, need to have BEMUs on local trains too (and line through Bath typically sees 4-6 trains each way per hour). There have been suggestions that wiring to Warminster and Frome is logical as could use spare EMUs on local services.

There is a bit of muddle about platform lengths associated with Bristol area electrification, WECA seems to be opting for 150m (to allow pairs of 3car units) on newer work, many stations are currently nearer 125m (which allows 5 x 23m, but means need a messy mix of 2car and 3car units), and some want 165-170m (and I think the proposed new South Wales services which might hourly extended to Bristol) will be built to this (giving option of pairs of 4car EMUs).

From memory project Churchward was not getting 2car units, just 3car local units, and a longer regional unit (5 or 6car) with common equipment. To me being able to operate pairs of standard EMUs on the fully wired sections justifies 170m platforms, even if 150m on unwired extensions where BEMUs will operate is normal length.

One final thing to note there are already some masts up near Chippenham, and a number of mast foundations already installed in the area. I think all the clearance work (bar one) has been completed between Chippenham and Bristol, and only a handful of structures from Bathampton to Warminster that need either raising or track lowered.
Though those “handful” presumably include the two aqueducts….
 

jimm

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2012
Messages
5,238
Didcot-Oxford is the easy one, and there are actually some block closures of the line in 2025 related to Botley underbridge rebuild, during which could put up portal spans in Oxford area (even if wires are many months later). From memory a new track layout at Oxford is being installed in stages 2025-2026
The only planned changes to the track layout at Oxford are those needed for the new platform 5.

Details of all recent and ongoing Network Rail projects in the Oxford area can be found at this link

 

Topological

Member
Joined
20 Feb 2023
Messages
917
Location
Swansea
Is there scope to split Cardiff-Portsmouth so that Cardiff-Bristol is EMU? Certainly there are enough spare EMUs around.
 

Topological

Member
Joined
20 Feb 2023
Messages
917
Location
Swansea
Doesn't make commercial sense, and don't forget Portsmouth-Redbridge is also electrified, but not splitting that off either.
I may be being disrespectful to Redbridge, but a Bristol to Redbridge service does not quite seem sensible.

Bristol to Cardiff on the other hand starts, and finishes, in the biggest cities in the area and provides a local service over a line otherwise used by higher speed intercity services. Accelerating the service would surely benefit those other GWR services which could otherwise be stuck behind the slow (Severn Tunnel to Cardiff in particular) and would allow the service to serve the new Cardiff East station as well (with associate modal shift opportunities)

Forgive me for being confused about why it would not make sense to split a train which already has to reverse at Temple Meads.
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
13,671
Location
Bristol
Doesn't make commercial sense, and don't forget Portsmouth-Redbridge is also electrified, but not splitting that off either.
Splitting it into a Cardiff-Bristol and and Bristol-Portsmouth isn't the maddest idea commercially. There is through traffic but the turnover at Bristol is very high. The interchange penalty might well be offset by the benefits of having electric traction to get through the Severn Tunnel.
If there's sufficient stock to get 8-car peak trains between Bristol and Cardiff and let the DMUs bump up the Portsmouth-Bristols to 5 cars every time then it's worth considering.
The only planned changes to the track layout at Oxford are those needed for the new platform 5.

Details of all recent and ongoing Network Rail projects in the Oxford area can be found at this link

I think it's been designed to be electrification-ready though, if not explicitly including electrification as a part of the designs.
 

The exile

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Messages
2,941
Location
Somerset
Splitting it into a Cardiff-Bristol and and Bristol-Portsmouth isn't the maddest idea commercially. There is through traffic but the turnover at Bristol is very high. The interchange penalty might well be offset by the benefits of having electric traction to get through the Severn Tunnel.
There is definitely a need for through services across Bristol. Whether they need to be provided by the Portsmouth - Cardiff is another question. I suspect the MOD might have something to say about the loss of a through service from Portsmouth to Filton AW - even if rarely used!
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
13,671
Location
Bristol
There is definitely a need for through services across Bristol. Whether they need to be provided by the Portsmouth - Cardiff is another question.
The turnover on all services at Temple Meads is fairly high in my experience, I'm not sure there's any dominant flow that 'needs' a through train.
I suspect the MOD might have something to say about the loss of a through service from Portsmouth to Filton AW - even if rarely used!
I imagine the MOD couldn't give 2 hoots about a through connection. Especially now MS Teams exists.
 

