Great western electrification

[anthony263]

just found this news story which may interest some of you. I apoligise if its in the worng section.

http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news...1-Cameron/article-2060294-detail/article.html

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

Sounds about right. IMHO If GWML had been been given a 'Cost Test' in the 1830s, Brunel probably wouldn't have built the flippin thing at all.:roll:

 

[anthony263]

I hate to say it but i think the great western needs to be electrified as a matter of urgency considering the age of some of the rolling stock which is used.

in my opinion the following should be electrfied:

Great Western: London -Oxford/Swansea/Bristol/Exeter St Davids (Perhaps to Plymouth or even Penzance?)

Midland Mainline

Manchester - Blackpool
Manchester - Liverpool
Bassingstoke - Exeter
Newport - Crewe
North Wales coast
Cardiff Valley Lines
Bristol - Birmingham

Reading - Gatwick?

Thames Branches: ie Slough - Windsor

 

[Oswyntail]

While I agree that electrification should be the long-term aim, the "cost effective" analysis is inevitable - so long as it is done properly and fairly and not just being terrified of big sums of money. What is needed is a co-ordinated rolling programme involving not only electrification but also stock replacement, over the whole country (Sadly this will not happen because of the franchise system, but one can dream). I would suggest that the starting point could well be designing Mk5 coaches capable of high-speed running and tilt; at the same time find a diesel locomotive capable of hauling them at current line speeds (67?). Then develop the electric locomotive. In the meantime start the co-ordinated electrification and linespeed enhancement programme. It may be that, for a period, lines are electrified without electric stock to run on them, but this could be acceptable. Then, as the electric locos come on stream the diesel locomotives get pushed out to the edges, being used to take trains on beyond the limits of the scheme (think Nuneaton in the 60s). This would require more effort from the ROSCOs, but would split up some of the terrifyingly large sums of money. As I said, the main block would be the machismo of the TOCs wanting their own trains. But they should be told they are only franchisees.

 

[BlythPower]

Wiring up Manchester - Liverpool seems pointless to me without doing Manchester - Leeds - York/Hull. Manchester - Blackpool just seems pointless full stop.

I'd go with Midland Mainline in all its branches followed by South and West Yorkshire suburban bits to form a basis for Trans-Pennine wiring.

 

[anthony263]

I did here that Virgin were planning on running a direct london - Blackpool service if the route was electrified. I also think that More class 67's should be built particulary to haul trains over no electrfied route such as London Paddington - Penzance/Paignton/Carmarthen/Hereford where electric loco could haul the trains to Oxford/Exeter where the wires would end and the diesel could take over. I think it would be ok to put wires to Plymouth or even to penzance the major problem would be the tunnels along the route and the dawlish sea wall

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

I did here that Virgin were planning on running a direct london - Blackpool service if the route was electrified. I also think that More class 67's should be built particulary to haul trains over no electrfied route such as London Paddington - Penzance/Paignton/Carmarthen/Hereford where electric loco could haul the trains to Oxford/Exeter where the wires would end and the diesel could take over. I think it would be ok to put wires to Plymouth or even to penzance the major problem would be the tunnels along the route and the dawlish sea wall

Well the GWR had plans to electrify it 80 years ago, so it probably is viable.

There is an alternative route to Dawlish, I would have to hit the maps but there was an alternative route (LSWR?) that Beeching shut that has long been mooted for reinstatement. It may well be better value to reinstate that and electrify it, rather than electrify Dawlish.

Ultimately though, thats a future issue. What needs to be tackled first is Bristol to Paddington. I just have a job seeing why its not going to be better value to electrify it, rather than spend large amounts of money developing Diesel powered rolling stock. Its going to make even less sense if HS2 gets built, when you have it running past the GWML at old oak common fully electrified.:roll:

 

[Oswyntail]

.. I just have a job seeing why its not going to be better value to electrify it, rather than spend large amounts of money developing Diesel powered rolling stock. ....

The chief benefit of the approach I outlined above (IMHO) is that the frighteningly expensive bit - the route electrification - does not have to be costed all as one project. And a locomotive/coaches solution is more flexible for use over the half a century or so that a rolling, country-wide programme would take. There are diesel designs currently available that could be used without the expense of much development.

