In my opinion Bi-Modes have killed electrification

[Bantamzen]

I agree with both of the above posters.

The public sector bits of the railway have killed electrification. Network Rail not doing jobs on time and on budget. The decision to start wiring the GWML without worrying about where the actual cables were underneath the ground in the first place. The moving goalposts about clearances. DfT agreeing to things and then not delivering. The politicians who changed their minds about commitments. If these bits had worked properly then electrification would be a success and we'd already see wires to Oxford/ Bristol (and Windermere etc) by now.

BUT, it was a shambles, with various bits of public sector failing. Just like many/most big infrastructure projects. Easy to blame 800/801s, but they have turned out to be the one thing that has gone right. As the above two posters have said, without bi-mode the whole thing would be significantly worse - we'd have hundreds of brand new electric carriages parked up without ever going into revenue earning service because the wires had only been done piecemeal towards Didcot etc.

Remember the "390s would have been much cheaper than 800s" arguments a couple of years ago (from people who were comparing the leasing costs of 390s against the full service package that the DfT agreed to for the 800s)? Imagine if we'd ordered hundreds of Pendolino carriages... how would the railway looks now? Would they be doing London to Didcot shuttles, where passengers would change for Bristol/ Cardiff? Would they be sat idle at Old Oak Common (etc)? ScotRail wouldn't be getting HSTs from GWR, just like Grand Central wouldn't be getting 180s (which means Northern wouldn't be getting the ScotRail 170s and East Midlands wouldn't be getting the GC HSTs), plus the Sprinter cascade that @D365 refers to. The whole railway would be choked for capacity, as the hundreds of unused 390 carriages sat idle. And this is what people would prefer?

Blame people for what went wrong, sure. But you can't blame bi-modes for the railway's failure to do the infrastructure improvements that it promised to do (which then gave politicians cold feet about other schemes).

Not surprising that people in the industry want to try to point the finger at the privately built trains, rather than the publicly built infrastructure. If anything, we should be grateful that the trains are so good that they can do 110mph on diesel (despite only being specified to do 100mph). The Government have got off lightly!

I'm sorry to say but this is a depressing, but very accurate assessment not of of rail infrastructure projects but of public sector projects in general. Over the years I have been involved with many projects (not in rail I hasten to add!) that have stumbled from crisis to crisis, often failing completely. Yet lessons are rarely learned, responsibility has always been ducked, and even when projects manage to complete, despite coming in late & over budget he decision makers manage to "celebrate success" and pat themselves on their backs then shifting themselves sideways before any awkward questions are asked.

The problems with public sector projects is that many involved often do not have the necessary experience or knowledge in the field that they are taking responsibility for. And as many are on a "career path", they often balk at the idea of admitting that they don't understand, & rather than seek independent advice from experts in the field they bluff their way through. Private contractors (and indeed shareholders) must find it hard to contain their excitement when being award a public sector contract, and I don't blame them frankly. It is almost always a licence to print money, or at least add an extra percent to costs even before the project starts. I've seen some of the costs involved with some I've been involved with, and when I've flagged them up as being way too high the response is always that it is "value for money" or just as a result of inflating costs, even when you can see the very same services & goods deflating on the open market. And if you make too much of a fuss, ranks quickly close and you quickly end up being sidelined & even shifted away.

(I would love to be able to share some examples and experiences, if I ever win the lottery I would certainly do so. But I don't get paid enough yet to have a nest egg large enough to take such a risk, in fact the nest is just a couple of twigs & the egg is yet to be laid!! )

 

[pt_mad]

They are aiming for Cardiff over Bristol TM first because the south Wales mainline already had a modern signalling system whereas that into Bristol is work in progress - along with 4 tracking the line from Temple Meads to Filton. Bath is also not so straight forward due to having to take into account the historic features of the line at this location.

Is Temple Meads still on at some point then?

Is four tracking to Fulton in progress? How difficult would this section be to electrify?


As far as I know, the clearance work for OLE at Bath Spa is well underway and possibly even complete, even though electrification has been cancelled.

 

[Domh245]

Bristol TM is in the same boat as Oxford, it's been "indefinitely deferred", but most people are reading as "we'll wait for any resignalling and station remodelling to go ahead before installing wires".

 

[Master29]

I'm the last guy who would ever side with Chris Grayling, but bi-modes didn't cause the problem. There was never any chance that MML was going to be completed this decade.

Arguably we'd be even further up s**t creek without the 800s. ScotRail wouldn't be getting their HSTs, the Sprinter cascade would have been put back further...