Topological

Member
Joined
20 Feb 2023
Messages
917
Location
Swansea
The turnover on all services at Temple Meads is fairly high in my experience, I'm not sure there's any dominant flow that 'needs' a through train.

I imagine the MOD couldn't give 2 hoots about a through connection. Especially now MS Teams exists.
Through across Bristol could be provided by an EMU once Chippenham is complete in any case.
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,575
Location
South Wales
Through across Bristol could be provided by an EMU once Chippenham is complete in any case.
GWR want Filton wired as well as temple needs to Chippenham wired so a battery emu also fitted with 3rd rail shoes could be used on the Cardiff to Portsmouth her service.

Pity GWR couldn't keep the 769/9's they'd be handy on some routes when we see the wires at Bristol TM
 

Brissle Girl

Established Member
Joined
17 Jul 2018
Messages
2,899
GWR want Filton wired as well as temple needs to Chippenham wired so a battery emu also fitted with 3rd rail shoes could be used on the Cardiff to Portsmouth her service.

Pity GWR couldn't keep the 769/9's they'd be handy on some routes when we see the wires at Bristol TM
You don’t need Filton Bank wired to use a battery emu on the Cardiff Portsmouth run as the battery would get it from Temple Meads to Patchway.

Quite whether a battery would have the range to get from Bathampton Jn to Redbridge is another matter though.
 

Sly Old Fox

Member
Joined
30 Nov 2022
Messages
311
Location
England
Can’t see anything being authorised. Too expensive these days. We’ll muddle in with what we’ve got until it breaks.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,647
Location
West Wiltshire
You don’t need Filton Bank wired to use a battery emu on the Cardiff Portsmouth run as the battery would get it from Temple Meads to Patchway.

Quite whether a battery would have the range to get from Bathampton Jn to Redbridge is another matter though.
It would be very easy to wire first couple of miles of Avon valley line south of Bathampton junction (to just before Dundas aqueduct), as no structures.

This would allow trains to accelerate away from the junction southbound before switching to battery, and trains heading northbound which are often subject to yellows, awaiting junction to clear could put pantographs up before accelerating.
 

The exile

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Messages
2,941
Location
Somerset
It would be very easy to wire first couple of miles of Avon valley line south of Bathampton junction (to just before Dundas aqueduct), as no structures.

This would allow trains to accelerate away from the junction southbound before switching to battery, and trains heading northbound which are often subject to yellows, awaiting junction to clear could put pantographs up before accelerating.
But stand by for Goring Gap levels of objections if similar structures are proposed.
 

Loppylugs

Member
Joined
26 Jul 2020
Messages
362
Location
In the doghouse
Oh please don't wish all that metal junk and wires on Oxford. It's the one place I can get to with a respite to do my photography without massive shadowing from a grossly ugly and quite frankly OTT system. Why the GW mainline was blighted with such an eyesore when the ECML and WCML can operate on a more aesthetic system is beyond me. I am an ex railway man and appreciate that electrification is necessary (although it hasn't done much for the GW timekeeping) but it will never be a friend of mine. Lucky old Bath and Bristol at present.
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
13,671
Location
Bristol
Oh please don't wish all that metal junk and wires on Oxford. It's the one place I can get to with a respite to do my photography without massive shadowing from a grossly ugly and quite frankly OTT system. Why the GW mainline was blighted with such an eyesore when the ECML and WCML can operate on a more aesthetic system is beyond me. I am an ex railway man and appreciate that electrification is necessary (although it hasn't done much for the GW timekeeping) but it will never be a friend of mine. Lucky old Bath and Bristol at present.
The idea that the railway should prioritise photos over delivering the speed, acceleration, better air quality, and quieter trains to passengers and lineside neighbours is, quite frankly, offensive.