 

[Ivo]

What I fail to see is how electrification of the route between Temple Meads and Paddington can cost such a huge figure (£1bn). Yes, I admit that there is the issue of new rolling stock, but that isn't a £900m job is it? Similarly, there are some four-track sections, but some of that is done anyway, and if Crossrail does happen (and Cameron et al don't shut it down) east of Reading will be done anyway. So how much would it cost to do Reading to Bristol? Even if you throw in Oxford, Cardiff and Bristol Parkway, it still would not be massively expensive.

And if the rolling stock is the issue then they consider that the HSTs do need to be replaced sooner rather than later, so this is irrelevant.

 

[ChrisCooper]

I would also think that a high speed diesel would be more expensive than an electric. A 125mph or faster EMU would be very easy to source, there are plenty available from all sorts of companies, Siemens, Bombardier, Hitachi, Alstom, China. Beyond shrinking to UK loading gauge, they can be bought pretty much off the shelf. There are far less 125mph diesel designs available, the only easy, off the shelf solution would be Voyager derivatives. We are about the only country that has considerable lengths of un-electrified 100mph+ lines. That's why IEP is such a thing, as a suitable HST replacement is just not easy to find. Even loco haulage is pretty much out. There is no diesel loco capable of hauling a train of any significant weight at 125mph over long distances that has a reasonable axle weight. 67s are useless, they are too heavy to run at 125mph under most circumstances, and even if they could (a Co-Co version to keep axle weight down) they lack the power to reach 125mph with large loads. They can replace 47s on Mail, Thunderbird and Railtour work, or 37s on Sleepers (just about), where high speeds are not required, and can haul and shove a couple of Mk3s and a DVT around no problem at up to 110mph (top speed of the DVTs), but hauling 8 or 9 Mk3s at 125mph is something else. HSTs remember are 4500hp, 67s are 3000hp. I think any diesel HST replacement is going to need more than one engine in more than one vehicle, regardless of if it's engines under every vehicle, or just engines in the end vehicles (as in the current HST). Now, top and tail 67s might be an option. Virgin even looked at single ended 67s top and tailing Mk3s to replace their HSTs. A lot of people's IEP alternatives would use top and tail 125mph diesel locos, which does futureproof them as a later electrification could see one loco replaced by an electric, and the other either retained for powering off the wires, or replaced with a driving trailer.

 

[Aictos]

What I fail to see is how electrification of the route between Temple Meads and Paddington can cost such a huge figure (£1bn).

Well my view is that HS2 should be cancelled and IEP cut back with the resulting savings used to deliver electrification to lines which ought to have it.

Lines as Leeds to York and Skipton, Doncaster to Hull, Hayes and Harlington to Bristol and Exeter St Davids, Peterborough to Doncaster via Lincoln, Ely to Norwich and Ipswich, Birmingham to Leeds, Preston to Blackpool.

Maybe as a after though, do the Norfolk Broads

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

The chief benefit of the approach I outlined above (IMHO) is that the frighteningly expensive bit - the route electrification - does not have to be costed all as one project. And a locomotive/coaches solution is more flexible for use over the half a century or so that a rolling, country-wide programme would take. There are diesel designs currently available that could be used without the expense of much development.

But that assumes the cost of the fuel is going to stay the same as it is today. Overlooking all the alarmist talk of peak oil (which may or may not be correct), fact remains that have been two alarming peaks over the cost of oil in the past 10 years. It would be a brave man who assumes the future will not be more of the same.

On the face of it, yes , I suspect you could buy off the shelf like that, I dont disagree. On the other hand, when you look at the rest of Europe having to a very large extent having electrified, and there is us still complaining about the cost, and running a half electrified railway, you have to ask why. Can we really know better than the French and the Germans? Or is it that they understand that money spent on infrastructure is never wasted, and that we for some reason dont?

IMHO we will go the diesel route, find its costs more, the TOCs will run to the Government begging for electric, then 10 years later and considerable more cost it will be electrified. In the meantime we bin HS2 to pay for it all.

