Great Western Electrification Progress

[snowball]

Press release

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/feeds/south-wales-railway-upgrade-update/

Network Rail is reminding residents between Monmouthshire and Cardiff that modernisation work is taking place along the South Wales Mainline as part of Network Rail’s Railway Upgrade Plan.

Piling work will continue in South Wales for several months. This is the process of installing foundations for the steel masts and gantries that will carry electrified wires along the railway.

Andy Thomas, route managing director for Network Rail Wales, said: “Our railway is vital to economic prosperity, linking people, businesses and communities. We are working together with Arriva Trains Wales, Great Western Railway and other partners to improve services for passengers.

“We are continuing work between Monmouthshire and Cardiff as part of our Railway Upgrade Plan to prepare the railway for the overhead masts and wires that will power trains running on electricity. The new bi-mode trains, which can run on electric and diesel, will provide extra seats and faster services for thousands of passengers and a quieter and greener environment for communities living alongside the railway.

“I’d like to thank local residents for their patience while we carry out this upgrade work and reassure them that we are doing all we can to keep disruption to a minimum.”

Piling is a noisy activity as it involves driving cylindrical steel piles deep into the ground to provide a secure base for gantries. There can also be noise from vehicle movements as safety rules dictate that a horn must be sounded when moving vehicles in the vicinity of the railway.

Noise levels are dependent on the distance of homes from the train line and piling locations, which are installed every 50 to 60 metres. For safety reasons, the majority of piling will take place overnight when trains are not running and residents are advised to expect some disturbance whilst this work takes place.

 

[snowball]

And another one

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/feeds...to-benefit-from-new-flood-alleviation-scheme/

Passengers travelling through South Gloucestershire are to benefit from a new flood alleviation scheme to improve the resilience of the railway at Chipping Sodbury.

The railway between the former Badminton station and the Kingrove stream has been subject to flooding on a regular basis, caused by a combination of ground and surface water.

Network Rail will expand the existing storage lagoon to hold around 11 million litres of water – as much as four and-a-half Olympic swimming pools.

Network Rail will also install a new pumping system to take excess rain water into the newly-enlarged storage lagoon more quickly when flooding occurs, improving the resilience of the railway.

Improving the resilience of the railway in the region will not only mean fewer trains are cancelled during extreme weather, but will also mean that services can be back up and running at a quicker rate, improving reliability for passengers.

This work gets underway today, Friday 29 July, and is due to finish in May 2018.

Local residents that may be affected by this work have been notified and Network Rail have hosted two well-attended public drop-in sessions to keep the local community informed of the work taking place.

The Chipping Sodbury project is one of a number of schemes under the Department for Transport’s Flood Resilience Programme. This £26.5m programme was established after extreme weather in 2012 and 2014 caused extensive disruption to the rail network.

The aim of the programme is to reduce the risk of flooding at key locations in the Thames Valley and south west and ensure that when flooding does occur, train services can be resumed at a quicker rate, reducing disruption for passengers.

Philip Morton, project manager for Network Rail, said: “I would like to thank passengers and residents for their patience while we undertake this vital work as part of our Railway Upgrade Plan to improve reliability and resilience of the railway through South Gloucestershire.

“Our public drop-in sessions have proven to be a success with more than 100 local residents attending to find out more about the work taking place and the benefits it will bring. Those that couldn’t make these events are welcome to call our national helpline with any concerns or questions about this work.”

Network Rail’s national helpline is available 24/7 for residents and passengers with any questions or concerns about this work on 03457 11 41 41.

More information about the work can be found at: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/westernupgrade

More information about how flooding on the railway causes delays – and what we’re doing to reduce it: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/runni...-after-the-railway/delays-explained/flooding/

 

[PaulHarding150]

There appears to be some work starting at the eastern end of platforms 1&2 in Cardiff Central.

No idea what though.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

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.

