Great Western Electrification Progress

[HowardGWR]

I can't see them doing two tracks only - operating flexibility and all that. However in the short to medium term it's academic as no tracks will be done.

I haven't seen any announcement to that effect. My understanding was that it is planned for CP6 -I call that 'short term'. Surely Grayling would have announced any delay along with the other bad news?

 

[hwl]

Quick question (or 2)

a) how much work has been done west of Cardiff?

b) how much work has been done on the (Chippenham) Bath - Bristol TM section? I can remember some piling work ages ago and some track lowering and bridge works too.

Just thinking about sunk costs/work and how much would be left to do if things start up again...

 

[nickswift99]

Not a good morning for GWR. Engineering works overran between Didcot and Swindon and the station staff at Oxford failed to open the station before the first Chiltern service.

DOZENS of people were left stranded outside of Oxford Railway Station after staff failed to unlock the doors before the first train arrived.

More than 100 people were reportedly left queueing outside the main entrance after the error this morning.

They could only watch in despair as the first Chiltern service to London passed by the station oblivious to the hordes of passengers stuck behind the locked door.

http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/15..._station_doors_in_staff_blunder/?ref=mrb&lp=1

 

[snowball]

I haven't seen any announcement to that effect. My understanding was that it is planned for CP6 -I call that 'short term'. Surely Grayling would have announced any delay along with the other bad news?

In early November 2016, electrification of both approach routes to Bristol was "deferred", along with Didcot to Oxford, Slough to Windsor and Twyford to Henley. No statement was made either that they would happen in CP6 or that they wouldn't. Since they were not mentioned in this week's announcements, it's a reasonable assumption that they will happen in CP6, but it is an assumption.

Cardiff to Swansea, being already well out of the running for CP5, was not mentioned in the November 2016 announcement but has now been definitively dropped.

As for the rest, Paddington to Cardiff and Reading to Newbury are still committed for December 2018.

 

[HowardGWR]

In early November 2016, electrification of both approach routes to Bristol was "deferred", along with Didcot to Oxford, Slough to Windsor and Twyford to Henley. No statement was made either that they would happen in CP6 or that they wouldn't. Since they were not mentioned in this week's announcements, it's a reasonable assumption that they will happen in CP6, but it is an assumption.

Cardiff to Swansea, being already well out of the running for CP5, was not mentioned in the November 2016 announcement but has now been definitively dropped.

As for the rest, Paddington to Cardiff and Reading to Newbury are still committed for December 2018.

See my highlighted. That was the basis for my point. Had the other schemes been dropped, I would have expected to have heard that in the same recent announcement.

Nevertheless, it would appear that a few questions to the Minister would be in in order. Ah, they have gone on holiday, so that's convenient, isn't it? :roll:

 

[snowball]

See my highlighted. That was the basis for my point. Had the other schemes been dropped, I would have expected to have heard that in the same recent announcement.

However it is at least theoretically possible that they will be built in a later CP than CP6.

 

[HowardGWR]

However it is at least theoretically possible that they will be built in a later CP than CP6.

Yes, but that's not the same as 'cancelled', which is what I understand e.g. MML and Swansea are. My understanding was that, like Oxford, it is the revamping of Temple Meads (at least, the signalling) that is preventing progress in those areas.

 

[snowball]

Yes, but that's not the same as 'cancelled', which is what I understand e.g. MML and Swansea are.

Edwin m said #5340 that Filton Bank would not be electrified in the short to medium term. You said in #5341 that you believed it was planned for CP6. My post #5344 was an attempt to clarify the exact situation, not entirely agreeeing with either of you. It seems to me you are now agreeing with what I said, and so slightly shifting from your earlier position.

My understanding was that, like Oxford, it is the revamping of Temple Meads (at least, the signalling) that is preventing progress in those areas.

Mine too. Though if those obstacles had not been present, the financial limits for CP5 would probably have had the same effect.

 

[Olaf]

To clarify; there is no funding in CP5 for the Bristol sections, and none in CP6.

These items will have to go back through the process to compete for funding, and that will be harder this time around. A study of NR's ability to deliver is due in October/November, and that will inform the costing projects going forward.

 

[jimm]

Mine too. Though if those obstacles had not been present, the financial limits for CP5 would probably have had the same effect.

In the case of Oxford, if resignalling had happened when initially scheduled - it has been deferred so many times I can't even remember the original target date any more - in order to allow for the wires to be up for electric services to start last December, it would have been done long before they stared to get the jitters about the CP5 budget.

 

[3973EXL]

The DR gap west of Maidenhead was wired yesterday.

Kennet Jn crossovers also look to have been completed.

Just Twyford East relief crossover to wire east of Reading.

 

[HowardGWR]

The DR gap west of Maidenhead was wired yesterday.

Kennet Jn crossovers also look to have been completed.