 

[anthony263]

What I fail to see is how electrification of the route between Temple Meads and Paddington can cost such a huge figure (£1bn). Yes, I admit that there is the issue of new rolling stock, but that isn't a £900m job is it? Similarly, there are some four-track sections, but some of that is done anyway, and if Crossrail does happen (and Cameron et al don't shut it down) east of Reading will be done anyway. So how much would it cost to do Reading to Bristol? Even if you throw in Oxford, Cardiff and Bristol Parkway, it still would not be massively expensive.

And if the rolling stock is the issue then they consider that the HSTs do need to be replaced sooner rather than later, so this is irrelevant.

I think the cost also includes the Manchester - Liverpool route electrification as i did read in a magazine about a year ago, (i think it was modern railways) that it would only cost £250 million to electrify London - Swansea/Bristol/Oxford. In my opinion it should also include the Swindon - Gloucester route.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well my view is that HS2 should be cancelled and IEP cut back with the resulting savings used to deliver electrification to lines which ought to have it.

Lines as Leeds to York and Skipton, Doncaster to Hull, Hayes and Harlington to Bristol and Exeter St Davids, Peterborough to Doncaster via Lincoln, Ely to Norwich and Ipswich, Birmingham to Leeds, Preston to Blackpool.

Maybe as a after though, do the Norfolk Broads

I agree that we should just concentrate on crossrail and electrification before all this talk of High speed 2 etc.

As for IEP, just scrap it and build some new MK3 stock coaches and DVT'S and get some Electric/Diesel locomotive's to haul them. It cant be too hard to swap engines at places such as Swansea or Bristol Temple Mead surely.

Then again isn't there that Polaris Bi mode train that Grand Central were on about buying a year or so ago?

 

[Aictos]

Well BR and others before them had no trouble changing locos, the LNER reportly could change a pair of locos around in 5 minutes including vacuum brakes and all or how about in the 60s when the WCML was only electrified from London to Crewe with Class 50s being responsible for northbound trains and southbound trains in the hands of the Electrics.

 

[ukrob]

Wiring up Manchester - Liverpool seems pointless to me without doing Manchester - Leeds - York/Hull. Manchester - Blackpool just seems pointless full stop.

I'd go with Midland Mainline in all its branches followed by South and West Yorkshire suburban bits to form a basis for Trans-Pennine wiring.

You can't just electrify everything at once and order new stock for everywhere though. You also have to take account into what stock will be cascaded to newly electrified lines, and what stock will then be cascaded from the newly electrified lines.

The Liverpool - Manchester plan requires no new stock to be purchased, and requires a large boost in capacity. It also provides several diversionary routes for electric stock.

If you were to electrify the MML first as per your plan, where does the stock come from, and what do you do with the surplus Cl319s?

Why does Manchester - Preston - Blackpool seem pointless full stop? Do you not want electrification in this country? Again, it enables DMU's to be cascaded to rural routes which might never see electrification.

It is about the bigger picture, not just randomly picking which routes to electrify first.

 

[David]

Manchester - Liverpool/Wigan/Preston (Blackpool) makes perfect sense as it allows a large scale cascade, and other services to be joined up, freeing a load of diesel units to strengthen other services.

TPE will be able to use Electric units on most NW services, as well as all Scottish services. This will free up 185s so the North route could be strengthened to 6 car trains (which is needed), with Manchester - Leeds - York (Middlesborough/Scarborough) the next route to be looked at for electrification.

Northern, however would be the biggest beneficaries. The would be able to run Crewe - Liverpool/Preston/Blackpool via Manchester and Hazel Grove - Blackpool and Manchester Victoria - Liverpool/Blackpool with EMUs, freeing up loads of units to strengthen other services that run away from the wires.

After all that is changed, the next routes to look at are the Windermere and Barrow branches of the WCML, as well as Manchester Victoria - Stalybridge (to link with the TPE North electrification mentioned above), routes around South/West Yorkshire and the Calder Valley. This would allow Pacers to be retired, possibly sprinters as well, and the 158s refurbished and cascaded elsewhere.

 

[tbtc]

Well my view is that HS2 should be cancelled and IEP cut back with the resulting savings used to deliver electrification to lines which ought to have it.