The electrification systems currently used have had several revisions since the GW stuff was put in. It's a lot neater. The ECML system also has a habit of dropping the wires in a stiff wind, something which the GW has been noticeably more resilient on.
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
8,003
Location
Dalton GA USA & Preston Lancs
The idea that the railway should prioritise photos over delivering the speed, acceleration, better air quality, and quieter trains to passengers and lineside neighbours is, quite frankly, offensive.

The electrification systems currently used have had several revisions since the GW stuff was put in. It's a lot neater. The ECML system also has a habit of dropping the wires in a stiff wind, something which the GW has been noticeably more resilient on.
A big +1 from me
 

Loppylugs

Member
Joined
26 Jul 2020
Messages
362
Location
In the doghouse
The idea that the railway should prioritise photos over delivering the speed, acceleration, better air quality, and quieter trains to passengers and lineside neighbours is, quite frankly, offensive.

The electrification systems currently used have had several revisions since the GW stuff was put in. It's a lot neater. The ECML system also has a habit of dropping the wires in a stiff wind, something which the GW has been noticeably more resilient on.
I didn't suggest photography took priority over speed ( trains often late), better air quality (maybe), quieter ( stand in the corridor and listen to the rattling of the automatic doors ) of our wonderful wooden plank-seated 800's. It is just a shame to see what was once a nice, neat railway turned into a metal junkyard although I know, as I said, electrification is necessary My daughter's garden backs onto the railway, I wouldn't call it quiet and she now has a wonderful view of two dirty great metal stanchions and a gross overhead structure, not to mention a ton of brambles which have shoved her fence back.
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
13,671
Location
Bristol
I didn't suggest photography took priority over speed ( trains often late), better air quality (maybe), quieter ( stand in the corridor and listen to the rattling of the automatic doors ) of our wonderful wooden plank-seated 800's.
Your post did suggest you'd prefer photos without any OLE. As for the other complaints - Speed is different to lateness, and FWIW I don't think GWR's punctuality is noticeably better on the non-OLE section (although you also have to compare apples with apples, Paddington to Reading is one of the most intensively used lines in the country), Electric trains certainly have better air quality at the lineside than Diesel, and they are a much quieter environment all round. Stand at Temple Meads for a few minutes with a Voyager ticking over and then compare it to an electric departure from Paddington and it's world's apart. The quality of the 800s certainly does leave a lot to be desired but the journey environment on 287s is perfectly fine.
My daughter's garden backs onto the railway, I wouldn't call it quiet and she now has a wonderful view of two dirty great metal stanchions and a gross overhead structure, not to mention a ton of brambles which have shoved her fence back.
Vegetation management is certainly an issue and I won't pretend Electrification isn't visually intrusive.
 

ChiefPlanner

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2011
Messages
7,819
Location
Herts
I imagine the MOD couldn't give 2 hoots about a through connection. Especially now MS Teams exists.

I cannot let that go - yes numbers at Filton Abbey Wood are a bit down post pandemic , but the first ever tranche of money in the SRA's fund for capacity enhancements (Rail Passenger Performance) was allocated for a pair of class 150's for then Wales and West to augment FAW services off the Westbury lines to reduce endemic overcrowding as a result of transfer of staff from Central London MOD type jobs to the Bristol area. These units were also used for weekend strengthening on other W&W services in the west Country as they were just a bit tight on stock from the first franchise.
 