For Swindon-Parkway-Cardiff, the contracts have been let, the work is well under way and there would be no benefit in cancelling it.
The same applies to Reading-Newbury.

Thingley-Bristol-Filton and Didcot-Oxford have not been cancelled, they are key components of the project, where again much work has been done, they are basically waiting for the delayed resignalling to complete first.

There were never any plans for EMUs Bristol-Cardiff (though you are right to wonder why not).
There was only an exhortation in the GW ITT which asked bidders to maximise the utilisation of electric trains, which FirstGroup studiously ignored.

 

[holts]

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 did post on here some months ago about this and the use of Ex Gatwick coaches on the heart of wales line , there was active discussion about stopping the London to Swansea electrification at Bristol , I suspect it was too much of a political hot potato or negotiating ploy to have some sort of begrudging agreement to stop it at Cardiff . Of course the tunnel had also been done by then .

 

[33Hz]

There were never any plans for EMUs Bristol-Cardiff (though you are right to wonder why not).
There was only an exhortation in the GW ITT which asked bidders to maximise the utilisation of electric trains, which FirstGroup studiously ignored.

With the plethora of bi-mode MUs coming along, especially the 319, maybe the Portsmouth-Cardiff services can run on 3rd rail as far as Redbridge, 25kV between Cardiff and Bristol/Bath and diesel in the middle, and get some extra capacity to boot?

 

[jyte]

With the plethora of bi-mode MUs coming along, especially the 319, maybe the Portsmouth-Cardiff services can run on 3rd rail as far as Redbridge, 25kV between Cardiff and Bristol/Bath and diesel in the middle, and get some extra capacity to boot?

Aren't the 319 Flex Diesel & 25kvAC only?

edit: No, no they're tri mode - 25kvAC, 750vDC + Diesel. I wonder what kind of endurance they will have on Diesel, because even Bath-Redbridge (isn't it actually Romsey not Redbridge?) is quite a way to do only on diesel.

 

[paul1609]

No Redbridge (and Eastleigh) to Romsey aren't electrified.

 

[edwin_m]

Aren't the 319 Flex Diesel & 25kvAC only?

edit: No, no they're tri mode - 25kvAC, 750vDC + Diesel. I wonder what kind of endurance they will have on Diesel, because even Bath-Redbridge (isn't it actually Romsey not Redbridge?) is quite a way to do only on diesel.

There will be no wires between Bath and the Filton Triangle for the foreseeable future, further increasing the distance to run on diesel.

The other issue here is that the 319 interior isn't really suitable for interurban journeys of this type - it really needs something similar to the Renatus refurbishment including air conditioning, but with a 2+2 layout with standard width aisle. However the current draw for the aircon could have a significant performance impact on diesel.

Also Cardiff-Portsmouth has significant 90mph sections and although the 319 is a 100mph unit the performance on diesel is quoted as being similar to a 150 which is a 75mph unit. Hence, although it is probably capable in theory of exceeding 75mph on diesel, its acceleration in that speed range is likely to be well short of a 158 or a 166.

 

[hwl]

There will be no wires between Bath and the Filton Triangle for the foreseeable future, further increasing the distance to run on diesel.

The other issue here is that the 319 interior isn't really suitable for interurban journeys of this type - it really needs something similar to the Renatus refurbishment including air conditioning, but with a 2+2 layout with standard width aisle. However the current draw for the aircon could have a significant performance impact on diesel.

Also Cardiff-Portsmouth has significant 90mph sections and although the 319 is a 100mph unit the performance on diesel is quoted as being similar to a 150 which is a 75mph unit. Hence, although it is probably capable in theory of exceeding 75mph on diesel, its acceleration in that speed range is likely to be well short of a 158 or a 166.

Also quoted as being capable of 90mph running on the level on the 769 thread

 

[HowardGWR]

Also quoted as being capable of 90mph running on the level on the 769 thread

Cardiff to Portsmouth is Inter-City (if it just stopped at cities) and needs an 802.