Lines as Leeds to York and Skipton,

Leeds to Skipton is such a good idea I can't believe its not been done already

 

[TGV]

This one was mentioned in NR's RUS issued last year: Southampton and Salisbury to Basingstoke junction, then on to Reading, Oxford, Banbury and Birmingham/WCML.

 

[Aictos]

Leeds to Skipton is such a good idea I can't believe its not been done already

Ah, I had assumed that because a HST was used that it wasn't done yet

Now I've actually realised my mistake, surely what NR should do is improve the electrical infrastructure to permit 91 operation on both the Skipton and Bradford routes and if possible extend a Leeds service alternatively onto both destinations so the 1035 ex Kings Cross goes to Bradford and the 1135 ex Kings Cross goes to Skipton.

Rather then test a 91 on the Skipton and bring every EMU in the area to a stop!

 

[tbtc]

Ah, I had assumed that because a HST was used that it wasn't done yet

Now I've actually realised my mistake, surely what NR should do is improve the electrical infrastructure to permit 91 operation on both the Skipton and Bradford routes and if possible extend a Leeds service alternatively onto both destinations so the 1035 ex Kings Cross goes to Bradford and the 1135 ex Kings Cross goes to Skipton.

Rather then test a 91 on the Skipton and bring every EMU in the area to a stop!

Aye, done, but done on the cheap, hence the juice not being sufficient for a 91. Not sure its worth doing for one a day, but a bi-hourly service beyond Shipley would justify it

 

[philjo]

The line via Moorthorpe & Rotherham to Sheffield should be wired (plus Swinton-Doncaster). This would allow for Leeds-Wakefield Westgate-Sheffield stopping services to use EMUs.
It would help to increase capacity on this busy section of line which includes ECML Leeds services, XC plus locals, as the EMUs would have better speed/acceleration than the present pacers. The Leeds-Doncaster services are EMUs but the Sheffield ones are still Pacers or 158s.

In the peak hour they are also full at Wakefield, so EMUs would provide more seats for passengers.
Presumably only the northbound bay platforms at Sheffield would need to be wired initially - the others done later with the MML.

Schemes should concentrate on commuter/regional services round the large cities where there are existing electric lines (or will be coming shortly in the case of Bristol) - i.e. Leeds/Manchester/Birmingham/Liverpool & Bristol. When a few of these schemes overlap - e.g. Manchester/Liverpool, etc you then have a good network.

 

[tbtc]

The line via Moorthorpe & Rotherham to Sheffield should be wired (plus Swinton-Doncaster). This would allow for Leeds-Wakefield Westgate-Sheffield stopping services to use EMUs.
It would help to increase capacity on this busy section of line which includes ECML Leeds services, XC plus locals, as the EMUs would have better speed/acceleration than the present pacers. The Leeds-Doncaster services are EMUs but the Sheffield ones are still Pacers or 158s.

In the peak hour they are also full at Wakefield, so EMUs would provide more seats for passengers.
Presumably only the northbound bay platforms at Sheffield would need to be wired initially - the others done later with the MML.

Schemes should concentrate on commuter/regional services round the large cities where there are existing electric lines (or will be coming shortly in the case of Bristol) - i.e. Leeds/Manchester/Birmingham/Liverpool & Bristol. When a few of these schemes overlap - e.g. Manchester/Liverpool, etc you then have a good network.

...if you infill like this, the cost/ benefit of other schemes nearby becomes better, e.g. Doncaster to Swinton would only be a short stretch (but allow Doncaster - Sheffield to be EMU run), plus then (if Meadowhall - Sheffield) is wired then the Barnsley/ Kirkgate/ Castleford lines become better business sense

(much better to do things like this than wiring a brand new part of the country)

 

[starrymarkb]

Thing is if the GWML isn't done, what do you do when the HSTs come up for renewal in a few years time

 

[ukrob]

Thing is if the GWML isn't done, what do you do when the HSTs come up for renewal in a few years time

Few?

Whilst it maybe short-sighted, they could go for another 15-20 years with minor expense (compared to electrification).

 

[philjo]

Also the Sheffield-Leeds scheme I suggested may well get local /PTE funding for South Yorkshire. Once this is done the overall MML wiring cost is lower as the trains can get from Sheffield to Neville Hill under the wires of the earlier scheme.

