Island Line Railway - current state and the future

[A0wen]

While their battery trains may have promise in the future, there hasn't even been a proper trial yet - Vivarail have only just built a prototype charger, their battery unit has carried out no mainline testing and may not even have the latest batteries fitted yet.

Perhaps one unit could have batteries as a trial, but are SWR and the DfT really going to commit now to junking the third rail without real world experience of the reliability and upfront/ongoing costs of Vivarail's battery units and chargers? I just can't see it.

The Island Line is just about the perfect proving ground for battery operation - its not too long, it's a simple operation in the scheme of things, the line is completely self-contained with its own maintenance facility and there's no contention with any other services anywhere. It also currently has life expired stock, life expired 3rd rail equipment, runs at a massive loss and needs to keep the cost of upgrade to an absolute minimum.

 

[Chris125]

It's entirely practical - trickle charging to a capacitor will be taking place 24 x 7 until the capacitor is full. Over the course of a day the units would only need charging a handful of times - bearing in mind the 60 mile range allows for 4 round trips.

Fewer charges just means each one involves more energy, takes longer and requires every train to have a heavier, costlier battery.

Fundamentally the power required to do a days work doesn't really change that much, but instead of being shared between three substations in the middle of the line (St Johns Road/Rowborough/Sandown) most of that electricity would need to come from Shanklin - I can't see that being cheap or easy to achieve.

And it won't be 3 or 4 car trains - there's no need for that. A class 483 has a seating capacity of 84 a 2 car D train can do 114..

Demand for Island Line is quite 'peaky', services can often be full and standing on busy summer days and during special events which if nothing else makes revenue collection all but impossible - if there's to be any significant growth the upgrade must make allowance for 3-car or 2x2-car trains.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Demand for Island Line is quite 'peaky', services can often be full and standing on busy summer days and during special events which if nothing else makes revenue collection all but impossible - if there's to be any significant growth the upgrade must make allowance for 3-car or 2x2-car trains.

I would agree they should go 3-car even if they shunt the middle car out during winter. The "as built" Tube layout with a wheelchair space added should be ideal - cheapest option too. Or as an alternative still block off 2 doors per vehicle side and add an extra facing bay or luggage stack (or maybe space for 2 bicycles mounted vertically?) in the space.

 

[Chris125]

The Island Line is just about the perfect proving ground for battery operation - its not too long, it's a simple operation in the scheme of things, the line is completely self-contained with its own maintenance facility and there's no contention with any other services anywhere. It also currently has life expired stock, life expired 3rd rail equipment, runs at a massive loss and needs to keep the cost of upgrade to an absolute minimum.

IMO a mainland branch worked by a single DMU makes infinitely more sense - unlike Island Line there'd be clear passenger and environmental benefits and should it prove unreliable or unsuccessful it can easily revert to DMU operation.

Unless any upgrades to Island Line include retention of the 3rd rail, with trains able to use it, any ongoing issues with battery operation could cause absolute chaos.

 

[Bletchleyite]

IMO a mainland branch worked by a single DMU makes infinitely more sense - unlike Island Line there'd be clear passenger and environmental benefits and should it prove unreliable or unsuccessful it can easily revert to DMU operation.

Much as the rubber band probably still has plenty of life left in it, the Stourbridge Town branch would be a very good "first go" for this type of thing. If it went wrong, just get the 139 out again. If 2-car is too long for the Town platform just lock a coach out.

 

[Elecman]

Or Preston - Ormskirk where you already have a live 3rd rail immediately adjacent at Ormskirk

 

[Bletchleyite]

Or Preston - Ormskirk where you already have a live 3rd rail immediately adjacent at Ormskirk

You probably don't want the risk of it sitting down on the WCML section, though (that said, if you wanted to try a 25kV charged version that would be ideal, say something based on a 319 rather than D-stock). Kirkby-Wigan as a shuttle possibly.

 

[A0wen]

I would agree they should go 3-car even if they shunt the middle car out during winter. The "as built" Tube layout with a wheelchair space added should be ideal - cheapest option too. Or as an alternative still block off 2 doors per vehicle side and add an extra facing bay or luggage stack (or maybe space for 2 bicycles mounted vertically?) in the space.

Adding capacity to trains which isn't needed (and trailers WILL add to the weight and therefore performance) is plain daft.

Yes, maybe in the summer months a few trains are full - you can make the same argument about a Saturday afternoon in a town where there's a football club - but that does not justify increasing the costs by having rolling stock which potentially is left laying about unused for 9 months of the year, that needs maintenance and needs storage.

