North Downs line electrification

[GRALISTAIR]

So that's a set of power electronics every 3m, each with a fat copper cable to its section of rail and linked along the lineside by a similar cable to carry the power past the sections that are switched off. The third rail would also need insulated* joints or possibly short sections alternating left and right, as with the normal gaps and ramps the shoegear would touch little or none of it . Is all this really cheaper, easier, safer or more reliable than installing OLE?

And the straight answer is no - and would also add "andyetanother" type of electrification. I say it is a no-no - (IMHO of course)

 

[po8crg]

APS is mostly used in city centres where overhead wires look ugly. I think there's a fair point when you're talking about something like a mediaeval cathedral square.

It's expensive and nothing like as reliable as OHLE, so systems generally switch to OHLE as quickly as possible when they get out of the centre. It's completely inappropriate for heavy rail.

I wonder sometimes if infill could be done with 750V DC OHLE (ie tram-style) if there is DC-only rolling stock - just plonk a pantograph on top of the train - but I imagine that the amount of testing required in the real world would make that impractical.

 

[najaB]

I wonder sometimes if infill could be done with 750V DC OHLE (ie tram-style) if there is DC-only rolling stock - just plonk a pantograph on top of the train - but I imagine that the amount of testing required in the real world would make that impractical.

If you're going to go to the effort to put up OHLE, might as well make it 25kV - it'll outlast any stock, after all there can't be that much new DC-only stock out there on the mainline.

 

[QueensCurve]

Im working out in the Middle East at the moment and was looking at Dubai Trams APS system today https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-level_power_supply, basically a very clever 3rd rail electrification system thats used on street running. On 3rd rail infill electrification in the Uk could not this system be adapted to a classic uk dc third rail using standard rolling stock fitted with the necessary radio equipment. Basically a modified 377 would run under classic 3rd Rail to Reigate but the radio equipment would energise the 3rd rail under the train between Reigate and Guildford and over the other gaps. Okay so its complex but conversion of the dc system to ac is unlikely to happen in my lifetime. It would appear to fulfil all hmris safety requirements. I can see that it wouldn't be practical on the Uckfield lines 10 car trains but it would seem to be technically possible on the low frequency 3 or 4 car units used on both the Marshlink and North Down lines limited to 60 mph running on the infill sections.

Presumably this system would be incompatible with the existing 3rd rail trains and so would still need dual fitted trains.

Now that the Tyne and weir metro is procuring dual current 1500V DC 25kV single phase trains, 25 kV looks like the future south of the Thames too. Not to mention any Merseyrail extensions.

 

[59CosG95]

This just in: http://www.964eagle.co.uk/news/local-news/2164653/north-downs-railway-line-to-be-fully-electrified/
If the DafT had a grain of forward planning, they'd use OLE. Probably won't be OLE though.

 

[physics34]

This just in: http://www.964eagle.co.uk/news/local-news/2164653/north-downs-railway-line-to-be-fully-electrified/
If the DafT had a grain of forward planning, they'd use OLE. Probably won't be OLE though.

cant find that anywhere official.......??

 

[theironroad]

This just in: http://www.964eagle.co.uk/news/local-news/2164653/north-downs-railway-line-to-be-fully-electrified/
If the DafT had a grain of forward planning, they'd use OLE. Probably won't be OLE though.

While I understood that no new major third rail would be started in the UK, the chances of putting ole in between Reigate and Guildford is slim. Much of the north downs line is part of the Surrey hills AONB and there would be a lot of local resistance to the ole kit going in.

While direct trains from north down line stations to Waterloo via Guildford would be a great improvement, it would make sense to do third rail as I'm not aware of any plans to make Guildford to Waterloo ole equipped, though suppose they could use cascaded trains off the thameslink with dual capability.

 

[59CosG95]

While I understood that no new major third rail would be started in the UK, the chances of putting ole in between Reigate and Guildford is slim. Much of the north downs line is part of the Surrey hills AONB and there would be a lot of local resistance to the ole kit going in.

While direct trains from north down line stations to Waterloo via Guildford would be a great improvement, it would make sense to do third rail as I'm not aware of any plans to make Guildford to Waterloo ole equipped, though suppose they could use cascaded trains off the thameslink with dual capability.

I'd think Guildford to Victoria via Reigate seems more likely; Southern can put their Dual-voltage 377s to good use there, seeing as the /2s have been largely superceded by the /7s on the WCML, and the /5s appear to be SE-bound.

 

[HowardGWR]

cant find that anywhere official.......??

You won't. Note the last para. Mr Goodman, a Surrey councillor speaking:

“Fully electrifying this line would change all that, giving Surrey and the South East’s powerhouse economies a significant shot in the arm while also providing the government with an enormous financial boost so I hope it features in their plans.”

My emboldening.