 

[edwin_m]

Also quoted as being capable of 90mph running on the level on the 769 thread

That may well be so, but it doesn't say anything about how long it will take to get to 90mph, and also doesn't allow for the extra engine load if air conditioning was fitted.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Also Cardiff-Portsmouth has significant 90mph sections and although the 319 is a 100mph unit the performance on diesel is quoted as being similar to a 150 which is a 75mph unit.

Not that I'd be happy with 319's on the route (it really should be treated more of an intercity or at least inter-regional route), but currently 150's often end up on the Cardiff-Portsmouth run anyway, and at least on the Cardiff-Bath section don't seem to lose any / much time compared to a 158.

 

[deltic08]

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.

And better accommodation than open bus shelters on platforms for interchanging passengers.

 

[33Hz]

Cardiff to Portsmouth is Inter-City (if it just stopped at cities) and needs an 802.

Agree, ideally it does. Hitachi knows how to make a train with 750V so perhaps we could get a sub-class with 3rd rail capability?

Between Portsmouth Harbour and Cardiff the ratio of electrified miles to non-electrified route will be close to 50/50. I imagine such a development would be interesting to Cross Country later on, too.

 

[swt_passenger]

Also Cardiff-Portsmouth has significant 90mph sections and although the 319 is a 100mph unit the performance on diesel is quoted as being similar to a 150 which is a 75mph unit. Hence, although it is probably capable in theory of exceeding 75mph on diesel, its acceleration in that speed range is likely to be well short of a 158 or a 166.

150s fairly regularly ( a few times a week) appear on Cardiff-Portsmouth now, and usually still seem on time through Southampton southbound...

 

[HowardGWR]

150s fairly regularly ( a few times a week) appear on Cardiff-Portsmouth now, and usually still seem on time through Southampton southbound...

Well, as it is a service run like an all-farmyards stopper, I am sure a 15x can keep time. There should be two services: Inter-city hourly, Cardiff Newport Bristol Bath (Westbury) Salisbury Southampton Portsmouth and the second tier should be connecting stoppers which should interleave with the Weymouth -Bristol service, ergo the suggested Westbury stop - also for east west connections.

 

[snowball]

Another press release on the Resonate traffic management stuff:

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/feeds...ion-set-to-deliver-a-more-punctual-railway-3/

A new delay-busting Traffic Management system on the Great Western Railway will boost performance on train journeys between London Paddington and Bristol Parkway. Thanks to a two year contract agreed between Network Rail and the British signalling & train control specialists, Resonate, a one year trial of ‘Luminate’ Traffic Management System could see reactionary delays reduced by up to 15%.

Traffic Management systems on the railway manage and monitor the flow of trains identifying conflicts, allowing plans to be changed and so more effectively reduce delays and the impact to passengers. Computer algorithms save us time and money in all walks of life and Traffic Management uses the same principle. The system takes into account the different types of trains and services operating across the network forecasting their forward journey, highlighting any potential conflicts or delay. When disruption occurs, Traffic Management enables real-time re-planning to happen quickly so that train services can get back to normal as fast as possible, minimising delays. This can only be good for train and freight operating companies and passengers alike.

The project to deploy the system has already commenced and once finished in June 2018, the trial will run for a year until 2019.

Network Rail and Resonate have agreed an innovative and ground-breaking way to finance the project so the cost to Network Rail and the tax payer is minimal and the financial benefits will be shared. In practice, this means that Resonate are picking up much of the costs to install and run the system. If reactionary delays reduce as predicted, compensation paid to train operating companies will also shrink and the money saved shared between Network Rail and Resonate.

David Waboso, group managing director for Digital Railway said:

“Thousands of passengers will benefit from the introduction of this cutting edge technology that could reduce train delays by up to 15% on the main lines out of London Paddington.

“We have also revolutionised the way we work with suppliers in the last year so that together, we can deliver real improvements to the railway and show measurable passenger benefits. Early contractor involvement and true partnership working is at the heart of all Digital Railway proposals. The pace at which we have designed and will deliver this trial is a testament to that approach.