The claim there's some latent demand on the Island Line is often stated and never proven. But I tell you what - here's some facts:

The ORR estimate use for the Island Line (entry & exit from all stations) was 1,170,934 for the year.

To put that in context the Marston Vale line (excluding Bedford Midland and Bletchley) was 426,900. Bletchley and Bedford's figures combined are just over 5m so if 10% of those are headed for the Marston Vale you're at the same level as the Island Line. From my office window I can see the Marston Vale line - the trains are overwhelmingly empty most of the day - they are carting about fresh air most of the time, so notwithstanding the platform length issue that one doesn't justify more than 2 cars, it's difficult to see how a similar case can be made for the Island Line.

 

[A0wen]

You probably don't want the risk of it sitting down on the WCML section, though (that said, if you wanted to try a 25kV charged version that would be ideal, say something based on a 319 rather than D-stock). Kirkby-Wigan as a shuttle possibly.

I fail to see why there's a risk of it "sitting down" on the WCML any more than that risk exists with the 153 or any other DMU which plies that branch - why do you think a battery D train is more susceptible to this than a 30 year old Sprinter?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I fail to see why there's a risk of it "sitting down" on the WCML any more than that risk exists with the 153 or any other DMU which plies that branch - why do you think a battery D train is more susceptible to this than a 30 year old Sprinter?

We're talking about a trial, aren't we?

If there's no risk of it "sitting down", why (back on topic) would there be a risk on the Island Line?

 

[Adsy125]

What I really want to know is why SWT and SWR have allowed the line and stock to get into the current state of disrepair, and why the DFT hasn’t just made them maintain it properly in the first place.

 

[A0wen]

What I really want to know is why SWT and SWR have allowed the line and stock to get into the current state of disrepair, and why the DFT hasn’t just made them maintain it properly in the first place.

Well in the case of the stock it's 80 years old and is in daily use. Feel free to point out other items of 80 year old rolling stock which are in daily use in the UK.v

 

[Chris125]

From my office window I can see the Marston Vale line - the trains are overwhelmingly empty most of the day - they are carting about fresh air most of the time, so notwithstanding the platform length issue that one doesn't justify more than 2 cars, it's difficult to see how a similar case can be made for the Island Line.

As previously mentioned demand on Island Line is very 'peaky', off-peak trains can be very quiet out of season but during the summer I regularly have to stand (with no opportunity to pay) during the day on trains with 150+ people and aisles full of luggage, especially if the weather is good.

That isn't going to be true of the the Marston Vale which will have a much higher proportion of commuter traffic spread out throughout the year and I daresay a fraction of the summer leisure traffic you find on Island Line when everyone makes a dash for the beach.

 

[CeeJ]

Fewer charges just means each one involves more energy, takes longer and requires every train to have a heavier, costlier battery.

Fundamentally the power required to do a days work doesn't really change that much, but instead of being shared between three substations in the middle of the line (St Johns Road/Rowborough/Sandown) most of that electricity would need to come from Shanklin - I can't see that being cheap or easy to achieve.

While there would be challenges, the use of a 24/7 trickle-down capacitor and a smaller onboard battery (perhaps a range of 30 miles), would mean a full charge could be achieved in the space of 5 minutes without serious concerns to operations.

Additional third rails could be added to St John’s (as they’ll be a substation for the depot anyway) to provide any additional power if the Shanklin chargers break/the line is inaccessible.

I do respect though that this is mostly untested technology, but as other posters have said it could be the best place to test it.

 

[A0wen]

As previously mentioned demand on Island Line is very 'peaky', off-peak trains can be very quiet out of season but during the summer I regularly have to stand (with no opportunity to pay) during the day on trains with 150+ people and aisles full of luggage, especially if the weather is good.

That isn't going to be true of the the Marston Vale which will have a much higher proportion of commuter traffic spread out throughout the year and I daresay a fraction of the summer leisure traffic you find on Island Line when everyone makes a dash for the beach.

So what that it's very "peaky" - that the demand is high for 3 months of the year is no justification for having massive excess capacity the rest of the year. That was the thing BR used to do in the 60s - loads of carriages left idle in sidings just to get used for a few seaside specials - a ridiculous waste of resource. The Island Line costs need to be kept to a minimum - its massively loss making already - so having excess unused capacity is not a sensible suggestion. And since the Island Line broadly serves the coast then it isn't really a way for people to get to the seaside. Certainly from Newport - the bit of the island furthest from the coast - it makes precisely no difference.