 

[swt_passenger]

You won't. Note the last para. Mr Goodman, a Surrey councillor speaking:

“Fully electrifying this line would change all that, giving Surrey and the South East’s powerhouse economies a significant shot in the arm while also providing the government with an enormous financial boost so I hope it features in their plans.”

My emboldening.

The radio station have simply misinterpreted a news release on Surrey CC's site that attempts to keep the pot boiling. Nothing to see here really.
https://news.surreycc.gov.uk/2016/1...will-boost-government-coffers-by-almost-190m/

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

While I understood that no new major third rail would be started in the UK, the chances of putting ole in between Reigate and Guildford is slim. Much of the north downs line is part of the Surrey hills AONB and there would be a lot of local resistance to the ole kit going in.

Much of this thread consists of detailed explanations by insiders explaining that the line will not be third rail electrified. It will be OLE or nothing irrespective of AONB status. See the GWML for a recent example.

 

[MatthewRead]

Could this mean 319's end up on the North Downs line or will it just be the 387's?

 

[swt_passenger]

Could this mean 319's end up on the North Downs line or will it just be the 387's?

Not either, because as has been explained it isn't a real announcement.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It will be OLE or nothing irrespective of AONB status.

Agreed - it is not the GWML with 140 mph running with two pants etc. This is North Downs and it just needs sensible and "pretty" but still functional OHLE. No need for massive over-engineering.

Alec Trick

 

[snowball]

The radio station have simply misinterpreted a news release on Surrey CC's site that attempts to keep the pot boiling. Nothing to see here really.
https://news.surreycc.gov.uk/2016/1...will-boost-government-coffers-by-almost-190m/

An understandable mistake given the way it's worded - very dodgy practice by the council in my view.

 

[The Ham]

An understandable mistake given the way it's worded - very dodgy practice by the council in my view.

It is carefully worded, there is no talk of the electrification being confirmed, rather it talks about

potentially massive financial boost for the government of electrifying the final 29 miles of the route

And

led to the council and the rail franchise joining forces to drive forward the case for investment. Other improvements the council wants to see include more frequent trains, longer platforms and greater capacity at Guildford station.

The radio station then added 2+2 and got 5 for their headline, but mostly just quoted the original press release.

Of course, the council want to give the impression that the investment should be a foregone conclusion, so that the public are then on side and may even start to question why it isn't happening yet.

 

[Minstral25]

If it happens and a through service is required, then the Bedford to Gatwick service will divert through Reigate to Guildford.

GTR have already stated publicly on several occasions that they want the Bedford service diverted from Gatwick to Reigate but can only do so if platform 3 is built at Reigate.

They have been lobbying Network Rail very hard for this work.

 

[DerekC]

The only options here are 3rd rail or OLE - anything else is pie in the sky. Practically speaking 3rd rail could be done in the (relatively) near future if the ban on further extension can be relaxed. (Hear any pigs starting engines out there?) OLE isn't going to happen except in conjunction with a planned switch of either SWML or BML (or both) from 3rd rail to OLE - which according to NR and DfT will happen one day - but my guess is it's 20 to 30 years away.

Ideas for terminating more trains at Guildford need to take account of plans associated with Crossrail 2 and Southwest access to Heathrow, both of which are covered by other threads.

 

[MatthewRead]

I'm confused are you all saying that that article is a fake :0

 

[snowball]

It is carefully worded, there is no talk of the electrification being confirmed

It starts

Upgrading North Downs Line will boost government coffers by almost £190m

Fully electrifying the North Downs Line will boost the government’s coffers by nearly £190 million.

Upgrading the train line, which runs between Reading and Gatwick through Surrey, will generate an additional £89m a year in corporation tax and an extra £97m annually in income tax.

Three uses of "will" rather than "would" without any prior backgrund explanation - that's misleading.

It continues

News of the potentially massive financial boost for the government of electrifying the final 29 miles of the route comes just days after Chancellor Philip Hammond signalled major investment in rail projects in his Autumn Statement to help boost growth.

"News comes" - gives the impression of a recent decision - misleading.

There are qualifications later but some people will have stopped reading by then.

 

[The Ham]

It starts

Upgrading North Downs Line will boost government coffers by almost £190m

Fully electrifying the North Downs Line will boost the government’s coffers by nearly £190 million.

Upgrading the train line, which runs between Reading and Gatwick through Surrey, will generate an additional £89m a year in corporation tax and an extra £97m annually in income tax.

Three uses of "will" rather than "would" without any prior backgrund explanation - that's misleading.

It continues

News of the potentially massive financial boost for the government of electrifying the final 29 miles of the route comes just days after Chancellor Philip Hammond signalled major investment in rail projects in his Autumn Statement to help boost growth.

"News comes" - gives the impression of a recent decision - misleading.

There are qualifications later but some people will have stopped reading by then.

