You would do Leamington through Snow Hill first and onwards to Kidderminster. As for capacity instead of HS2, no, as the signalling limits that alongside stopping patterns. You would be building plenty of new bits to eat into what HS2 could deliver.
There is no third rail on the route - the sections used by LU metropolitan line have 4th rail electrification, which is much easier to make compatible with OHLE than third rail.
I'd have a single phase to allow the rollout of battery units to replace the entire fleet in the early 2030s with electrification from Bicester Junction to West Ruslip and Leamington Spa to Stourbridge to allow for battery units on both Chiltern and Snow Hill. Battery units for the Amersham line would charge off the existing LU 4th rail infrastructure between Harrow and Amersham.
I would suggest the Birmingham end should come first as it has a more intensive service (doesn’t it??) and out to Leamington also adds to the mileage for other possible electric/bi-mode services.
There is no third rail, or fourth rail anywhere on the lines between Marylebone and Birmingham (although they run parallel to fourth-rail lines in the section Finchley Road - Neasden). The only part where Chiltern runs on lines with fourth rail electrification is the section from Harrow-on-the-Hill Northwards towards Amersham.
Simply, yes. Although as you get further from London it gets flimsier until you're close enough to Birmingham when it picks up again.
Two teams, one from Marylebone northwards, one focusing on suburban Birmingham down towards Banbury. New EMU stock with 2 Subclasses: Single-voltage Regional setup with battery option, and Dual-Voltage commuter units for Met sharing.
No. This would be teasing a little bit of capacity out and could not have competed against a brand-new 2 track railway that also serves Manchester with relief capacity.
I broadly do the same, but with changes to phase 3.
For phase one the best trains to use would be the currently available 379s for fast and semi fast services to Aylesbury
So what do you do about Chesham?
They will have been out of operation for about ten years by the time electrification could be done though.
That's not the problem with third rail electrification (or even 4-rail) of the entire route.
Yes. Two teams one from either end would be what I would go for.
Wouldn't you want to go from both ends of the Snow Hill services OR both ends of Chiltern, to get one done faster than two done slower?
You would have a 'Snow Hill' Team and a 'Marylebone and out' team. The nature of the Snow Hill lines is that you need to do all of it at once or have bi-modes, but Marylebone could be phased outwards.
If Snow Hill needs doing all at once then wouldn't it be better to have both teams there, getting it done quickly, then restarting at the Marylebone end?
yes it would be there
It's not like in the Army, a team is not a fixed size. You'd have 1 big team in Birmingham, probably with sub-teams, but still under 1 overall Programme/Project Manager.
You'd probably also need another Feeder or to boost the existing feeder in the Birmingham area. And maybe a secondary feeder in the London area. But Yes Claydon could expect to provide a fair amount of the load.
It is when one is DC and the other AC. The different feeding and return current arrangements are a complete pain in the proverbial and are the reason why dual system electrification is limited to only 2 places on the network: Euston approach and the thameslink Core. All other 3rd rail/OLE boundaries are only as long as required for the transition.
And many are allegedly in foul condition already.
But the advantage of DC 4th rail instead of DC 3th rail when having dual electrification with AC OHLE is that the return currents for the AC and DC systems are separate, with the AC return via the running rails, and the DC return via one of the two conductor rails, so that should be easier right?