The D trains would be better than the 483s if only because their larger profile offers more room for standing passengers so even with a load of 150 they'd be less crowded and be more pleasant.

 

[bramling]

IMO a mainland branch worked by a single DMU makes infinitely more sense - unlike Island Line there'd be clear passenger and environmental benefits and should it prove unreliable or unsuccessful it can easily revert to DMU operation.

Unless any upgrades to Island Line include retention of the 3rd rail, with trains able to use it, any ongoing issues with battery operation could cause absolute chaos.

I may well be missing something, but I don’t quite get the value of battery operation on the IOW. It seems to be generally accepted that there would be substations at Shanklin and Ryde, whereas the current electrification scheme has just three (small) substations. A Shanklin substation would be a new project. The cost of the third rail is relatively minor, so I don’t really see where the saving arises, nor why one would mess around with the infrastructure for battery when a D stock could just run on diesel power and avoid any electrification infrastructure at all.

I’d have thought Uckfield might make a better battery scheme, if technically viable, not least because if offers considerable benefits eliminating 10-car DMU operation on a highly congested railway.

 

[Chris999999]

So why is the Solent stopping them from running? I know when there’s a high tide and a heavy swell they knock the service on the head at the Esplanade but that doesn’t happen all that often.

Crossing the Solent should get a bit easier from next month with the new Red Funnel vessel Red Kestrel which carries 12 HGVs - should be able to carry a railway carriage or 2.

 

[hooverboy]

To put that in context the Marston Vale line (excluding Bedford Midland and Bletchley) was 426,900. Bletchley and Bedford's figures combined are just over 5m so if 10% of those are headed for the Marston Vale you're at the same level as the Island Line. From my office window I can see the Marston Vale line - the trains are overwhelmingly empty most of the day - they are carting about fresh air most of the time, so notwithstanding the platform length issue that one doesn't justify more than 2 cars, it's difficult to see how a similar case can be made for the Island Line.

now you just have to figure out WHY it is empty most of the day,and find ways and means to make it not empty.
In the case of marston vale,I believe it's purely down to bad connections.....it is cheaper /faster to use alternative means from bedford-MKC...sort that one out and you will get decent footfall.

I have banged on repeatedly about the need to properly integrate transport hubs..and both bedford and bletchley come up short here. MKC with plusbus would work,but bedford bus connections from the station are useless.
Fact of the matter is MK IS a hub,bletchley IS NOT.Bedford could be,but ISN'T

in the case of island line.I think it's down to seasonal demand obviously,but also lack of truly integrated island(or island with mainland) ticket, and also the council's reluctance to stage other events outside peak tourist season.
A few extra concerts could fix it...even if it means subsidising the site fees/easing planning /noise restictions... you would make the money back on and then some from accommodation/bars/restaurants etc.

also diversify the events...ok you have a bit of horse racing and bestival(..hmm....lets see about the line-up there, is it going to be cutting edge popular stuff or kajagoogoo have just finished playing butlins in minehead and are close by???..only so far you can push re-treads.)...what about making a purpose built music arena, a bit of motorsport, worst case turn ventnor into vegas..complete with poker tournaments,go-go girls and cabaret!!!!

 

[Chris125]

So what that it's very "peaky" - that the demand is high for 3 months of the year is no justification for having massive excess capacity the rest of the year.

Who said anything about "massive excess capacity"? Strengthening formations with an extra unit or two during the summer occurs throughout the country on lines serving tourist areas, indeed it was normal on Island Line until just a few years back when more units were available and guards could move between carriages freely.

The Island Line costs need to be kept to a minimum - its massively loss making already - so having excess unused capacity is not a sensible suggestion.

It wouldn't be unused on countless days throughout the summer when trains are too busy for guards to collect fares, it's hardly a welcoming experience for visitors either especially those with small children and what if the upgrade and other factors see a growth in passenger numbers?

And since the Island Line broadly serves the coast then it isn't really a way for people to get to the seaside. Certainly from Newport - the bit of the island furthest from the coast - it makes precisely no difference.

Aside from daytrippers, people who live along the Island's coast also go the beach - and we don't always go to the nearest one. There were plenty of locals on the trains at easter out enjoying the sun, myself included.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I have banged on repeatedly about the need to properly integrate transport hubs..and both bedford and bletchley come up short here. MKC with plusbus would work,but bedford bus connections from the station are useless.
Fact of the matter is MK IS a hub,bletchley IS NOT.Bedford could be,but ISN'T

Bletchley has the second largest bus station in MK with plenty of (primarily local) connections. The trouble is that, ludicrously, there is no station entrance on that side so it takes ages to walk across. This has needed solving for years.

