MML Electrification: progress updates

[londonmidland]

A metal structure has been erected at the South Wigston worksite (where the concrete base is). Not sure if it’s to do with the OLE itself or the associated electrical components.

 

[Edvid]

Here's how said worksite looks from Blaby Road:

August 2023 passby on Street View

Travelled through Kibworth on the X7 bus earlier today and OLE installation progress at the bridges looked as follows:

* Harborough Road (SPC3/22) - catenary, contact and ATF wires registered
* New Road (SPC3/20) - catenary and contact wires registered
* Station Bridge Kibworth (SPC3/19) - SPS/fittings installed; no wires

The first may also have had aerial earth wires in place but I wasn't looking for them.

 

[YourMum666]

Question, why are they skipping Leicester?

 

[John R]

Question, why are they skipping Leicester?

More complex, more costly. With bimodes the strategy seems to be to get the easy bits done first to get more bang for the DfT’s buck.

 

[380DC]

Question, why are they skipping Leicester?

There are so many constraints to work through with existing infrastructure - overbridges being the main cause for concern through Leicester. They're already had to R&D and bring in whole new standards just to get RS1 & 3 to work, Leicester itself is so much more complex

 

[edwin_m]

Also there may be a re-modelling sometime in the future, which will be a bit easier if it isn't electrified first.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

More complex, more costly. With bimodes the strategy seems to be to get the easy bits done first to get more bang for the DfT’s buck.

And with my realism cap on, that seems eminently sensible.

 

[londonmidland]

When are works north of Leicester expected to take place?

 

[Edvid]

There's nothing publicly available on the NR website, not even a mention of the works referenced in post #6506 that should be underway in Sutton Bonington* this week.

[* Possibly ground investigation, devegetation, or a reinspection of bridge SPC5/95 - named Station Road on its identity plate - to affirm its modification (done before the 2017 de-scoping) meets current standards]

-----

The transfer of MML traction supply control from York ECR to Derby ECR is noted in the September 2023 NESA update; I'm guessing the change happened just hours after the June 2023 update was finalised.

There's also a reference to headspans in StP across platforms 4 & 5 handling two supplies (because the latter is on HS1 and fed from Barking NG / Choats Road ATFS; ergo it's under the control of Ashford ECR). Are there any other such examples on the GB rail network?

 

[WesternBiker]

And with my realism cap on, that seems eminently sensible.

Indeed.

I fear it may go the way of the GW electrification through Bath/Bristol though - i.e. once bi-modes are in place, the difficult bits can get kicked down the road...

 

[CdBrux]

Indeed.

I fear it may go the way of the GW electrification through Bath/Bristol though - i.e. once bi-modes are in place, the difficult bits can get kicked down the road...

or if enough easy bits are done switch / exchange the Bimodes to become battery bi-modes vs diesel bi-modes

 

[GraphitProjekt]

Recently picked up a 2022 TRACKmap for the midlands and northwest and I gladly discovered they've started recording ECR areas. They must be irritated that their ECR info regarding the MML is now wrong considering how rare it is for a new ECR to come about.

 

[swt_passenger]

The transfer of MML traction supply control from York ECR to Derby ECR is noted in the September 2023 NESA update; I'm guessing the change happened just hours after the June 2023 update was finalised.

That seems highly likely to be what must have happened, the exact time of transfer was given as 12:33 on Sat 27th May, according to post #6309 made on the day.

 

[Nottingham59]

or if enough easy bits are done switch / exchange the Bimodes to become battery bi-modes vs diesel bi-modes

Though the issue there is that for diesel bimodes it's best to electrify the plain track and leave the (complex) stations till later. For battery bimodes, its better to electrify the stations (and the approaches where trains accelerate back to line speed).

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

More complex, more costly. With bimodes the strategy seems to be to get the easy bits done first to get more bang for the DfT’s buck.

Given capital budgets are being squeezed and they have bimodes on order does make entire sense to maximise the amount of wiring you can get with those limited pounds. The bigger question in short term is will they even get authority to leap over Leicester when they get to Wigston

 

[Bald Rick]

The bigger question in short term is will they even get authority to leap over Leicester when they get to Wigston

I’m sure the team are trying very hard on that front.

 

[Flying Phil]

It should be remembered that several bridges North of Leicester were rebuilt, with electrical clearances, in preparation, back in 2015ish.

 

[John R]

It should be remembered that several bridges North of Leicester were rebuilt, with electrical clearances, in preparation, back in 2015ish.

Let’s hope that there hasn’t been a change in the goalposts, sorry standards, that means that they are no longer sufficient. That sort of thing seem to happen on the railways a lot it seems.

 

[edwin_m]

Let’s hope that there hasn’t been a change in the goalposts, sorry standards, that means that they are no longer sufficient. That sort of thing seem to happen on the railways a lot it seems.

The parapets probably aren't high enough. Bridges near stations will probably require some risk assessment around wire height in the platforms.

