Electrification for CP6-what could we expect to see?

[59CosG95]

By MML do you mean Midland Main Line? That's already committed.

Yes, I know that, but I was referring more to the fact that the local lines around Shef. are going to be wired, so the signals'd need immunisation if they haven't been immunised already for AC.

 

[w0033944]

I presume from its total absence from the thread so far that there's no chance of any new electrification in the East? Then again, we don't do badly for OHLE around here, and the North an South-West need it more, probably.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I presume from its total absence from the thread so far that there's no chance of any new electrification in the East? Then again, we don't do badly for OHLE around here, and the North an South-West need it more, probably.

You'll be getting it with the East-West rail link, won't you? It needs to link up to Norwich and Ipswich, I think.

 

[swt_passenger]

You'll be getting it with the East-West rail link, won't you? It needs to link up to Norwich and Ipswich, I think.

There's nothing planned east of Bedford in the timescales under discussion, and isn't likely to be for donkeys...

 

[The Ham]

Any electrification towards Salisbury or Exeter would almost certainly be 25kV but conversion inwards towards Waterloo is likely to be a long way off, so electric trains on this route would need to be dual voltage.

The basic timetable has hourly trains through to Exeter, many of which are strengthened east of Salisbury. There is also an hourly Salisbury service but this extends to/from Yeovil or beyond in the peaks. Hence electrification only to Salisbury or Yeovil would mean most of the units going off the wires at some point during the day, or having to multiple with others that do so. So unless electrification went right through to Exeter the majority of the fleet would need to be bi-modes with dual-voltage capability.

What's the betting that the wires will reach Exeter via Salisbury before via Taunton?

Firstly, just electrifying to Salisbury could mean that (at least some of) the stopping services which terminate at Basingstoke could be extended to Salisbury to serve the more minor stations between Basingstoke and Salisbury, potentially speeding up the Salisbury services. At the very least it could enable some additional stations to (re)open. Better still extend them and electrification to Yeovil and you could further increase the speed of the Exeter services.

Although these trains can be full going into London, very few people would use them to go all the way as it would be faster to change at the more major stations along the route (i.e. Basingstoke, Salisbury, etc.). It would also enable better connectivity between towns either side of Basingstoke, as at present there is normally about a 9 to 15 minutes between services at Basingstoke (which is a lot on a journey time of about 45 minutes between Farnborough and Andover).

Even with the electrification to Exeter there would still be some services to Bristol which could still need to be run by DMU's until the line from Bath Spa to Salisbury is fully wired up, these services currently run paired with the services to Exeter. Although that then starts to become a good case for electrification of this gap. As Cardiff to Bath Spa and Southampton to Portsmouth would be electrified meaning a fairly small length gap in what otherwise could be electric service. Especially if the Salisbury 6 route is wired up to enable electric freight to go that way as the gap would then be shorter.

The case for through Taunton to Exeter would probably depend on what trains run the service post 2020 and their lifespan. Although the Electrification of the Line to Newquay could be better than the line to Penzance as IIRC there is a major power line which could provide power which crosses the Newquay line.

 

[Altnabreac]

In Scotland I reckon CP6 will definitely include Kilmarnock, Fife Circle and Dundee.

Possibly also Ladybank - Perth, City Union line and Edinburgh South Suburban Line.

I've taken the committed schemes for CP5 and assumed a similar number of track miles to be electrified in CP6 following the project priorities set out in the Strategic Transport Projects review. So its speculation but informed by official policy:

Scottish Electrification projected to be undertaken in late CP4 / CP5 based on published plans by Transport Scotland:

• Paisley Canal 4 miles (mainly single track)
• Cumbernauld 12 miles
• Whifflet 8 miles
• Edinburgh – Glasgow Queen St via Falkirk High 39 miles
• Cumbernauld – Polmont via Falkirk Grahamston and other infill 16 miles
• Falkirk – Grangemouth 4 miles
• Falkirk – Dunblane 17 miles
• Stirling – Alloa 7 miles (mainly single track)
• Glasgow North Suburban 5 miles (1 mile single track)
• Shotts line 22 miles
• East Kilbride line 10 miles (4 miles single track)

16 miles single track and 128 miles double track electrification

Total CP5 Scottish Electrification 272 track miles of electrification.