But yes, I do think the Marston Vale would be better used if it ran to MKC, though it would require an extra unit and crew to do so.

 

[hooverboy]

Bletchley has the second largest bus station in MK with plenty of (primarily local) connections. The trouble is that, ludicrously, there is no station entrance on that side so it takes ages to walk across. This has needed solving for years.

But yes, I do think the Marston Vale would be better used if it ran to MKC, though it would require an extra unit and crew to do so.

that's the problem!

people are inherently lazy and will automatically look to the quickest/easiest solution...if it is not immediately available then you have a problem.
MKC has this one sorted..you walk out of the entrance and you immediately see a whole array of bus bays.
into MKC about every 5 minutes, longer distance 2 or 3 coaches per hour.
you want short distance local train travel?....fine..hop across the stairs to platform 3/4..every 10 minutes on average
you want long distance train travel...fine....that'll be platform 5/6..about 4 trains per hour..2 tph BHM, 2/3 tph LIV/MAN/GLW

now what does bletchley offer?
4tph max for local services?
10 minute walk to the bus station(not particularly well signed either)

 

[Bletchleyite]

you want short distance local train travel?....fine..hop across the stairs to platform 3/4..every 10 minutes on average
you want long distance train travel...fine....that'll be platform 5/6..about 4 trains per hour..2 tph BHM, 2/3 tph LIV/MAN/GLW

It's not quite that good (in particular there are only 3tph of IC - one Manchester, one Chester/Holyhead and one Scotland via Brum), but your point does stand.

Off peak Bletchley basically has 3tph to Euston (1 fast and 2 slow) and the hourly Southern when they feel in the mood to bother operating it.

But anyway...wasn't this about the Isle of Wight? Which of course has a very convenient ferry connection at one end, a bus station directly adjacent at Esplanade, and plenty of other bus connections on what is without a doubt the best rural bus network in the UK and possibly in the world?

 

[hooverboy]

It's not quite that good (in particular there are only 3tph of IC - one Manchester, one Chester/Holyhead and one Scotland via Brum), but your point does stand.

Off peak Bletchley basically has 3tph to Euston (1 fast and 2 slow) and the hourly Southern when they feel in the mood to bother operating it.

But anyway...wasn't this about the Isle of Wight? Which of course has a very convenient ferry connection at one end, a bus station directly adjacent at Esplanade, and plenty of other bus connections on what is without a doubt the best rural bus network in the UK and possibly in the world?

ok sure we've wandered a bit OT here!

my original point was there is not an IOW "one day travelcard"(or weekly/seasonal variant thereof), which allows you travel to/from mainland and also inclusive travel on vectis buses AND island line trains.
at the moment there is very much an either/or purchase option, which to be honest is quite offputting ,certainly to tourists.
It would be a very easy fix indeed to create such a ticket, and most people will pay the extra for the convenience factor.

from what I've seen of vectis sites, their best deals are also mobile app only,which is not such a good idea for elderly holidaymakers.
a pay-as-you go chargeable/timestamped passcard or ticket you can buy or top up from rail/bus stations/wh-smiths etc would seem like a sensible option

I've seen plenty of suitable candidates for such a system on my travels to know that it could work extremely easily on IOW.,
(danish rejsekorte in being one such example..actually works on trains and buses all over denmark!..I've got one!..for 7 day validity timestamped example I'd say NT card from finland )..card bought from travel office or newsagents....topped up at travel office,buses or newsagents...simple.Once you get close to your limit it bleeps and swears at you so you know it's time to recharge.

 

[Bletchleyite]

my original point was there is not an IOW "one day travelcard"(or weekly/seasonal variant thereof), which allows you travel to/from mainland and also inclusive travel on vectis buses AND island line trains.
at the moment there is very much an either/or purchase option, which to be honest is quite offputting ,certainly to tourists.
It would be a very easy fix indeed to create such a ticket, and most people will pay the extra for the convenience factor.

Yes, such a ticket would be an excellent idea - perhaps offered in varying lengths too as well as family and couple versions. TBH, I think it'd be of more value to have Island Line in Vectis's ticketing system than the National Rail one, you could always do it as a through ticket under PlusBus.