I don't agree with not finishing the Great Western, but I feel it was the governing bodies that went off-track in 2015. The industry was never going to be ready to take on any further work at that point.

So why on earth were millions spent on pointless consultancy fees when nursery school kids could have told us that. Not really an excuse when you look at it.

 

[47802]

Bristol TM is in the same boat as Oxford, it's been "indefinitely deferred", but most people are reading as "we'll wait for any resignalling and station remodelling to go ahead before installing wires".

I would have thought you could still make a good business case for Oxford at least being able to get EMU's into Oxford

 

[duffield]

Is Temple Meads still on at some point then?

Is four tracking to Fulton in progress? How difficult would this section be to electrify?


As far as I know, the clearance work for OLE at Bath Spa is well underway and possibly even complete, even though electrification has been cancelled.

Filton Bank four-tracking is well advanced with track laying in progress, see this thread:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/filton-bank-4-tracking-visualisation.115629/
I believe that the works include all necessary electrification clearances, so it should be (relatively) simple and cheap to do - I expect the expensive bit in Bristol will be Temple Meads station and approaches.

 

[nat67]

40*10=400, where's the extra 200 from?

If it's 400 then that's less than 404.

Unless my maths is off...

well HST power cars are 70 ton each and 8 MK3 are 33 ton each 70+70 =140 8x33 =264 =404 for HST. 5 car IET 300 ton approx coupled to another = 600

 

[nat67]

Thanks, that makes more sense.

Although the total weight may be larger, I assume there's an element of point loadings bring lower which would impact on the maintenance of the track. Which could be where some of the confusion is coming from.

Not quit true that IET could still get wheel flats and the point to point of a HST is still quicker than an IET.

 

[Domh245]

well HST power cars are 70 ton each and 8 MK3 are 33 ton each 70+70 =140 8x33 =264 =404 for HST. 5 car IET 300 ton approx coupled to another = 600

Read what I posted earlier. 2x 5 car IETs come to 494 tonnes, not 600 tonnes.

 

[nat67]

I would have thought you could still make a good business case for Oxford at least being able to get EMU's into Oxford

Unfortunately its the Council who are being the DAFT ones this time so Oxford still wont get the wires.

 

[nat67]

Read what I posted earlier. 2x 5 car IETs come to 494 tonnes, not 600 tonnes.

This probably isn't accurate (600 ton) but Wiki showed a 5 car is 300 ton which I guess is just all round, but yes its still heavier than a HST though.

 

[Domh245]

This probably isn't accurate (600 ton) but Wiki showed a 5 car is 300 ton which I guess is just all round, but yes its still heavier than a HST though.

The Wikipedia source (note that it says "better source needed") is an old Roger Ford column, and the author has extrapolated the 300 tonne weight from a line saying "the maximum axle load was 15 tonnes for a Class 800 bi-mode intermediate car" completely neglecting the fact that the driving vehicles will be lighter by virtue of not having engines strapped to them, or that the maximum axle weight on a vehicle isn't going to be the same across all axles. The 494 tonne (247 tonnes for an individual 5 car train) is taken from a later entry where they'd been in service for a while and (from memory) Roger had gotten hold of the actual vehicle weights from somewhere, possibly NR.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The Wikipedia source (note that it says "better source needed") is an old Roger Ford column, and the author has extrapolated the 300 tonne weight from a line saying "the maximum axle load was 15 tonnes for a Class 800 bi-mode intermediate car" completely neglecting the fact that the driving vehicles will be lighter by virtue of not having engines strapped to them, or that the maximum axle weight on a vehicle isn't going to be the same across all axles. The 494 tonne (247 tonnes for an individual 5 car train) is taken from a later entry where they'd been in service for a while and (from memory) Roger had gotten hold of the actual vehicle weights from somewhere, possibly NR.

Amusingly, Roger initially got the car weights from the shipping packaging for the first trains imported from Japan.
He recently said Hitachi would not disclose the actual operational weights of each type of car.

 

[nat67]

The Wikipedia source (note that it says "better source needed") is an old Roger Ford column, and the author has extrapolated the 300 tonne weight from a line saying "the maximum axle load was 15 tonnes for a Class 800 bi-mode intermediate car" completely neglecting the fact that the driving vehicles will be lighter by virtue of not having engines strapped to them, or that the maximum axle weight on a vehicle isn't going to be the same across all axles. The 494 tonne (247 tonnes for an individual 5 car train) is taken from a later entry where they'd been in service for a while and (from memory) Roger had gotten hold of the actual vehicle weights from somewhere, possibly NR.

