DfT Feb 25th (2014) meeting on Hull-Selby electrification

[PhilipW]

Attached is an interesting article from the Hull Daily Mail stating that there is going to be a meeting on Feb 25th with the Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin and MPs and business leaders from all around Hull.

http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Hull...rt-Secretary/story-20526848-detail/story.html

Hull railway electrification: Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin to meet MPs and business leaders

TRANSPORT Secretary Patrick McLoughlin will meet a delegation of MPs, city councillors and business leaders next month to discuss proposals to electrify the railway lines in and out of Hull.
The meeting, which was promised before Christmas, will take place at the Department for Transport (DfT) on Tuesday, February 25.

It will be attended by a cross-party group of East Yorkshire MPs, councillors, Lord Haskins, chairman of the Humber Local Enterprise Partnership, and Ian Kelly, chief executive of Hull and Humber Chamber of Commerce.

Welcoming the meeting, Hull West and Hessle MP Alan Johnson told the Mail: "I am very pleased the Transport Secretary has agreed to meet such a wide group of representatives, which crosses local authority, as well as political, boundaries....

Could this be the day that the electrification will be announced ?

As Alan Johnson MP says "I suspect he's agreed to hold the meeting because he has something positive to tell us. Let's hope so."

Surely the time for talking has to end and a decision needs to be made.

Fingers crossed for Feb 25th

 

[GRALISTAIR]

surely the time for talking has to end and a decision needs to be made.

Fingers crossed for feb 25th

absolutely +1

 

[ianhr]

Will be absolutely daft if the DfT turn it down because from my understanding the proposal was for it to be private sector funded. The only problem is does the industry have the skilled manpower available to actually do the work in the short term? They seem to be struggling with all the other schemes that have been committed.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Will be absolutely daft if the DfT turn it down because from my understanding the proposal was for it to be private sector funded. The only problem is does the industry have the skilled manpower available to actually do the work in the short term? They seem to be struggling with all the other schemes that have been committed.

Short term - next 12-18 months possibly not, but each scheme improves the skills. I am confident. Without repeating history and going over old ground, this was the huge mistake in the late 80s early 90s. You had all that expertise etc. for a rolling programme of electrification and it all came to a grinding halt. I am confident that it will not happen this time.

 

[westv]

If it was confirmed how long would such a project take?

Let's hope it's not just platitudes at the meeting.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

If it was confirmed how long would such a project take?

Let's hope it's not just platitudes at the meeting.

It should be easily doable by 2019.

 

[Stats]

Could this be the day that the electrification will be announced?

No. Why would the SoS meet the local MP and business leaders in London to announce the scheme? The reason for this meeting is either for the SoS to be convinced that the benefits warrant diverting physical resources to this scheme ahead of other already announced electrification schemes, or to explain to them there isn't the capacity within the system to take this on at this time, possibly appeasing them by giving an assurance it is a strong contender for CP6

 

[PhilipW]

No. Why would the SoS meet the local MP and business leaders in London to announce the scheme? The reason for this meeting is either for the SoS to be convinced that the benefits warrant diverting physical resources to this scheme ahead of other already announced electrification schemes, or to explain to them there isn't the capacity within the system to take this on at this time, possibly appeasing them by giving an assurance it is a strong contender for CP6

Valid point but ......

Why not then commit the scheme for CP6 and end all the talking, dithering and faffing around. This has been going on for ages.

All the SoS has to do is confirm that electrification will take place. The issue then just becomes a question of timing rather than principle.

With that commitment Hull Trains will then know that they will eventually be running electric trains to London, TPE will know that they will eventually be running electric trains to/from Liverpool and Northern with local services to Leeds and York. They can then all plan accordingly.

If I were going to the meeting the last thing I would want would be to be fobbed off with some political waffle about it being a "strong contender for CP6". I don't want to be appeased.

Time for the DfT to make their mind up. "Deal or no deal".

 

[IanXC]

In terms of industry capacity Balfour Beatty are a member of the consortium - it'd be a strange state of affairs if they'd not considered whether they can find suffficient skilled people to deliver their commitments.

In terms of timescales the HT project is for delivery early in 2017 as I understand it.

If the SoS does reject the policy there's sure to be a lot of political noise - afterall the *privately funded* project has the full backing of Hull's 3 Labour MPs...