BrianW

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2017
Messages
1,565
Oh please don't wish all that metal junk and wires on Oxford. It's the one place I can get to with a respite to do my photography without massive shadowing from a grossly ugly and quite frankly OTT system. Why the GW mainline was blighted with such an eyesore when the ECML and WCML can operate on a more aesthetic system is beyond me. I am an ex railway man and appreciate that electrification is necessary (although it hasn't done much for the GW timekeeping) but it will never be a friend of mine. Lucky old Bath and Bristol at present.
At risk of being pilloried ... the GWML electrification paraphenalia is Hideous. Like electricity pylons and wind turbines I will get used to them. The station at Oxford is not an architectural masterpiece, but the views of dreaming spires will not be enhanced by electrification; similarly Bristol's Temple Meads station and Bath Spa. I'm putting in a plea for some consideration of beauty amongst the understandable and important concerns for speed, comfort, economy and emission-reduction/elimination.
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
13,671
Location
Bristol
I cannot let that go - yes numbers at Filton Abbey Wood are a bit down post pandemic , but the first ever tranche of money in the SRA's fund for capacity enhancements (Rail Passenger Performance) was allocated for a pair of class 150's for then Wales and West to augment FAW services off the Westbury lines to reduce endemic overcrowding as a result of transfer of staff from Central London MOD type jobs to the Bristol area. These units were also used for weekend strengthening on other W&W services in the west Country as they were just a bit tight on stock from the first franchise.
None of this suggests that the MOD saw any particular value in a through link from FAW to Portsmouth though. The concerns you've highlighted seem focused entirely around commuter capacity in the Bristol area, something that could potentially be much better provided by focusing EMUs on the suburban services. There's also now a time element to it in that the office has been there long enough that people will have moved closer by now. The fact that the stock was then used to beef up weekend regional services seems like it was a useful bonus, and of course getting in the electric stock would release DMUs for strengthening services anyway.
At risk of being pilloried ... the GWML electrification paraphenalia is Hideous.
It is bulky but as mentioned newer designs are much lighter on the eye.
The station at Oxford is not an architectural masterpiece, but the views of dreaming spires will not be enhanced by electrification;
Are there currently any views of dreaming spires including the railway? I have always got the sense the University deliberately kept the railway at a distance when it was first built. But yes, it will have an impact.
similarly Bristol's Temple Meads station and Bath Spa. I'm putting in a plea for some consideration of beauty amongst the understandable and important concerns for speed, comfort, economy and emission-reduction/elimination.
Bath had a solution all ready to go that was accepted by the heritage bodies. The WECA document talks about headspan designs for Temple Meads to respect the listed status. York or Newcastle are good examples of what is possible.
 

Brissle Girl

Established Member
Joined
17 Jul 2018
Messages
2,899
I imagine the MOD couldn't give 2 hoots about a through connection. Especially now MS Teams exists.

I cannot let that go - yes numbers at Filton Abbey Wood are a bit down post pandemic , but the first ever tranche of money in the SRA's fund for capacity enhancements (Rail Passenger Performance) was allocated for a pair of class 150's for then Wales and West to augment FAW services off the Westbury lines to reduce endemic overcrowding as a result of transfer of staff from Central London MOD type jobs to the Bristol area. These units were also used for weekend strengthening on other W&W services in the west Country as they were just a bit tight on stock from the first franchise.
Do you think many people at the MOD even remember that - the station was opened 28 years ago specifically to serve the MOD site?
 

BrianW

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2017
Messages
1,565
The idea that the railway should prioritise photos over delivering the speed, acceleration, better air quality, and quieter trains to passengers and lineside neighbours is, quite frankly, offensive.

The electrification systems currently used have had several revisions since the GW stuff was put in. It's a lot neater. The ECML system also has a habit of dropping the wires in a stiff wind, something which the GW has been noticeably more resilient on.
Frankly (?) I think the use of a word like 'offensive' could be considered offensive? The poster to which you are responding (Loppylugs) has posted a mere 358messages, against your 13,546 and I think deserves to have his view and contribution respected (esp as I support that view ;). I agree with a lot of what you say too!

Is it possible (or just not sensible?) to imagine mast-and-wire-free sections through 'sensitive' places- could batteries work through Oxford or Bath or Temple Meads- could it simplify the wiring of complex trackwork?
 

Brissle Girl

Established Member
Joined
17 Jul 2018
Messages
2,899
I didn’t realise Oxford station was such an architectural beauty to be regarded as sensitive.
 

Energy

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2018
Messages
4,599
Is it possible (or just not sensible?) to imagine mast-and-wire-free sections through 'sensitive' places- could batteries work through Oxford or Bath or Temple Meads- could it simplify the wiring of complex trackwork?
Yes, however an OHLE design for Bath was already agreed upon between Network Rail and the relevant authorities.

1706892644622-png.151580


While OHLE has a visual impact, Chris Grayling's statement at the time was largely to avoid backlash in the government's cutting back on investment.
 

Top