Cheers now I know the actual weight.

 

[pt_mad]

Filton Bank four-tracking is well advanced with track laying in progress, see this thread:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/filton-bank-4-tracking-visualisation.115629/
I believe that the works include all necessary electrification clearances, so it should be (relatively) simple and cheap to do - I expect the expensive bit in Bristol will be Temple Meads station and approaches.

But will the electrification go ahead?

 

[jimm]

Is Temple Meads still on at some point then?

Is four tracking to Fulton in progress? How difficult would this section be to electrify?

As far as I know, the clearance work for OLE at Bath Spa is well underway and possibly even complete, even though electrification has been cancelled.

Electrification to Bristol Temple Meads on both the Filton Bank route and via Chippenham and Bath is currently deferred - not cancelled.

But until the resignalling work around Bristol is completed - and the same goes for the Oxford area - then electrification can't proceed anyway,as the existing signal equipment at both locations is old and is not immunised again interference from 25kv overhead wires. The Oxford resignalling is due to be completed during a blockade this July and work between Bristol and Bath is due to be finished next year.

Unfortunately its the Council who are being the DAFT ones this time so Oxford still wont get the wires.

No, you're being daft - the council and residents in Jericho near the stabling sidings would be delighted if electrification happens, as there wouldn't be diesel engines being fired up and run in the early hours any more. Everyone locally wants to see overhead wires and the sooner the better.

 

[nat67]

Electrification to Bristol Temple Meads on both the Filton Bank route and via Chippenham and Bath is currently deferred - not cancelled.

But until the resignalling work around Bristol is completed - and the same goes for the Oxford area - then electrification can't proceed anyway,as the existing signal equipment at both locations is old and is not immunised again interference from 25kv overhead wires. The Oxford resignalling is due to be completed during a blockade this July and work between Bristol and Bath is due to be finished next year.



No, you're being daft - the council and residents in Jericho near the stabling sidings would be delighted if electrification happens, as there wouldn't be diesel engines being fired up and run in the early hours any more. Everyone locally wants to see overhead wires and the sooner the better.

Yes that would be good anything better than Turbos, its the council that don't want the change the station layout. But it needs to change so they can make more paths and so they don't need to keep crossing over the main through lines to access platform 3 to Paddington and it would cost a lot that's why it wouldn't happen.

 

[keith1879]

I'm sorry to say but this is a depressing, but very accurate assessment not of of rail infrastructure projects but of public sector projects in general. Over the years I have been involved with many projects (not in rail I hasten to add!) that have stumbled from crisis to crisis, often failing completely. Yet lessons are rarely learned, responsibility has always been ducked, and even when projects manage to complete, despite coming in late & over budget he decision makers manage to "celebrate success" and pat themselves on their backs then shifting themselves sideways before any awkward questions are asked.

The problems with public sector projects is that many involved often do not have the necessary experience or knowledge in the field that they are taking responsibility for. And as many are on a "career path", they often balk at the idea of admitting that they don't understand, & rather than seek independent advice from experts in the field they bluff their way through. Private contractors (and indeed shareholders) must find it hard to contain their excitement when being award a public sector contract, and I don't blame them frankly. It is almost always a licence to print money, or at least add an extra percent to costs even before the project starts. I've seen some of the costs involved with some I've been involved with, and when I've flagged them up as being way too high the response is always that it is "value for money" or just as a result of inflating costs, even when you can see the very same services & goods deflating on the open market. And if you make too much of a fuss, ranks quickly close and you quickly end up being sidelined & even shifted away.

(I would love to be able to share some examples and experiences, if I ever win the lottery I would certainly do so. But I don't get paid enough yet to have a nest egg large enough to take such a risk, in fact the nest is just a couple of twigs & the egg is yet to be laid!! )

Fair enough I have no doubt. But I have been working in the private sector exclusively since 1998 and this is very much my experience too. The private sector is entirely capable of cocking things up and delivering nothing - especially when the international consultancies get their cloven hoofs under the table. Looking back over my career the best people to work for by far in terms of actually doing the job were nationalised power companies - not necessarily cheap but they did get the job done.

 

[B&I]

Fair enough I have no doubt. But I have been working in the private sector exclusively since 1998 and this is very much my experience too. The private sector is entirely capable of cocking things up and delivering nothing - especially when the international consultancies get their cloven hoofs under the table. Looking back over my career the best people to work for by far in terms of actually doing the job were nationalised power companies - not necessarily cheap but they did get the job done.