 

[Sonik]

Also there may be a re-modelling sometime in the future, which will be a bit easier if it isn't electrified first.

Leicester is a major bottleneck for east-west freight, so there have been proposals previously of four tracking from Wigston to Syston, with a flyover at Wigston.

This is a bit old but the issues are still valid:

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Midland-Main-Line-Congested-Infrastructure-Capacity-Enhancement-Plan-240915.pdf

 

[InTheEastMids]

Also there may be a re-modelling sometime in the future, which will be a bit easier if it isn't electrified first.

Leicester is a major bottleneck for east-west freight, so there have been proposals previously of four tracking from Wigston to Syston, possibly with a flyover at Wigston so the freights can cross the fasts.

This is a bit old but the issues are still valid:

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Midland-Main-Line-Congested-Infrastructure-Capacity-Enhancement-Plan-240915.pdf

The "Network Rail Leicester Area Strategic Advice" (Google that term and you'll find it) that NR issued in 2020 supports the idea of remodelling to improve capacity, but doesn't suggest a need for grade separation. If I remember correctly, it does have 4-tracking from Wigston and potentially additional platforms at Leicester. This (of course) has not been funded but I think is needed for the Midlands Rail Hub to be delivered as this proposal has (again from memory) gives additional Leicester-Birmingham trains as well as a new (since WMCL upgrade) direct service to Coventry.

This is separate from the redevelopment of the station building/area itself which secured £17m funding earlier this year and does seem to be progressing - the Parcel Yard (pub) has closed and planning applications submitted for demolition of that building.

 

[PJM]

The "Network Rail Leicester Area Strategic Advice" (Google that term and you'll find it) that NR issued in 2020 supports the idea of remodelling to improve capacity, but doesn't suggest a need for grade separation. If I remember correctly, it does have 4-tracking from Wigston and potentially additional platforms at Leicester. This (of course) has not been funded but I think is needed for the Midlands Rail Hub to be delivered as this proposal has (again from memory) gives additional Leicester-Birmingham trains as well as a new (since WMCL upgrade) direct service to Coventry.

This is separate from the redevelopment of the station building/area itself which secured £17m funding earlier this year and does seem to be progressing - the Parcel Yard (pub) has closed and planning applications submitted for demolition of that building.

https://sacuksprodnrdigital0001.blob.core.windows.net/regional-long-term-planning/Eastern/Leicester%20Area%20Strategic%20Advice%202021.pdf

This is good bedtime reading!

 

[midland1]

https://sacuksprodnrdigital0001.blob.core.windows.net/regional-long-term-planning/Eastern/Leicester%20Area%20Strategic%20Advice%202021.pdf

This is good bedtime reading!

The picture on page 27 is not Syston North Jn.

 

[londonmidland]

A letter received through the post by Network Rail regarding the latest electrification works -

 

[edwin_m]

A letter received through the post by Network Rail regarding the latest electrification works -

If those things in the references are chainages as they look to be, then this is northwards from Wigston Junction to just south of Leicester station. Which I thought was beyond the current agreed scope of work.

 

[snowball]

If those things in the references are chainages as they look to be, then this is northwards from Wigston Junction to just south of Leicester station. Which I thought was beyond the current agreed scope of work.

Indeed it seems to extend to possibly somewhere near Lancaster Road underbridge south of Leicester station, and to include the Wigston triangle and a couple of hundred yards further towards Narborough.

 

[InTheEastMids]

A letter received through the post by Network Rail regarding the latest electrification works -

What's the thought process at Network Rail that says "we need to communicate with a non railway audience about our works" and then decides that the best way to do it is to quote miles/chains measurements that mean nothing to a non railway audience?

And no actual description of the works they are undertaking and the levels of noise that communities can expect. They might as well print it on absorbent paper so the letter has at least some use to "railway neighbours".

 

[takno]

What's the thought process at Network Rail that says "we need to communicate with a non railway audience about our works" and then decides that the best way to do it is to quote miles/chains measurements that mean nothing to a non railway audience?

And no actual description of the works they are undertaking and the levels of noise that communities can expect. They might as well print it on absorbent paper so the letter has at least some use to "railway neighbours".

The miles and chains are in a reference. Generally I'd expect that to be a completely obscure number only used if you get in touch with them.

The message is fairly clear - we'll be making some noise, but if we won't be outside yours all night, and we won't be working weeknights. I'm not sure what else you want them to say - particularly interested neighbours can presumably call the hotline to find out more

 

[swt_passenger]

The miles and chains are in a reference. Generally I'd expect that to be a completely obscure number only used if you get in touch with them.

The message is fairly clear - we'll be making some noise, but if we won't be outside yours all night, and we won't be working weeknights. I'm not sure what else you want them to say - particularly interested neighbours can presumably call the hotline to find out more

The distances also include the yards conversion in brackets though, for people who read the whole thing...

 

[Mikey C]

A map showing where the work is taking place would be more helpful.