“We need our partners in the supply chain to be 100 per cent invested in the products they provide for us, so why not share the costs and share the benefits? That’s the way to produce first-rate improvements to the railway. We’re not interested in paying a fortune for a product and then when challenges come our way, as they inevitably do, having none of the product expertise in the organisation to deal with them.

“I’m delighted to be working with Resonate on this project to improve performance on the Great Western Railway. The last remaining British signalling company, they have a stellar track record and will undoubtedly be a great partner to implement this trial by early summer 2018.”

Anna Ince, chief executive officer at Resonate, said: “Digital Railway’s enlightened and open collaborative approach to early contractor involvement was the catalyst for our proposal. Understanding the outcomes required, as well as the business case, enabled us to make a ground breaking commercial offer.

“We are delighted that our digital platform, developed in the UK, will be used on this busy and complex route to reduce train delays. We look forward to continuing to work closely with Digital Railway and the Western Route to improve passenger journeys.”

Mark Langman, route managing director at Network Rail welcomed the trial onto his route: “This is a really exciting time on the railway and particularly on the Western Route as we move towards a more efficient digital railway and introduce a fleet of new modern trains. On a crowded network one issue can cause several delays so any opportunity to improve train performance for passengers and freight and deliver real measurable passenger benefits is welcome.

“Our work with Resonate on this project is revolutionary and as well as improving train performance it represents an efficient use of taxpayers’ money with some significant potential savings.

“Being a devolved route organisation has enabled us to move faster and get this trial up and running quickly in a new, innovative way.”

The Department for Transport has been working very closely with the Digital Railway team on numerous proposals and business cases to increase capacity and improve performance on Britain’s railways.

Rail Minister Paul Maynard said:

“Digital Railway technologies will allow us to safely and securely put more trains on our network. This means more service, more space and more choice for passengers, and we have always said that we want to see passengers at the heart of everything we do on the railways. So I am delighted to see Network Rail choosing to work closely with an innovative, British company to realise the benefits that digital technologies can bring to passengers and the UK economy.”

 

[jyte]

I am still so unconvinced by this 'delay busting' system.

Maybe when coupled with a more flexible signalling system (in cab, moving block, bi-di, more passing loops etc) it could work but I really struggle to see how it will lead to a 15% improvement.

 

[snowball]

I am still so unconvinced by this 'delay busting' system.

Maybe when coupled with a more flexible signalling system (in cab, moving block, bi-di, more passing loops etc) it could work but I really struggle to see how it will lead to a 15% improvement.

At least they've stopped claiming 40%.

 

[HowardGWR]

At least they've stopped claiming 40%.

The MD's quote

Being a devolved route organisation has enabled us to move faster and get this trial up and running quickly in a new, innovative way.

holds no logic at all IMO. If another route had been chosen for the trial, that would have been OK too, would it?

 

[CdBrux]

The MD's quote



holds no logic at all IMO. If another route had been chosen for the trial, that would have been OK too, would it?

As I read it that is not what is said. I assume it to be they took the decision themselves rather than having to refer it 'upstairs' for approval

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

As I read it that is not what is said. I assume it to be they took the decision themselves rather than having to refer it 'upstairs' for approval

I find that hard to believe.
Waboso was looking for a meaningful trial at low cost, and Didcot was the obvious place.
They were probably only allowed to go ahead with a centrally-negotiated benefit-sharing deal.

All part of proving the new business model (see the new policy on getting external investment into NR).
But it might mean Western Route will have control over where it goes next after the Didcot trial.

 

[IanXC]

I am still so unconvinced by this 'delay busting' system.

Maybe when coupled with a more flexible signalling system (in cab, moving block, bi-di, more passing loops etc) it could work but I really struggle to see how it will lead to a 15% improvement.