 

[HSTEd]

AIUI it is privately funded in the same way that Evergreen was 'privately funded'.

In other words, its a PFI.

But there we go.
As to Balfour Beaty not being able to deliver, it is not as if there is a shortage of OLE engineers globally and they are the only ones available.
Or you know... we could train more, there is plenty of work to go around.

 

[westv]

It should be easily doable by 2019.

What I meant really was how long does it take to wire up 40 miles of track?

 

[jimm]

AIUI it is privately funded in the same way that Evergreen was 'privately funded'.

In other words, its a PFI.

But there we go.
As to Balfour Beaty not being able to deliver, it is not as if there is a shortage of OLE engineers globally and they are the only ones available.
Or you know... we could train more, there is plenty of work to go around.

No, Evergreen is not a PFI. The money has been/is being borrowed against Network Rail's 'credit card' and is being paid back by Chiltern in the form of higher track access charges, on the basis that the schemes were/are upgrading and adding to Network Rail's assets.

Full details of exactly how Hull Trains plans to proceed are not clear, simply references to borrowing from private institutions, which sounds rather more like a bog-standard commercial loan arrangement than anything as complex and insanely expensive as a PFI.

 

[HSTEd]

No, Evergreen is not a PFI. The money has been/is being borrowed against Network Rail's 'credit card' and is being paid back by Chiltern in the form of higher track access charges, on the basis that the schemes were/are upgrading and adding to Network Rail's assets.

So it is not a 'privately funded' railway scheme at all?
That paints the project in a rather different light to the one that Chiltern's PR department has attempted since the project began.

Full details of exactly how Hull Trains plans to proceed are not clear, simply references to borrowing from private institutions, which sounds rather more like a bog-standard commercial loan arrangement than anything as complex and insanely expensive as a PFI.

Yes, a 'commercial loan arrangement' that will inevitably be paid for by the state in the form of reduced access charges for Hull Trains or something similar.
It is incredibly unlikely that Hull Trains could afford to pay for the electrification all the way to Hull on a commercial basis with only fuel and train maintenance to offset the expense.

 

[jimm]

So it is not a 'privately funded' railway scheme at all?
That paints the project in a rather different light to the one that Chiltern's PR department has attempted since the project began.



Yes, a 'commercial loan arrangement' that will inevitably be paid for by the state in the form of reduced access charges for Hull Trains or something similar.
It is incredibly unlikely that Hull Trains could afford to pay for the electrification all the way to Hull on a commercial basis with only fuel and train maintenance to offset the expense.

Depends on how you define private. Chiltern has to pay the increased charges out of its income and would Network Rail/Railtrack have done any upgrades to the route off their own bat? Unlikely given all the work BR had just ahead of privatisation.

As for how any Hull scheme is to be funded, maybe wait and see what transpires first. It's not just about Hull Trains anyway, since TransPennine and Northern would clearly also benefit.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Hull Trains are in it for the extended rights to the route (to pay for their investment).
Such things do not get agreed overnight, and not solely by the Sec of State - that's down to ORR, who have yet to pronounce.
They have not been in a hurry to approve any other new Open Access deal.

 

[IanXC]

Hull Trains are in it for the extended rights to the route (to pay for their investment).
Such things do not get agreed overnight, and not solely by the Sec of State - that's down to ORR, who have yet to pronounce.
They have not been in a hurry to approve any other new Open Access deal.

Although this is a renewal rather than a new application, and as I understand it the process would look more like an application for the renewal of freight paths than anything else.

It would seem unusual but its not out of the question that the ORR process has been going on in confidence alongside the DfTs considerations.

 

[ianhr]

As for how any Hull scheme is to be funded, maybe wait and see what transpires first. It's not just about Hull Trains anyway, since TransPennine and Northern would clearly also benefit.

Do we know exactly which lines are part of the scheme? AIUI Micklefield-Selby is covered by TransPennine east and I assume this will also include the Hambleton Jct West to South chord so that East Coast can run that way to/from Leeds. Hull trains would also need Temple Hirst-Selby to be wired in addition to Selby-Hull. If Northern are to operate Hull-Selby-York trains with EMUs, which would surely be sensible, then the Hambleton Jct East to North chord would have to be included AND possibly Gascoign Wood-Church Fenton since I believe some of these trains also serve Sherburn-in-Elmet. Then of course there is the question of freight to the various terminals around Hull.