Just Twyford East relief crossover to wire east of Reading.

At least some good news.

To make it clear, i was not disagreeing with anyone's post, just trying to clarify the GWML project chances. Olaf has reminded me that the SoS stated that all projects would have to be revisited on CBR at later stages and that will possibly give an excuse to postpone / cancel them all, depending on background budgetary considerations.

I just cling to the possibility that at least Filton Bank to the two TM terminus platforms will be done (electrification gives a good CBR where you have banks to climb and enables the half hourly Pads via Badminton to be electric throughout).

Thingley Junction to Bristol also has a bank, Box, and much pre-electrification work has been done in Box Tunnel and Bath area, as far west as Keynsham.
As all Pad trains on that route stop at Chippenham, they will at least have electric for the following Dauntsey bank, but that only because of power supply considerations.

Oxford must be top priority surely, ditto Newbury. I suspect new detailed BCRs for those two is just throwing money away on consultants. It will be so thrown though.

Is it not ironical that the stretches having to make do with diesel, at least pro tem, are the ones with the stiff banks whereas the 'billiard table' ones get electrified? That consideration, of course, also applies to the Devon banks, which was the GWR's favoured start point for electrification. Yes, I know the latter was apparently just trying to get cheaper coal for their steam engines from the coal owners.

 

[snowball]

Oxford must be top priority surely, ditto Newbury. I suspect new detailed BCRs for those two is just throwing money away on consultants. It will be so thrown though.

Newbury is definitely going ahead, in CP5, for completion by Dec 2018, the same timescale as Didcot-Cardiff.

 

[edwin_m]

I just cling to the possibility that at least Filton Bank to the two TM terminus platforms will be done (electrification gives a good CBR where you have banks to climb and enables the half hourly Pads via Badminton to be electric throughout).

I think that's highly unlikely as a standalone scheme.

I'm not sure which terminus platforms you mean but if they are the ones furthest from the ticket barrier then trains to/from Filton Bank would have to cross all the other tracks. As well as being operationally inconvenient this means the new wires would have to be moved when the eventual re-modelling changes the position of these tracks.

If you're referring to the Digby Wyatt shed that makes more sense operationally and has been talked about as the place to terminate the new fast London trains that run via Parkway. But the existing power box blocks access beyond the end of the existing short bay platform so nothing could be done until re-signalling is complete. The lack of AC immunisation of the existing signalling probably dictates the same anyway.

 

[hwl]

The lack of AC immunisation of the existing signalling probably dictates the same anyway.

That effectively won't be sorted till Easter 2019.

 

[HowardGWR]

I think that's highly unlikely as a standalone scheme.

I'm not sure which terminus platforms you mean but if they are the ones furthest from the ticket barrier then trains to/from Filton Bank would have to cross all the other tracks. As well as being operationally inconvenient this means the new wires would have to be moved when the eventual re-modelling changes the position of these tracks.

If you're referring to the Digby Wyatt shed that makes more sense operationally and has been talked about as the place to terminate the new fast London trains that run via Parkway. But the existing power box blocks access beyond the end of the existing short bay platform so nothing could be done until re-signalling is complete. The lack of AC immunisation of the existing signalling probably dictates the same anyway.

I did write the 'terminus platforms', those are indeed they. The box goes as part of the resignalling, so that in itself should not delay the job. As with Oxford, it's the signalling that has to be done first, AIUI.

The through trains from Weston go from the other side via Bath.

 

[edwin_m]

I did write the 'terminus platforms', those are indeed they. The box goes as part of the resignalling, so that in itself should not delay the job. As with Oxford, it's the signalling that has to be done first, AIUI.

The through trains from Weston go from the other side via Bath.

I think the deferment of electrification to Temple Meads (and Oxford) is to a large extent down to the lack of any progress on the signalling. If that is so then it follows that anything that requires the signalling to be done isn't likely to happen much sooner.

 

[3973EXL]

At some point the UR contact wire has gone up between Scours and West Jn.

Still to be wired are lines towards Oxford Road Jn/Reading West Station:
Feeder Relief
Up & Dn west curve.

 

[3973EXL]

Last night the Relief crossover east of Twyford was wired.

As far as I know, Maidenhead to Tilehurst overhead wires are now all up. There is still work to finish as some fixings are temporary and there is other lineside wiring to complete.

 

[59CosG95]

Last night the Relief crossover east of Twyford was wired.

As far as I know, Maidenhead to Tilehurst overhead wires are now all up. There is still work to finish as some fixings are temporary and there is other lineside wiring to complete.

Fantastic news. Did you happen to see where the clusters of temporary fixtures were, and what the types of lineside wiring that still need to go up are (plus where they're missing?)