Projected Scottish electrification in CP6 based on priorities set out in Strategic Transport Projects Review and other industry documents:

• Busby junction – Kilmarnock 20 miles
• Fife Circle 50 miles
• Markinch – Dundee 26 miles
• Ladybank – Perth 18 miles
• City Union Line 3 miles
• Edinburgh South Suburban 8 miles
• Barassie – Kilmarnock 8 miles (mainly single track)

8 miles single track and 125 miles double track electrification

Total – 258 track miles of electrification

Projected Scottish Electrification in CP7 based on priorities set out in Strategic Transport Projects Review and other industry documents:

• Dunblane – Inverurie 134 miles (19 single track)

Total – 249 track miles of electrification

Post CP7 Scottish electrification – Perth- Inverness in STPR – others are speculative options.

• Perth - Inverness 118 miles (80 miles single track)
• Kilmarnock – Gretna Green 82 miles
• Ayr – Girvan 21 miles (18 single track)
• Borders Rail 30 miles (20 single track)
• Inverurie – Inverness 91 miles (mainly single track)

Total - 475 track miles of electrification

 

[WatcherZero]

Higgins report suggests NR CP6 funding should be pretty much dedicated to Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds-Hull improvements and integration with HS2.

 

[snowball]

There's nothing planned east of Bedford in the timescales under discussion, and isn't likely to be for donkeys...

Isn't there some talk of Felixstowe-Nuneaton as a possibility?

 

[jopsuk]

with existing other electrification plans, would wiring Peterborough-Norwich allow the Norwich-Liverpool service to go electric?

How much (other than already announced) wiring would be needed to electrify Stansted-Birmingham? Obviously both of these ideas would have a common section. The additional Ely-Ipswich then would be more for freight benefits, with Kennet-Cambridge as an obvious infill.

 

[YorkshireBear]

with existing other electrification plans, would wiring Peterborough-Norwich allow the Norwich-Liverpool service to go electric?

How much (other than already announced) wiring would be needed to electrify Stansted-Birmingham? Obviously both of these ideas would have a common section. The additional Ely-Ipswich then would be more for freight benefits, with Kennet-Cambridge as an obvious infill.

The next wiring to come to the East i imagine will be Felixstowe to Nuneaton with the addition of small bits to allow passenger services to be converted.

 

[joeykins82]

Without rerouting the Norwich-Liverpool services I think it'd require the electrification of:
Norwich-Peterborough
Grantham-Nottingham
Nottingham-Sheffield via Erewash Valley (although this is the sort of service I can see being rerouted via Toton for the HS2 connection)
Sheffield-Stockport

 

[swt_passenger]

Isn't there some talk of Felixstowe-Nuneaton as a possibility?

Sorry I wasn't clearer, in the context of the earlier post I was thinking specifically of the 'East West rail' potential project beyond Bedford...

 

[cjmillsnun]

Any electrification towards Salisbury or Exeter would almost certainly be 25kV but conversion inwards towards Waterloo is likely to be a long way off, so electric trains on this route would need to be dual voltage.

The basic timetable has hourly trains through to Exeter, many of which are strengthened east of Salisbury. There is also an hourly Salisbury service but this extends to/from Yeovil or beyond in the peaks. Hence electrification only to Salisbury or Yeovil would mean most of the units going off the wires at some point during the day, or having to multiple with others that do so. So unless electrification went right through to Exeter the majority of the fleet would need to be bi-modes with dual-voltage capability.

What's the betting that the wires will reach Exeter via Salisbury before via Taunton?