 

[IanXC]

The last draft of the Network Rail plan I've seen includes, Leeds-Selby and specifically Hambleton South-West. The HT plan is Hull-Selby-Temple Hurst. Hambleton North-East is only a very short, single track chord so I'd be astounded if it wasn't done.

There's nothing to say the route via Sherburn will be done as far as I've seen, remember that whilst some Hull-Yorks do go via Sherburn there's nothing to say they have to. A diesel shuttle could be provided between York and Selby (I think Sherburn gets many more services per day than the franchise specification, due to the difficulty of obtaining 75mph paths via the direct ECML route).

Another short addition for diversionary capacity could be provided by electrifying Selby Canal Junction to Selby West(?) - this is a chord which allows a route Doncaster-Temple Hurst-Selby Canal Chord (avoids Selby station, joins the line towards Leeds) then either Hambleton then York, or potentially Sherburn then York.

 

[snowball]

Both curves at Hambleton are specifically included, see page 92 of this:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/publications/draft-CP5-enhancements-delivery-plan.pdf

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Both curves at Hambleton are specifically included, see page 92 of this:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/publications/draft-CP5-enhancements-delivery-plan.pdf

Thank god for commonsense.

 

[IanXC]

Thank god for commonsense.

Indeed. The electrification works east of Leeds are very much about diversionary routes - LNE seem to look enviously at LNW's diversionary opportunities, and see providing more options as an important plank of their actions to improve performance for the East Coast franchise holder.

 

[Aictos]

Just wondering but how much won't be electrified at all in the North and will continue to see DMUs to the end of time?

 

[ianhr]

Just wondering but how much won't be electrified at all in the North and will continue to see DMUs to the end of time?

Probably depends whether or not any contracts are let before the next General Election. It looks as though GW & NW stage II will get away with it as apparently they have already been signed off. I'm not holding my breath about anything else!

 

[Altnabreac]

Just wondering but how much won't be electrified at all in the North and will continue to see DMUs to the end of time?

Nunthorpe - Whitby is probably safe as a diesel route for now.

Judging by the Electrification RUS, basically any route with no freight, no diversionary capability and a less than 1tph passenger service is unlikely to ever get done.

There are surprisingly few lines which meet this triumvirate of reasons not to electrify.

In NE England the other lines which meet these criteria are probably:
Bridlington - Seamer
Barton on Humber - Habrough
Long Preston - Carnforth

As relatively short sections with potential under wires running as well you could see Bridlington and Barton on Humber getting done anyway.

So the only sections of passenger track in NE England I'd be confident will still be diesel operated in 2050 will be Nunthorpe - Whitby and Long Preston - Carnforth.

 

[duffield]

So the only sections of passenger track in NE England I'd be confident will still be diesel operated in 2050 will be Nunthorpe - Whitby and Long Preston - Carnforth.

There's probably a good chance that dual-mode overhead electric/battery powered trains (which are already being tested) will be a viable proposition for these sort of lines well before 2050, especially as battery technology continues to improve steadily.

 

[HSTEd]

Once you are down to such a small number of lines the cost of doing them is negligible.
Considering the entire diesel maintenance infrastructure and stock procurement costs will fall on just those two routes.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Once you are down to such a small number of lines the cost of doing them is negligible.
Considering the entire diesel maintenance infrastructure and stock procurement costs will fall on just those two routes.

That was my thought too and is why I even think Long Preston Carnforth could get done.

 

[PhilipW]

Today's the day.

http://www.kcfm.co.uk/news/local-ne...y-over-plans-to-electrify-hulls-rail-network/

Fingers crossed that progress is made.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Today's the day.
http://www.kcfm.co.uk/news/local-ne...y-over-plans-to-electrify-hulls-rail-network/
Fingers crossed that progress is made.

Since the original posts on here, NR has had its CP5 plans approved (not including Selby-Hull).
It has also appointed its route electrification contractors - for the north east it's Carillion Powerlines, although there is no contract yet for TP electrification.
The route is also included in the December announcement about investigating further electrification in the north, which talked about "an interim report within 12 months".
Unless it is all private money and separate resources, it's difficult to see this scheme leapfrogging the others into CP5.
It's also an opportunity for Patrick McLoughlin to say more about rail in the north generally.

 

[snowball]

Do you mean CP5 there (both occurrences)?