I can only think it takes away the manual (hence fallible) element from calculating the best way to recover the service. For instance about how multiple late running services will interact at junctions ahead, which services to cancel/non stop, how this all interacts with crew and stock diagrams etc etc

 

[edwin_m]

I can only think it takes away the manual (hence fallible) element from calculating the best way to recover the service. For instance about how multiple late running services will interact at junctions ahead, which services to cancel/non stop, how this all interacts with crew and stock diagrams etc etc

I think that's about it. At times of disruption the staff are often too busy sorting out the immediate problem to spend any time thinking about the longer term consequences. So as long as somebody has a bit of time to test out various option on the new system then it might bring some benefit (but even 15% looks a bit high to me).

The other advantage is that it integrates with the ARS so should be able to re-programme it immediately to implement whatever revised timetable is selected, rather than someone else having to enter all the changes manually or just turn the ARS off and set all the routes by hand. For this reason the "isolated" TMS systems suggested elsewhere, which just provide advice to the signallers rather than integrating with the rest of the system, strike me as a total waste of time.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

In practice the TOC and NR Route Control departments (sometimes the same office) are responsible for recovering a disrupted service. The signallers are more concerned with routing trains at junctions etc and very often can be hundreds of miles from Control. Given that TMS gives the signaller the different options for amending workings etc using Plan/Replan functions, how will it interface with the people actually responsible for making the decisions?

For instance, I would be concerned as a GWR controller if a signaller in TVSC Didcot is making the call about which inbound peak service from Oxford to cancel / run fast on a morning if things are going badly. They might be able to see the diagrams etc but how can they know about all the other contributing factors; passengers waiting at intermediate stations, a critical connection, a required unit swap to get a set into a maintenance cycle, a driver who has a personal problem and needs to be relieved early? I can see the signallers talking to Control to validate their decisions which is what happens currently anyway. I just don't see the major performance saving beyond short term junction clashes which ARS does to some extent already.

 

[jyte]

For instance, I would be concerned as a GWR controller if a signaller in TVSC Didcot is making the call about which inbound peak service from Oxford to cancel / run fast on a morning if things are going badly. They might be able to see the diagrams etc but how can they know about all the other contributing factors; passengers waiting at intermediate stations, a critical connection, a required unit swap to get a set into a maintenance cycle, a driver who has a personal problem and needs to be relieved early? I can see the signallers talking to Control to validate their decisions which is what happens currently anyway. I just don't see the major performance saving beyond short term junction clashes which ARS does to some extent already.

I guess in an ideal world he would be able to see the number of passengers on platforms or the system could have some kind of people count functionality. Basically it could do it off every data feed under the sun. Maybe I ask for too much :/


Also haven't we gone majorly off topic?

IanXC Yes I agree better pathing could cut delays, but even 15% (how this 15% is actually quantified IDK) seems a little optimistic.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

To return to topic, I've noticed that the first wires are in place for approx 1-mile section between Dauntsey and Wootton Bassett. To my untrained eye, looks like a non-contact wire (perhaps current return or something?) that is generally strung along the outside of the stanchions.

 

[veryoldbear]

From the ground here in OX13 I hear that decisions regarding the Steventon bridge are still pending with NR refusing to engage with the Steventon Parish Council and acrimony breaking out between the PC and the local MP. It's a total fiasco that has been running for several years now. It is now highly unlikely that bridge works (if any) will start before May 2018, which puts electrification between Didcot and Wantage Road back to mid 2019.

Don't hold your breath on this one :roll:

 

[snowball]

From the ground here in OX13 I hear that decisions regarding the Steventon bridge are still pending with NR refusing to engage with the Steventon Parish Council and acrimony breaking out between the PC and the local MP. It's a total fiasco that has been running for several years now. It is now highly unlikely that bridge works (if any) will start before May 2018, which puts electrification between Didcot and Wantage Road back to mid 2019.

Don't hold your breath on this one :roll:

Good job they've got bi-modes then.