Dual voltage is not really an issue is it? Any new third rail stock gets a pan well nowadays (IIRC the only post privatisation third rail stock without a pan well will be the 458/5s derived entirely from ex 460). There'll be third rail around long enough for them to see out their days anyway.

 

[pemma]

I cant really see Network rail annoucing many more schemes until they have nearly completed most of the current schemes.

The south wales valleys were supposed to be done in cp5 now looks like most of the network wont be wired unti around 2024 although the Maesteg & Ebbw Vale branches should be completed before 2020 if the GWML electrifiction continues on course.

I don't think it was ever confirmed as a CP5 scheme

The Welsh Government is developing a business case for investment in VLE. It is intended that this business case will be considered by the Department for Transport (DfT) for inclusion of the project in its High Level Output Specification (HLOS2) submission for CP5, which covers the period 2014-2019.

http://wales.gov.uk/docs/det/policy/electrification/120830vleobc.pdf

However, Valley Lines electrification wasn't included as a Network Rail CP5 scheme and it sounds like it was put back to CP6 following a SEWTA consultation: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-23667445

The July 2009 electrification announcement was because of a big change in DfT rolling stock policy - no more DMUs or diesel-only IEPs.
The NW electrification was announced on the same day, but only Liverpool-Manchester at that stage - by the autumn statement it had grown to the triangle, and later still they added Blackpool.

The idea of no more local/regional DMUs was only announced last year. However, the 2009 announcement was due to DfT having an ITT for 200+ new DMU vehicles out which they were to cancel it so that the units freed up by the new Thameslink order were put in to use. However, they needed to give the full picture - just announcing they were pulling the ITT would have led to too many objections. As it is was much needed extra capacity was delayed due to the change in idea.

 

[edwin_m]

Dual voltage is not really an issue is it? Any new third rail stock gets a pan well nowadays (IIRC the only post privatisation third rail stock without a pan well will be the 458/5s derived entirely from ex 460). There'll be third rail around long enough for them to see out their days anyway.

Maybe. It's just another non-standard design feature that will send the costs up. Incidentally to a global manufacturer the non-standard feature is third rail not 25kV overhead.

 

[jimm]

The case for through Taunton to Exeter would probably depend on what trains run the service post 2020 and their lifespan. Although the Electrification of the Line to Newquay could be better than the line to Penzance as IIRC there is a major power line which could provide power which crosses the Newquay line.

Why are you so obsessed with Newquay? Outside the summer, it's a rural backwater. All the major centres of population in Cornwall - St Austell, Truro, Falmouth, Camborne/Redruth and Penzance - are west of Par. If the wires ever get to Cornwall, then Penzance (and Falmouth) is where they will be going, end of story.

 

[jopsuk]

If Penzance, and possibly Falmouth, get wired up, then I could potentially see St Ives, Newquay and even Looe being wired up as addons.

But you're right, Newquay has a population about 20,000, everywhere else on the branch is a small village at best.

 

[The Ham]

Why are you so obsessed with Newquay? Outside the summer, it's a rural backwater. All the major centres of population in Cornwall - St Austell, Truro, Falmouth, Camborne/Redruth and Penzance - are west of Par. If the wires ever get to Cornwall, then Penzance (and Falmouth) is where they will be going, end of story.

I may have phrased that poorly, as there is a major power feed along the line to Newquay, which there isn't along the mainline then it maybe better to wire up to Newquay as well as to Penzance rather than just to Penzance.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Why are you so obsessed with Newquay? Outside the summer, it's a rural backwater. All the major centres of population in Cornwall - St Austell, Truro, Falmouth, Camborne/Redruth and Penzance - are west of Par. If the wires ever get to Cornwall, then Penzance (and Falmouth) is where they will be going, end of story.