I work in the tattered remains of the professions, usually on behalf of large private companies. They are every bit as capable of making a pig's ear of day to day operations as the public sector, let alone anything large scale

 

[jimm]

Yes that would be good anything better than Turbos, its the council that don't want the change the station layout. But it needs to change so they can make more paths and so they don't need to keep crossing over the main through lines to access platform 3 to Paddington and it would cost a lot that's why it wouldn't happen.

I have absolutely no idea what you are on about - both the county and city councils support the plans to expand the station. Any modifications to the track layout in conjunction with that are Network Rail's job, same as the current ones linked with the Oxford area resignalling scheme.

Dealing with the conflicts posed by shunt moves across the layout at the north end of Oxford station is an issue for, er, the rail industry.

One idea being considered as part of a wider look at developing the Cotswold Line for the future is to install overhead wires as far as Hanborough, allowing terminating services to run there and turn back, though this would require tight regulation at Wolvercote junction and double track reinstated to Hanborough, or beyond, as well.

 

[TRAX]

I think you make one of my point for me! They've ordered them for TER services, not TGV or Intercités!

France/SNCF does have BMUs on Intercity services. They are dual-mode and dual-voltage, just like the regional B82500 you guys have been talking about.

 

[Domh245]

France/SNCF does have BMUs on Intercity services. They are dual-mode and dual-voltage, just like the regional B82500 you guys have been talking about.

Presumably you are referring to the B85000 or 'Coradia Liner'? Whilst they are going onto Intercités services, they're hardly what we'd call intercity trains by UK standards, and certainly not what I had in mind when I was making that point. They've got a maximum speed of 100mph, and seem like more of an analogue to a Turbostar or a 185 than an 80x.

The point that I was trying to make is that SNCF aren't ordering 125mph(+) BMUs for use on flagship lines, although how much of that is down to the existence of the LGVs is up for debate.

 

[TRAX]

Yes but this is what we usually have as Intercity trains, we don’t have many intercity lines and rolling stock cleared for 124 mph. Usually it’s either 99 mph or 186/199 mph on high speed lines. 125 mph isn’t a common speed limit in France like it is in the UK, hence why I mention the B85000 as an intercity BMU, because that’s what it is, even if it runs 25 mph slower than the IEP trains (and 125 mph is just the max speed for those, it’s not like they run at this speed all the time...)

 

[The Ham]

Yes but this is what we usually have as Intercity trains, we don’t have many intercity lines and rolling stock cleared for 124 mph. Usually it’s either 99 mph or 186/199 mph on high speed lines. 125 mph isn’t a common speed limit in France like it is in the UK, hence why I mention the B85000 as an intercity BMU, because that’s what it is, even if it runs 25 mph slower than the IEP trains (and 125 mph is just the max speed for those, it’s not like they run at this speed all the time...)

Quite, and a lot of any future services to be run by bimodal trains are likely to be even more limited with their maximum speeds.

It's also worth noting that there's a big difference between France, which has most of its intercity network wired up (and high speed lines), and the UK where we've got a significant amount of the intercity network still isn't wired up or at least has noticeable gaps in it.

 

[TRAX]

Yes but overall only 50 % of the French network is wired.

 

[jimm]

The point that I was trying to make is that SNCF aren't ordering 125mph(+) BMUs for use on flagship lines, although how much of that is down to the existence of the LGVs is up for debate.

I'd say that is almost entirely down to the existence of the LGV - which have now pretty much supplanted the parts of the traditional French network where 125mph services, whether loco-hauled or TGVs, had previously operated. It probably wouldn't be worth the maintenance bill to keep track fit for 125mph running in those places for a far more limited number of remaining Intercites services.

The 800 and 802 aren't - at least as currently specified - actually expected to be operated for long distances at speeds much above 100mph on diesel either.

I'm sure if SNCF and the French regional councils had wanted the Coradia Liner to top 100mph on electric then Alstom could have managed that if the UK experience wth the 350s and Electrostars being permitted to run at 110mph is anything to go by.

 

[TRAX]

I'm sure if SNCF and the French regional councils had wanted the Coradia Liner to top 100mph on electric then Alstom could have managed that

Surely you mean 125 mph ?

 

[jimm]

No, I don't. The maximum speed of a Coradia Liner V160, aka B85000, whether using power from the diesels or overhead wires, is 100mph. Which is all that is needed on the routes they work.

 

[TRAX]

So why did you say that they COULD have managed that when they actually did ?

 

[JamesT]

So why did you say that they COULD have managed that when they actually did ?

“Top 100” means going over 100. So jimm was talking about going over the speed they’ve currently been specified.