 

[tbtc]

Also the Sheffield-Leeds scheme I suggested may well get local /PTE funding for South Yorkshire. Once this is done the overall MML wiring cost is lower as the trains can get from Sheffield to Neville Hill under the wires of the earlier scheme.

...and then if you've done Leeds - Sheffield and Sheffield - Derby, then the cost/ benefit ratio of doing the Cross Country route to Birmingham becomes attractive. Which means...

 

[Drsatan]

There is an alternative route to Dawlish, I would have to hit the maps but there was an alternative route (LSWR?) that Beeching shut that has long been mooted for reinstatement. It may well be better value to reinstate that and electrify it, rather than electrify Dawlish.

The LSWR's line to Plymouth diverged at Coleford Junction on the Barnstaple line, and headed to Okehampton, and then to Tavistock, joining the Gunnislake branch at Bere Alston. It would make sense to reopen this route because due to global warming causing rising sea levels, the line to Dawlish may end up under water.

However, when the GWML is finally electrified, it would make sense to electrify the Valleys lines around Cardiff, the Severn Beach line in Bristol, the line to Western-Super-Mare (or even Bristol-Exeter in its entirety so Cardiff-Taunton services can be EMU operated), the lines around Exeter (the Tarka line, the Exmouth branch, the Riviera line, and even up the West of England line to Axminster with a passing loop to allow a half-hourly local service there), and possibly the Tamar Valley Line. Although these lines would not be electrified immediately, it would be a disappointment to get off the shiny new electric train at, say, Exeter St Davids, and be confronted with a 150 for your onward journey (although by the time the GWML is electrified the 150s should have been replaced by more modern units following successive rolling stock cascades).

Electrification of the aforementioned lines should be in conjunction with infrastructure and capacity upgrades to encourage a greater modal shift from road to rail. For instance, the Tamar Valley line could be redoubled from St Budeaux Victoria Road to Bere Alston to allow a more frequent service; the proposed extension to Tavistock to serve a new housing development would attract more passengers. Rolling stock would be cascaded 317s or 321s to save money, until new EMUs are ordered.

Trouble is, none of the above will happen because it's too expensive, and it's not likely to happen unless a government is elected which regards public transport as a social necessity rather than a commercial enterprise (and no, I don't mean Labour). I wouldn't be surprised if the Tories cancel electrification of the GWML if it doesn't meet their value-for-money test.

 

[LE Greys]

The LSWR's line to Plymouth diverged at Coleford Junction on the Barnstaple line, and headed to Okehampton, and then to Tavistock, joining the Gunnislake branch at Bere Alston. It would make sense to reopen this route because due to global warming causing rising sea levels, the line to Dawlish may end up under water.

The trouble with that is that it cuts off Torbay. Yes, it would be a very good thing to reopen the line, but there needs to be some way to maintain the link. The GWR actually planned to build a new line from Starcross to Newton Abbott in 1941, but the war got in the way. The route featured in First's plans to build a high speed line ten years ago.

However, when the GWML is finally electrified, it would make sense to electrify the Valleys lines around Cardiff, the Severn Beach line in Bristol, the line to Western-Super-Mare (or even Bristol-Exeter in its entirety so Cardiff-Taunton services can be EMU operated), the lines around Exeter (the Tarka line, the Exmouth branch, the Riviera line, and even up the West of England line to Axminster with a passing loop to allow a half-hourly local service there), and possibly the Tamar Valley Line. Although these lines would not be electrified immediately, it would be a disappointment to get off the shiny new electric train at, say, Exeter St Davids, and be confronted with a 150 for your onward journey (although by the time the GWML is electrified the 150s should have been replaced by more modern units following successive rolling stock cascades).

Electrification of the aforementioned lines should be in conjunction with infrastructure and capacity upgrades to encourage a greater modal shift from road to rail. For instance, the Tamar Valley line could be redoubled from St Budeaux Victoria Road to Bere Alston to allow a more frequent service; the proposed extension to Tavistock to serve a new housing development would attract more passengers. Rolling stock would be cascaded 317s or 321s to save money, until new EMUs are ordered.

Hear! Hear! Don't repeat the mistake of the ECML electrification, where they failed to do Leeds-York let alone the West Riding.