I confess to having been obsessed by Newquay for 18 months now. Through electric in summer - major power feed present- not keen on diesel island (e,g. Windermere which is even more of a backwater), but what really p-s*** me off is that there is an airport at Newquay with jet service!!! If it has an airport it deserves a freaking electric railway - sorry for the rant but I just hate the way railways are relegated to 3rd place in the UK.

If Penzance, and possibly Falmouth, get wired up, then I could potentially see St Ives, Newquay and even Looe being wired up as addons. But you're right, Newquay has a population about 20,000, everywhere else on the branch is a small village at best.

I hope so - it would be an outbreak of operational commonsense even if the BCR is not there.

I may have phrased that poorly, as there is a major power feed along the line to Newquay, which there isn't along the mainline then it maybe better to wire up to Newquay as well as to Penzance rather than just to Penzance.

Agree - I personally would do Newquay first and come and back and do the rest while the teams were down there.

 

[jopsuk]

but what really p-s*** me off is that there is an airport at Newquay with jet service!!! If it has an airport it deserves a freaking electric railway - sorry for the rant but I just hate the way railways are relegated to 3rd place in the UK.

It's the only airport with service to anywhere other than the Scillys west of Exeter. Of all the airfields in Cornwall, it was (likely) chosen for civilian commercial use as it was convenient for St Austell (the biggest town in Cornwall) and not too far from Truro and Bodmin. Proximity to Newquay was a bonus.

 

[jimm]

I confess to having been obsessed by Newquay for 18 months now. Through electric in summer - major power feed present- not keen on diesel island (e,g. Windermere which is even more of a backwater), but what really p-s*** me off is that there is an airport at Newquay with jet service!!! If it has an airport it deserves a freaking electric railway - sorry for the rant but I just hate the way railways are relegated to 3rd place in the UK.



I hope so - it would be an outbreak of operational commonsense even if the BCR is not there.



Agree - I personally would do Newquay first and come and back and do the rest while the teams were down there.

I couldn't give a monkey's if there's a power line there, or an airport (with jet service!!!), the location of which has more to do with the previous RAF and USAF operations at St Mawgan leaving the legacy of a 9,000ft runway than any other consideration.

Where are most of the people, and the demand for rail services, in Cornwall? Not in Newquay.

I said nothing about an island of diesel operation. Logic says that if wires ever do get west of Plymouth then you would probably wire to Newquay while you're at it, but The Ham has something of a fixation with Newquay, telling us in other threads that it should have year-round, all-day through services from London - which it plainly should not, unless you're keen on haemorrhaging red ink everywhere.

And it's an entirely academic question, because even wiring to Plymouth by 2024 looks improbable as things stand, never mind west of the Tamar, with the key issue facing the South West's railways being how to provide an alternative to the Dawlish seawall route.

 

[Aictos]

The next wiring to come to the East i imagine will be Felixstowe to Nuneaton with the addition of small bits to allow passenger services to be converted.

IF anything I reckon these small bits would include:

Ipswich to Cambridge
Ipswich to Ely
Ely to Norwich
Ely to Peterborough

That should free up a reasonable number of DMUs plus allow more electric freight which I think GBRF is certainly one pushing for it?

Regards to the ECML, it's about time they wire up the GN & GE Joint line as a it already acts as a diversionary route for ECML services and it would be better then having to use Thunderbirds to drag trains over this section with it being used to send all trains when the ECML via Grantham is unavailable plus if it was wired up you could see the existing Peterborough to Lincoln services extended to Doncaster with EMUs being used.

 

[joeykins82]

The "problem" is that there are so many obvious candidates for electrification, and almost every scheme introduces a new "oh, well if you're doing that then it makes sense to do this as well" add-on.

Do you prioritise electrifying the branches that cause the worst uses of diesels running under the wires, or look for intensive (4tph+) lines where a big electrification project would swap many DMUs for EMUs? Does the flexibility given from electrifying an important diversionary route outweigh the capacity and frequency increases possible from a main line scheme?

The electrification strategy would be a fascinating thing to work on.