It says that the the government will get a boost to its coffers with electrification of the line, it does not say that the line is going to be, or even had been announced that it will be electrified. As I said, carefully worded.

Likewise, the news that comes is to do with the financial boost "of" electrifying the line. Again it doesn't say that the planned electrifying of or the electrification that is due by XXXX.

 

[snowball]

If you read it like a High Court judge reading evidence, yes. But I suggest it's so written that if you read it like an ordinary person reading something in which they have only a moderate level of interest, there's a high probability that they will think it means the electrification is going ahead. The people at the radio station did.

Whoever wrote it failed in their responsibility to write clearly.

 

[Taunton]

Much of the thread above was taken up with 25Kv supporters shooting down us Third Rail extension advocates.

What has changed in recent months is the coming together of several anti-overhead issues. The new European electrification clearance requirements would appear to have added so much to the cost of raising clearances etc that it's being openly said that no more 25Kv of existing lines would be practical, especially with the limited clearances in the old Southern Railway area. Then the way that not only did the GW scheme way blow its budgets and timescales, but has now suddenly had to be substantially de-scoped to even fit within the newly agreed figures, such as no electric service to Bristol AT ALL it would now appear. The inability of the industry to have competent 25Kv electrification engineers has been noted by government, along with the gold-plating of projects (which sounds suspiciously similar to engineers promoting the substitution of one perfectly serviceable electrification scheme with another, which offers no real benefit to passengers).

Meanwhile a DC scheme suffers from none of this.

 

[najaB]

Meanwhile a DC scheme suffers from none of this.

It just suffers from being incredibly dangerous and grossly inefficient.

 

[HowardGWR]

Much of the thread above was taken up with 25Kv supporters shooting down us Third Rail extension advocates.

What has changed in recent months is the coming together of several anti-overhead issues. The new European electrification clearance requirements would appear to have added so much to the cost of raising clearances etc that it's being openly said that no more 25Kv of existing lines would be practical, especially with the limited clearances in the old Southern Railway area.

See my emboldened. There are no new EU requirements, which was why it has been such a scandal that officials here did what they did. By the way, the tongue in cheek letter from the head of the European head in Modern railways is a hoot to read, although sad that some have failed to spot his clever subtle humour.

 

[Phil.]

It just suffers from being incredibly dangerous and grossly inefficient.

Third rail electrification is not "incredibly dangerous" as you would have it. Anything is dangerous if you're not familiar with it which is where H&S jockeys get so much so wrong about so many situations. I'd also question the "grossly inefficient" statement too. It's done southern England very well over the years and for a (relatively) low speed line like the North Downs Line it's perfectly adequate.
After watching the rapidly unpeeling farce that the Great Western electrification is/has become I'd say that third rail supply with it's simplicity of installation (no bridges and tunnel clearances to worry about) and zero visual impact (no locals complaining about ugly masts) has an awful lot going for it.
We used to laugh at other countries getting in a tangle over engineering projects. Remind me again, how long did it take the Chinese to build an 819 mile 186 mph line from Beijing to Shanghai?

 

[Taunton]

It just suffers from being incredibly dangerous and grossly inefficient.

If it was incredibly dangerous there would be regular fatalities. But there aren't.

If it was grossly inefficient then fares would be much higher south of the Thames than north of it because the TOCs would have to pay much more for energy. But that doesn't apply either.

If you want gross inefficiency look at the GW 25Kv "money poured down the drain" scheme. Now THAT'S gross inefficiency.

 

[HSTEd]

It just suffers from being incredibly dangerous and grossly inefficient.

Define "incredibly dangerous".
How many fatalities each year are suffered from third rail that would not have been killed regardless by being hit by a train?

And inefficiency is irrelevant - electricity is cheap.

 

[Domh245]

Define "incredibly dangerous".
How many fatalities each year are suffered from third rail that would not have been killed regardless by being hit by a train?

And inefficiency is irrelevant - electricity is cheap.

Inefficiency is important - as far as I'm aware we still rely on large amounts of Gas to produce our power, and any losses that you can get rid of should be gotten rid of. Also remember that an inefficient system means less power for the train. On the NDL it may not be massive worry, but as a general argument for OLE v Third Rail, inefficiency is a big concern

 

[najaB]

Define "incredibly dangerous".

Exposed 750V conductors at ground level able to deliver thousands of Amps into anything that provides a path to earth without detecting a short circuit.

Or do you have bare mains voltage wires lying around your house?

 

[JamesRowden]

Exposed 750V conductors at ground level able to deliver thousands of Amps into anything that provides a path to earth without detecting a short circuit.

Or do you have bare mains voltage wires lying around your house?

AC is more dangerous than DC because it can interfere with the signals within the body. Two cyclists fell onto the third rail at St Leonards Warrior Square in seperate incidents over the past 10 years and both survived with burns.