Trouble is, none of the above will happen because it's too expensive, and it's not likely to happen unless a government is elected which regards public transport as a social necessity rather than a commercial enterprise (and no, I don't mean Labour). I wouldn't be surprised if the Tories cancel electrification of the GWML if it doesn't meet their value-for-money test.

That wouldn't surprise me, but they would probably forget that the cost of all that excess traffic on the M4 is probably higher in the long run than electrification. Who would you suggest?

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

The LSWR's line to Plymouth diverged at Coleford Junction on the Barnstaple line, and headed to Okehampton, and then to Tavistock, joining the Gunnislake branch at Bere Alston. It would make sense to reopen this route because due to global warming causing rising sea levels, the line to Dawlish may end up under water.

However, when the GWML is finally electrified, it would make sense to electrify the Valleys lines around Cardiff, the Severn Beach line in Bristol, the line to Western-Super-Mare (or even Bristol-Exeter in its entirety so Cardiff-Taunton services can be EMU operated), the lines around Exeter (the Tarka line, the Exmouth branch, the Riviera line, and even up the West of England line to Axminster with a passing loop to allow a half-hourly local service there), and possibly the Tamar Valley Line. Although these lines would not be electrified immediately, it would be a disappointment to get off the shiny new electric train at, say, Exeter St Davids, and be confronted with a 150 for your onward journey (although by the time the GWML is electrified the 150s should have been replaced by more modern units following successive rolling stock cascades).

Electrification of the aforementioned lines should be in conjunction with infrastructure and capacity upgrades to encourage a greater modal shift from road to rail. For instance, the Tamar Valley line could be redoubled from St Budeaux Victoria Road to Bere Alston to allow a more frequent service; the proposed extension to Tavistock to serve a new housing development would attract more passengers. Rolling stock would be cascaded 317s or 321s to save money, until new EMUs are ordered.

Trouble is, none of the above will happen because it's too expensive, and it's not likely to happen unless a government is elected which regards public transport as a social necessity rather than a commercial enterprise (and no, I don't mean Labour). I wouldn't be surprised if the Tories cancel electrification of the GWML if it doesn't meet their value-for-money test.

That was the line I was thinking of. Isnt part of that used by a quarry, or am I mixing it up with something else?

I dont disagree with the argument, that the Conservatives will try everything they can NOT to electrify GWML. (Heck, they have already been backpedaling locally over the Kemble redoubling, despite the fact there is an economic case, AND the cash is already available). I just find it impossible to understand how an economic case can be made for yet another electrified line going North (HS2), when we have yet to have had a single one going West. Im not going to beat my chest and say the West is losing out again, but it certainly seems we are not the top of anyone's list of priorities.

 

[tbtc]

I just find it impossible to understand how an economic case can be made for yet another electrified line going North (HS2), when we have yet to have had a single one going West

There are a number of regular services in "northern" England that run 90% under the wires, but not entirely. For example, London to Chester, Manchester Airport to Glasgow, Morpeth to the Metro Centre.

Electrifying lines in these areas means you can replace a decent number of DMUs with EMUs (considering the small sections of wiring needed).

Hence my logic that doing the Manchester/ Liverpool/ Blackpool "triangle" would save a lot of DMUs, which would then encourage electrification of Bolton - Wigan - Kirby/ Southport etc. Same logic applies to Leeds/ Doncaster to Sheffield via Swinton. Or (once Sheffield - Doncaster is done) Doncaster to Hull. It becomes a self generating process, where each stretch done makes the next stretch more cost effective.

Whereas, wiring the GWML means doing a lot of track without saving that many diesel services until a *lot* of gaps have been done. For example, if London to Oxford is done, you'll still need DMUs for Hereford. If London to Bristol is done, what about Weston? If London to Swansea is done, what about the Fishguard services? If London to Swindon is done, what about Cheltenham?

I know those out west won't agree, but if you approach electrification in terms of "what is the most efficient way of switching diesel powered trains to electric ones" then infill schemes are the way forward...

...if you approach it in terms of "what can we do to share the wires out around the country, so everywhere gets *some* electrification" then you'd wire the GWML. However, I don't think that's efficient (unless you wire *everything*). I appreciate you'll disagree