 

[Aictos]

Well my use of wiring up the routes I've mentioned between Peterborough and Ipswich/Norwich/Cambridge etcera would remove need for DMUs in the affected area with only the Liverpool to Norwich service remaining as DMU operated or least until Bi Modal trains are available especially if they enable a infill scheme between Nuneaton and New Street to be tied in with any West Midlands electrification projects

I say that's going to be a considerable amount of DMUs freed up as you would see EMUs on the following routes:

Birmingham New Street to Leicester/Stansted Airport
Peterborough to Ipswich via Bury St Edmunds
Norwich to Cambridge (maybe extended to Stansted Airport)
Cambridge to Ipswich

These freed up DMUs can now be used to be cascaded to other areas which won't see electrification or use to displace existing rolling stock to enable 14Xs to be withdrawn from service without affecting seating capacity for passengers.

 

[The Ham]

The "problem" is that there are so many obvious candidates for electrification, and almost every scheme introduces a new "oh, well if you're doing that then it makes sense to do this as well" add-on.

Do you prioritise electrifying the branches that cause the worst uses of diesels running under the wires, or look for intensive (4tph+) lines where a big electrification project would swap many DMUs for EMUs? Does the flexibility given from electrifying an important diversionary route outweigh the capacity and frequency increases possible from a main line scheme?

The electrification strategy would be a fascinating thing to work on.

I would suggest that the key priority for electrification is removing under the wire running as much as possible, with the secondary goal of removing small DMU fleets from individual TOC's (especially if it means that they are located a long way from a depot and/or a long way away from each other). If there are a number of routes which meet both of these, then any routes which could result in electric traction for freight and/or any routes whose DUM's are up for renewal shortly should be brought into consideration.

Therefore, there maybe a route which does the former, however by doing so leaves only a handful of DMU's. That then means that the lines which remove the need for those DMU's could be done, even if they only have an hourly service on them, at the expense of another line which has 2 or 3 trains an hour over it.

Following that guidance, if Basingstoke to Exeter were to be done in CP6 then the lines for the Sailsbury 6 would also have wires put up either at the same time or very shortly after (as it also completes the wires for a freight route). Which would then mean that the line from Salisbury to Bath Spa would be a high contender for wires to also be erected as it would then remove the need for SWT's to run DMU's at all, as well as removing DMU's from the Cardiff to Portsmouth service which would then be running under the "wires" for a lot of the way. (I know that for a section it would be using 3rd rail, but it's a nice shorthand).

 

[GRALISTAIR]

The "problem" is that there are so many obvious candidates for electrification, and almost every scheme introduces a new "oh, well if you're doing that then it makes sense to do this as well" add-on.

Do you prioritise electrifying the branches that cause the worst uses of diesels running under the wires, or look for intensive (4tph+) lines where a big electrification project would swap many DMUs for EMUs? Does the flexibility given from electrifying an important diversionary route outweigh the capacity and frequency increases possible from a main line scheme?

The electrification strategy would be a fascinating thing to work on.

You are absolutely correct and everyone (especially politicians) have their own opinions and pet projects. Since my 2nd home is in Preston and my father's former boss wrote a letter to the Editor in Modern Railways in 1987 about Manchester-Blackpool electrification I am happy.

OP you say ---- The "problem" is that there are so many "obvious" candidates for electrification, and almost every scheme introduces a new "oh, well if you're doing that then it makes sense to do this as well" add-on.

That is why I hope commonsense prevails and that the coalition government (hopefully supported by Labor) will just use the phrase in Parliament "We are having a ROLLING PROGRAMME OF ELECTRIFICATION" Nice and steady.

 

[David]

I'm predicting that CP6 will be more about various infill projects, with perhaps just 1 "headline" electrification scheme, such as Felixstowe - Nuneaton or Newport - Crewe (both these routes tie in with current electrification projects and routes, so would be an easy fit in the grand scheme of things).