 

[hooverboy]

Yes, such a ticket would be an excellent idea - perhaps offered in varying lengths too as well as family and couple versions. TBH, I think it'd be of more value to have Island Line in Vectis's ticketing system than the National Rail one, you could always do it as a through ticket under PlusBus.

definitely...although I think the all-in-one solution is probably the best option.....you're certainly right about the group/family versions.
it always makes sense for one responsible adult to take care of all the travel arrangements for parties with young children and stag/hen do's!

I don't think £100 for an off peak 3 day pass from waterloo(including return rail/ferry/hover)/£200 for a group of 4 would be at all excessive, and I think you could drum up quite a bit of extra business on the island as a result.
3 days is basically a perfect bank holiday dirty weekend/stag do!...you can charge commensurate rates for family weeks.

that would be a nice and easy fare scheme (from waterloo incl train/ferry/hover):
individual / group/family up to 4 ppl
1 day £50 / £100
3 day £100 / £200
1 week £200 / £400

on-the island tickets(island line and vectis bus)
individual / group/family up to 4 ppl
1 day £15 / £50
3 day £30 / £100
1 week £50 / £160

 

[Adsy125]

Well in the case of the stock it's 80 years old and is in daily use. Feel free to point out other items of 80 year old rolling stock which are in daily use in the UK.v

I understand the stock, but as many preserved railways show it can be done. And maintaining the track and electricity supply is done daily by Network Rail.

 

[A0wen]

I may well be missing something, but I don’t quite get the value of battery operation on the IOW. It seems to be generally accepted that there would be substations at Shanklin and Ryde, whereas the current electrification scheme has just three (small) substations. A Shanklin substation would be a new project. The cost of the third rail is relatively minor, so I don’t really see where the saving arises, nor why one would mess around with the infrastructure for battery when a D stock could just run on diesel power and avoid any electrification infrastructure at all.

.

Because the 3rd rail infrastructure is apparently life expired or near to - it's probably what was installed when the line was electrified in 1967. Add in running 750v 3rd rail over water isn't ideal. Plus to make any changes to the track layout e.g. reinstating the Brading loop means you need to factor in the 3rd rail. Whereas if you only need a couple of sections of 3rd / 4th rail at a couple of locations for charging, that simplifies matters massively and reduces cost. Also 3rd rail isn't "maintenance free" or even low maintenance as posters like @Bald Rick have pointed out on many occasions.

 

[A0wen]

I understand the stock, but as many preserved railways show it can be done. And maintaining the track and electricity supply is done daily by Network Rail.

But preserved railways run them a handful of times a year, whereas the Island Line is running them 18 hours a day, 7 days a week for about 360 days a year. Even the most regular of Heritage Railways e.g SVR or GCR usually only operate 9 hours a day, only 7 days a week during high season and down to as few as 2 days a week at quiet times.

 

[Adsy125]

But preserved railways run them a handful of times a year, whereas the Island Line is running them 18 hours a day, 7 days a week for about 360 days a year. Even the most regular of Heritage Railways e.g SVR or GCR usually only operate 9 hours a day, only 7 days a week during high season and down to as few as 2 days a week at quiet times.

Ignoring my point about the track... True heritage railways don’t operate as frequently, but there are 6 units on the island and at most 3 of them are in use at once (2 now) you’d hope they could maintain 50% availability reasonably well if it was properly resourced.

 

[cactustwirly]

Because the 3rd rail infrastructure is apparently life expired or near to - it's probably what was installed when the line was electrified in 1967. Add in running 750v 3rd rail over water isn't ideal. Plus to make any changes to the track layout e.g. reinstating the Brading loop means you need to factor in the 3rd rail. Whereas if you only need a couple of sections of 3rd / 4th rail at a couple of locations for charging, that simplifies matters massively and reduces cost. Also 3rd rail isn't "maintenance free" or even low maintenance as posters like @Bald Rick have pointed out on many occasions.

Because the 3rd rail infrastructure is apparently life expired or near to - it's probably what was installed when the line was electrified in 1967. Add in running 750v 3rd rail over water isn't ideal. Plus to make any changes to the track layout e.g. reinstating the Brading loop means you need to factor in the 3rd rail. Whereas if you only need a couple of sections of 3rd / 4th rail at a couple of locations for charging, that simplifies matters massively and reduces cost. Also 3rd rail isn't "maintenance free" or even low maintenance as posters like @Bald Rick have pointed out on many occasions.

But it's the substations that are life expired, so if you introduced charging points, you would need to new substations anyway?