I noticed that not all the AT wires are up yet (according to your correspondence on here, which I've duly noted over the months); so far I've got them down as being fixed between Maidenhead and Reading on the Mains; Maidenhead and Twyford on the Reliefs, between West Ealing & Hanwell (both lines IIRC) and between Stockley & Maidenhead (missing around Slough). Would an update on that situation also be possible?

Thanks once again for the correspondence.

 

[3973EXL]

Fantastic news. Did you happen to see where the clusters of temporary fixtures were, and what the types of lineside wiring that still need to go up are (plus where they're missing?)

I noticed that not all the AT wires are up yet (according to your correspondence on here, which I've duly noted over the months); so far I've got them down as being fixed between Maidenhead and Reading on the Mains; Maidenhead and Twyford on the Reliefs, between West Ealing & Hanwell (both lines IIRC) and between Stockley & Maidenhead (missing around Slough). Would an update on that situation also be possible?

Thanks once again for the correspondence.

I've not looked at ATF wires other than between Maidenhead and Reading, and here, not been looking recently (believe most are up).

ATF wire attached to the masts, can transfer to troughing under bridges.
You can see this work ongoing at Twyford in the first photo. I'm not aware of the state of progress at other sites and if the wires have been connected.

In the same photo you can see some tall masts opposite the ATF installation at Twyford east. The second shows masts at Twyford west. Work wiring is ongoing at both locations. There may be other locations as well, Ruscombe?

Last Photo show state of progress at Twyford overbridge.

Some of the recent wiring east of Reading station has straps holding them up.
There are other odd locations, perhaps where a registration arm is defective or a return wire needs alteration through a bridge or some other reason.

Just trying to illustrate, although the wires are up, work is not finished.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

From what I read in August Modern Railways, the Acton-Airport Jn OHLE will not be upgraded to 125mph until May 2018.
So IEPs/387s will be limited to 100mph on that 7-mile stretch until then.

By the end of 2018, electric working will extend to Cardiff via Bristol Parkway, Thingley Jn on the Bath route, and to Newbury.
There appears to be no date for the extension of electric working from Didcot to Oxford, with too much uncertainty in the funding/timing of the upgrades required at Oxford and the associated signalling changes.

 

[snowball]

There appears to be no date for the extension of electric working from Didcot to Oxford, with too much uncertainty in the funding/timing of the upgrades required at Oxford and the associated signalling changes.

Someone said in the last few days, either in this thread or one of the others, that the bits of GW electrification that were "deferred" in Nov 2016 - Didcot to Oxford, both approaches to Bristol TM, and the branches to Windsor and Henley - do not have guaranteed places in the programme for CP6, but will have to compete with other projects for inclusion.

 

[coppercapped]

Someone said in the last few days, either in this thread or one of the others, that the bits of GW electrification that were "deferred" in Nov 2016 - Didcot to Oxford, both approaches to Bristol TM, and the branches to Windsor and Henley - do not have guaranteed places in the programme for CP6, but will have to compete with other projects for inclusion.

I think if one reads the runes correctly, the whole basis of the CP6 settlement is that it will cover infrastructure operations, maintenance and renewals only. All capital expenditure on enhancements will be costed and, with luck, approved as separate stand-alone projects. See the Bowe and Shaw reports and the recently published HLOS. There may be exceptions for some(?) CP5 carryovers - but I would not bet on it.

 

[HowardGWR]

I think if one reads the runes correctly, the whole basis of the CP6 settlement is that it will cover infrastructure operations, maintenance and renewals only. All capital expenditure on enhancements will be costed and, with luck, approved as separate stand-alone projects. See the Bowe and Shaw reports and the recently published HLOS. There may be exceptions for some(?) CP5 carryovers - but I would not bet on it.

I'm beginning to think you are probably right,sadly. Electrifying the GWML was a strategic decision (as of course were the other CP5 and CP6 schemes). If each add-on has to go through a separate later stage GRIP process, it will fail, because cost / benefit arguments will be introduced that were not valid originally (and are not now, but that is what they will do).

 

[coppercapped]

I'm beginning to think you are probably right,sadly. Electrifying the GWML was a strategic decision (as of course were the other CP5 and CP6 schemes). If each add-on has to go through a separate later stage GRIP process, it will fail, because cost / benefit arguments will be introduced that were not valid originally (and are not now, but that is what they will do).

They might fail, they might not. It may well be that, for example, costing the Bristol and Oxford trackwork changes and re-signalling schemes as standalone projects will show benefits in terms of reduced delays and the ability to run more trains. I suspect they will get approved. If putting the wires up then only has to cope with its direct costs (and possibly some bridges) it may well stand a chance if the ORR can be smacked down to restore the original electrical clearances. The really heavy lifting for the electrification has already been done - Box Tunnel has been fixed as has the track through Bathampton, the Filton Bank four tracking is going ahead anyway and the 400kV feeder points from the grid are already paid for.