The easiest infill schemes would be relatively short runs, such as Derby - Birmingham and Sheffield - Doncaster/Fitzwilliam plus Birmingham - Bristol, as this would allow the majority of the Cross Country fleet to be cascaded and/or reformed (especially if Southampton to Bournemouth is converted as part of the electric spine).

Other possible routes to consider are Leeds - Sheffield via Barnsley and Sheffield - Nottingham and the Hope Valley, plus routes around the South West. Each infill scheme takes away the need for some DMUs, and in turn makes other routes more viable to be converted.

 

[pemma]

Do you prioritise electrifying the branches that cause the worst uses of diesels running under the wires, or look for intensive (4tph+) lines where a big electrification project would swap many DMUs for EMUs? Does the flexibility given from electrifying an important diversionary route outweigh the capacity and frequency increases possible from a main line scheme?

I think this will be a problem if we start talking about 100% electric franchises. Post-North TPE electrification TPE will be able to use DMUs on diverted overnight/Sunday services which are used on South TPE during Monday-Saturday daytime but if you make every route electrified by don't electrify the diversionary routes then they'll either want to hang on to DMUs to cover diversions or have a proportion of the fleet which are bi-mode trains.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'm predicting that CP6 will be more about various infill projects, with perhaps just 1 "headline" electrification scheme, such as Felixstowe - Nuneaton or Newport - Crewe (both these routes tie in with current electrification projects and routes, so would be an easy fit in the grand scheme of things).

The easiest infill schemes would be relatively short runs, such as Derby - Birmingham and Sheffield - Doncaster/Fitzwilliam plus Birmingham - Bristol, as this would allow the majority of the Cross Country fleet to be cascaded and/or reformed (especially if Southampton to Bournemouth is converted as part of the electric spine).

Other possible routes to consider are Leeds - Sheffield via Barnsley and Sheffield - Nottingham and the Hope Valley, plus routes around the South West. Each infill scheme takes away the need for some DMUs, and in turn makes other routes more viable to be converted.

I think this will be a problem if we start talking about 100% electric franchises. Post-North TPE electrification TPE will be able to use DMUs on diverted overnight/Sunday services which are used on South TPE during Monday-Saturday daytime but if you make every route electrified by don't electrify the diversionary routes then they'll either want to hang on to DMUs to cover diversions or have a proportion of the fleet which are bi-mode trains.

I largely agree that David's prediction of largely infill projects with one or two larger 'Headline' schemes is the way forward:-
Though it's for the reasons cited by jcollins that I suggest the Calder Valley line as one of the possible 'big' projects. Not sure there'd be a case for Copy Pit, but Leeds-Rochdale-Manchester Victoria plus Heaton Lodge to Dryclough & Milner Royd(?) junctions would release a LOT of diesel units!

That does raise the question of what electric stock would be used on Caldervale line services, though I wonder if new outer-suburban stock on the Great Eastern might be justified as those routes have (rightly or wrongly) gained a bit of a reputation of being the 'Cinderella' lines in the former NSE area. This would release a good number of 317s or 321s in addition to those released from the Great Northern by the Thameslink units, which could be spruced up and sent North!

 

[The Ham]

How many miles are being wired up in CP5?

If you took the following as a starting point (allows SWT's to be totally EMU run and a lot of XC services to be run by EMU's), what other services would benefit (I know that it would allow GW to run Portsmouth to Cardiff by EMU), would there be any other short lengths which would then be able to be run as EMU:

125 Basingstoke to Exeter
30 Salisbury 6
45 Sailsbury to Bath Spa
45 York to Sheffield
40 Derby to Birmingham
125 Birmingham to Bristol/Cardiff (both routes)

410 miles

Assumming (say) a total of 600 route miles (or what ever the answer is to the number of miles in CP5), what other routes would be useful to add, would there be a good case to push some or all of the above to CP7 and do others in CP6?