swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,448
You cannot easily raise line speeds south of Basingstoke with all that freight about.
So it certainly could be done if enough cash was thrown at it, the wires started back at Waterloo and if a premium path could somehow be created.
Sounds like a reasonable outcome. I'd say the old Alphaline routes would be ideal for the 159s, or possibly Norwich-Liverpool and some other EMT routes, assuming their 158s don't get replaced with something more modern.
You cannot easily raise line speeds south of Basingstoke with all that freight about.
Seeing as a 159 is to all intents and purposes a 158 i can't see how cascading them to Liverpool-Norwich would be in any way beneficial. It'd just be like for like.
I guess the only advantage is that they're all 3-car units and would also introduce first class onto the route. But I agree otherwise it does seem a bit pointless.
Running anything up to 10 car trains like SWT do would be a massive improvement on that route wouldn't it?
I took his idea to mean that they would run WITH the existing EMT fleet if it wasn't replaced. Not as replacements, but as a significant capacity increase.
Running anything up to 10 car trains like SWT do would be a massive improvement on that route wouldn't it?
Seeing as a 159 is to all intents and purposes a 158 i can't see how cascading them to Liverpool-Norwich would be in any way beneficial. It'd just be like for like.
If only there was a rail line that connected Southampton to Oxford, perhaps say, via Newbury and Didcot
You cannot easily raise line speeds south of Basingstoke with all that freight about.
With new powerful 25kV electric locos for freight haulage, much better acceleration and hill climbing should be the result. That could create some capacity for some modest passenger speed improvement, as the freights would be able to get out of the way more quickly.
They could, but there's also 4 quite significant tunnels - and anyway there's some quite significant lengths of four track already that allow some looping of trains, eg between Basingstoke and Worting Jn, at Waller's Ash, and from Shawford to Eastleigh.Can they not create some long sections of quad/freight lay-bys to allow passenger trains to overtake?
In terms of Reading 3rd rail on the northern platforms - I thought that a long standing plan was for Airtrack to possibly use these to head to Oxford. The North Downs trains are diesel, and the SWT trains from Waterloo would never be extended, surely?
I guess it gives flexibility - or possibly the SWT trains might terminate on the northern platforms, and the new WRATH trains if not through running, might terminate on the old SWT platforms, if coming from the fast lines.
The GW ITT has this paragraph:
The three new north side platforms and the new dive under at Reading station will be equipped with steel sleepers to facilitate third rail electrification.
Does this mean 3rd rail installation inhibits the kind of track formation you can use?
Surely, adding 50% to the capacity is better than nothing, but I thought the internal facilities were better with 159s. They certainly have 200 evtra horsepower per vehicle, which would be useful.
There is, in effect, already a 4-track freight route from Basingstoke to Southampton now that the route via Salisbury has been converted to W10 gauge for freight.
It is called a "diversionary" route but, because of the limited number of freight paths through Eastleigh, I suspect it will become more of an "alternative" route.
The reason that takes so long is nothing to do with electrification, that is linespeed. You don't get over 70mph along there if I recall.
There is, in effect, already a 4-track freight route from Basingstoke to Southampton now that the route via Salisbury has been converted to W10 gauge for freight.
It is called a "diversionary" route but, because of the limited number of freight paths through Eastleigh, I suspect it will become more of an "alternative" route.
If there is a real push to get freight electrically hauled then once the Basingstoke to Southampton route is converted to 25Kv, I suspect that as night-follows-day the Salisbury route will also be electrified probably immediately afterwards by the same team moving onto it.
For those not familar with the area, the 2 miles west of Southampton Central covering the 4-track layout and many points will get electrified as part of the main push to get access to the docks. This takes the OHLE up very close to Redbridge station. From Redbridge to Worting Junction via Salisbury is just simple 2-track all the way. With the bridges already adjusted, it should be a simple piece of electrification and could follow on just months after the main Eastleigh route. Limited benefit initially for passengers but a big piece of the master jigsaw for freight.
It has not been converted. It is being converted, not due to be finished until June 2013.
I didn't notice any mention of this in the thread so apologies if this is repetition, but it seems to me that with the MML being wired, along with the new Bedford - Oxford link and Southampton, isn't there potential for new services from Sheffield, Notts, etc, to Southampton, avoiding the need to go via London or Brum?
I appreciate it's being done with more freight in mind, but it'd be a shame not to make maximum use of the infrastructure.
They could, but there's also 4 quite significant tunnels - and anyway there's some quite significant lengths of four track already that allow some looping of trains, eg between Basingstoke and Worting Jn, at Waller's Ash, and from Shawford to Eastleigh.
Anyone can see that the only difference between the sleepers used in the third rail area and those used everywhere else is that the former have inserts to take the third rail insulators . . . .
But a 3 car 159 would result in 25% LESS capacity than the 2x158's currently used on the majority of services. As i pointed out earlier, doubling up the 159's is impractical as things stand due to platform lengths at some stations.
I was also under the impression that 159's use the same 350/400hp Cummins engines as our current 158's (unless i'm mistaken???) so there's no extra ponies available.
It's probably been discussed before under various 'East West rail' (EWR) topics, as diverting XC services was claimed as an advantage for the route in the EWR project reports. I think the basic problem is that they'd have to be additional services rather than re-routings, because if you think of diverting North East to South Coast XC, or Manchester to South Coast XC, you actually remove a massive chunk of their existing flows to/from New St and Coventry.
Steel sleepers are very popular at the moment, because they are cheap, relatively lightweight and anchor themselves well into the ballast.
Anyone can see that the only difference between the sleepers used in the third rail area and those used everywhere else is that the former have inserts to take the third rail insulators.
I think the only one of those possibilities where there would be space to build loops or extensions would be Micheldever if you rebuilt the station and took out the island platform.Probably some benefit providing some fairly short additional platform loops or slow line extensions at the more minor intermediate stations e.g. Shawford, Micheldever, St. Denys to allow more flexibility for fasts to overtake stoppers.