If NR can use lighter stanchions and contact wire of a smaller cross section (140mph will never happen between Chippenham and Bristol) then I suggest the economics would be more favourable. Somebody has to read the Riot Act to the ORR and DfT...

 

[deltic08]

I spent 90 minutes at Severn Tunnel Junction station this afternoon, the first time in 40 years. Apart from a nice clean concrete overbridge at the west end, I could see no signs of electrification. Not even a base.

What did surprise me was the 'pigs ear' of a relayed junction and dogleg onto/off the tunnel route. With plenty of railway land available, this dogleg could have been eased to 90 or 100mph, but no 70mph has been set.

The other matter that came to my attention was the congestion caused by the junction layout for westbound trains off two routes converging into one. There was so much traffic out of the tunnel that non-stop trains were being checked substantially by stopping trains or by conflicting moves at the grade junction.

This junction should have been a grade separated junction further back towards the tunnel mouth so that the Up and Down Bristol lines pop up between the spread out Up and Down Gloucester lines on the Caldicot side of the station.

The other thing that shocked me was that I only saw one freight train in 90 minutes when both routes used to be so busy with freight into and out of both Up and Down yards.

Very busy with passengers and interchange between Tunnel trains and Gloucester route trains to/from Chepstow and Lydney but absolutely no sign of station staff. Stopping trains from Bristol were rammed full. One Cardiff-Portsmouth train was a two car only 150/2 again rammed. Less than impressed with this type of unit on that length of journey with that many passengers standing.

This could all change radically at the end on 2018 as toll charges (£6.70 for cars) on both Severn Bridges are being abolished and handed back to he DfT.

 

[Envoy]

I spent 90 minutes at Severn Tunnel Junction station this afternoon, the first time in 40 years. Apart from a nice clean concrete overbridge at the west end, I could see no signs of electrification. Not even a base.

What did surprise me was the 'pigs ear' of a relayed junction and dogleg onto/off the tunnel route. With plenty of railway land available, this dogleg could have been eased to 90 or 100mph, but no 70mph has been set.

The other matter that came to my attention was the congestion caused by the junction layout for westbound trains off two routes converging into one. There was so much traffic out of the tunnel that non-stop trains were being checked substantially by stopping trains or by conflicting moves at the grade junction.

This junction should have been a grade separated junction further back towards the tunnel mouth so that the Up and Down Bristol lines pop up between the spread out Up and Down Gloucester lines on the Caldicot side of the station.

The other thing that shocked me was that I only saw one freight train in 90 minutes when both routes used to be so busy with freight into and out of both Up and Down yards.

Very busy with passengers and interchange between Tunnel trains and Gloucester route trains to/from Chepstow and Lydney but absolutely no sign of station staff. Stopping trains from Bristol were rammed full. One Cardiff-Portsmouth train was a two car only 150/2 again rammed. Less than impressed with this type of unit on that length of journey with that many passengers standing.

This could all change radically at the end on 2018 as toll charges (£6.70 for cars) on both Severn Bridges are being abolished and handed back to he DfT.

The toll is indeed being abolished on the Severn Bridges next year, however, that still leaves the problem of major congestion on the M4 around Newport. The fact that you saw a rammed 2 coach 150 on the Cardiff to Portsmouth run highlights the fact that many people will not use the trains on this route due to overcrowding - even when a regular 3 car 158 is used. In summer, the air conditioning is often not working either.

When GWR ship the 165’s & 166’s west and mini HST’s are on the Cardiff to Cornwall run, I hope that they pull out all the stops to market the fact that capacity has dramatically increased on these routes. Hopefully this will happen prior to the tolls being removed.

You would think that such a busy station would be manned.

 

[Hwnt52]

With electrification cancelled to Swansea, BTM and Oxford, what surprises me is that no-one has suggested cancelling the whole scheme west of Swindon, or at least Bristol Parkway. To add to the lack of work at STJ could be added the lack of any electrification work at Cardiff Central and Newport. Apart from a few masts at Llanwern and Marshfield no-one would know that the line was being electrified at all in South Wales. All this colossal expense for two trains an hour through the tunnel when it could have been so different - electric commuter trains to BTM and Cardiff along the SWML for example.

 

[YorkshireBear]

With electrification cancelled to Swansea, BTM and Oxford, what surprises me is that no-one has suggested cancelling the whole scheme west of Swindon, or at least Bristol Parkway. To add to the lack of work at STJ could be added the lack of any electrification work at Cardiff Central and Newport. Apart from a few masts at Llanwern and Marshfield no-one would know that the line was being electrified at all in South Wales. All this colossal expense for two trains an hour through the tunnel when it could have been so different - electric commuter trains to BTM and Cardiff along the SWML for example.

I think the IEPs are not quite good enough for that.

And also Oxford and BTM have not been cancelled.