Well, if it wasn't for a lack of 750V capability I would suggest the best thing the government could spend electrification budget on would be to buy 400 of them and try to sell the freight operators on a scrappage scheme for the existing diesel fleet.
Perhaps the government can do this for the Sprinter fleet as well in favour of BEMUs?
It has made it more attractive as FOCs can say if you wire it, we can use 99s in electric mode.
I'm not sure it has.
Or you wire to the reception and departure sidings and have a battery loco like the 08e shunt the train around, including the electric loco. Garston has wires for the 90s, and they load containers. Having the 90s always at one end of the train allows the wires to stop short of the loading area, allowing electric freight without the need to wire the loading area at all, even with the moving OLE. The argument to convert to OLE has become even stronger as a larger fleet of electric locos could use the wires. It would also remove the time it takes to swap from a 66 to a pair of 90s.
I'm not sure I agree actually - in the long term diesel will have to go completely even from freight operations, so ideally the operations within the port would be doable on battery - and climbing the hill up to Ipswich is not ideal, so it may be worth electrifying closer to the port.
But what you say applies if you don't have class 99s (or similar locos), not if you do have them.
Still need at least to wire a short section of the ‘up line’ at Thames Haven Jn to allow 99s to pan up before reaching the mainline.
Only GBRf have 99s. 88s and 93s can manage Gateway but I wouldn’t trust them on the Felixstowe branch with a full container train (correct me if I’m wrong). Again, what are you saying to Freightliner, who have very commendably invested in a strong fleet of pure electric locos.
I think it is clear from the rest of my post that I'm actually in favour of electrifying those branches up to the port (but not in the port themselves)
In BR era the Gateway branch could have been wired using simple OLE as its under 40mph which would have made it quite cost effective albeit you still have to get the train into the terminal so still need either last mile diesel/battery loco or a separate shunter which would lower economics hence you can see the advantage of the bimodes locos.
It follows because, if you are doing a rolling programme, you could try and make sure the 99s are using electric on ‘core’ freight routes as much as possible.
These bimodes are passenger units though. It would make so much more sense for a 99 to be able to pan up at the signal while waiting for the mainline to become available. Can the 99s change power on the move? If they can’t then electrifying that would seem to make sense to avoid stopping on the main line for a power changeover.
If you are saying that you are not electrifying two of the most important freight routes in the country because one relevant operator (DRS and ROG don’t go to either Gateway or Felixstowe) has bi-modes, I think Freightliner would question you on why you are stopping their (recently enlarged, much to their credit) electric loco fleet from getting to these ports.
…which would be my third pick personally, behind the two ports.
Would the better acceleration on electric help with train speed through the junction - a benefit on congested lines? Or is the speed through the junction likely to be so slow that how long it takes to reach it is irrelevant?
These two branches have very different constraints.
Electrodiesels mean that electrification should be installed on those sections of track where it reduces diesel burn by the most per unit cost.
"Because we don't have a business case to spend that much money for so little benefit" would probably be a pretty potent answer in this context.
I would agree that there is no case for electrifying London Gateway, however there is clearly a case for electrifying Felixstowe, given it enables electric locomotives with small batteries to operate there, and the substantial performance benefits.
Yes but enabling FOCs to use electric traction should enable more paths across the wider railway. The cost of slow freight paths likely makes the abstraction caused by OA look trivial.
You won't get much electrification for the cost of simply giving everyone Class 99s to replace the remaining Class 86s, 87s and 90s in use.
Did you mean to put this? Neither of these locos have worked freight trains recently, and for the 87s it’s been about 20 years! (I think)
I didn't think they had been, but I am not necessarily up to date, so I thought I would hedge!
The issue here is that it's fairly useless to get 90s only to the port gates. Electrified freight terminals are possible but an operational minefield, and Felixstowe is extremely busy so complicating operations is not advisable.
Felixstowe has shunters available and at London Gateway you can do the Garston/Trafford Park/Coatbridge method of running round and shunting the wagons into the terminal while the locos remain under the wires.
Lawley Street appears to have 3 trains a day that could go over to electric traction for most of the route but would still require last mile (2 London Gateway, 1 Felixstowe) while London Gateway appears to have 4 a day to fully electrified destinations (3 Trafford, 1 Garston, 1 Coatbridge) that could go over to 90s tomorrow, and 8 more to ‘last mile off-wire’ destinations (2 Ditton, 2 Lawley St, 2 Hams Hall, 1 Birch Coppice, 1 Wentloog). Probably more if Doncaster/Leeds workings took the ECML instead of the ‘joint’ line.
So complicating operations?
Gateway only benefits gateway whereas Nuneaton to New Street gives much wider network benefits, especially in the context of the upcoming Midlands Rail Hub Plans.
A very minor consideration compared to a train running 200 miles running on electric instead of diesel.
All trains on the Birmingham to Nuneaton currently go on to at least Leicester.
A last mile loco that is likely to be unaffordable in large numbers. There are several Freightliner trains that can go over to Class 90 haulage tomorrow with Gateway electrification.
We can get 200 miles on electric instead of diesel by simply buying the Class 99 instead though.
The electrification of Gateway and Felixstowe would likely cost enough that the Government could just give freightliner Class 99s one for one for the Class 90s and come out ahead though.
Why? Google Earth https://www.google.com/maps/search/...try=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDYzMC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw== seems to show loads of undeveloped land around Gateway for a worksite, including a big triangular "field" at the west end off the main road roundabout. Plus you could always move stuff in by rail (or water). Some of the land might have already been developed, of course, but there is also a triangular fan that looks like ex rail sidings at the east end too.
Well you have a lot of costs in setting up a project team, acquiring site compounds and all that, but with very few kilometres of electrification to amortise these costs over.
Let one contract for Gateway and Felixtowe together then, to be done in succession with a compulsory holiday in between while the site huts are moved to the other half of the job.