Possible electrification schemes in the pipeline?

[zwk500]

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.

They're two completely different sites, this wouldn't save any money.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Saturday at 15:20 ==

A very minor consideration compared to a train running 200 miles running on electric instead of diesel.

Operations cost far more than a couple of hundred miles on diesel.

All trains on the Birmingham to Nuneaton currently go on to at least Leicester.

Which is why I'd do Nuneaton to Wigton immediately after, and the MMLe will do Leicester itself at some point. And hey presto, the Birmingham to Felixstowe route has a series of short hopes between wires...

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.

They're going to be absolutely necessary at some point because you can't load containers from a gantry crane with OLE. The option is either to have a very awkward single reception road and headshunt operation with tight edges to the limits of electrification or to just equip everything with last mile.
88s, 93s, 99s are all last mile capable. Buying FLIM enough euroduals to replace their 90 fleet is probably cheaper than faffing about with all the freight terminals to provide OLE.

 

[AndrewE]

They're two completely different sites, this wouldn't save any money.

not even some of the "costs in setting up a project team, acquiring site compounds and all that" ? You only need one site compound at a time, and you wouldn't have to set up and train a new team if the work continued.

I have to conclude that all of us who imagine that a rolling programme of electrification would have loads of benefits must just be deluding ourselves.

 

[popeter45]

I didn't think they had been, but I am not necessarily up to date, so I thought I would hedge!

I didn't include Class 92 because they have a capability that Class 99s lack that could be useful later (750V operation).

i dont think the lack of 750V is an issue considering how no Class 92 has used that option in years as far as i can think of

 

[HSTEd]

i dont think the lack of 750V is an issue considering how no Class 92 has used that option in years as far as i can think of

Yes, but I reckon thats mostly due to diesel operations being preferred over electric operations generally.

If we can get a Class 99 capability locomotive with third rail, so much the better. But right now I wouldn't really want to surrender more or less the last third rail freight capability.

 

[Zomboid]

There's very little in the way of routes that could support a 92 on DC anyway. The same would be true of any other heavy freight locos on DC, the system just isn't designed to handle the power draw.

That's something that will need to be addressed in one way or another if electric trains to/from Southampton are an aspiration.

 

[popeter45]

Yes, but I reckon thats mostly due to diesel operations being preferred over electric operations generally.

If we can get a Class 99 capability locomotive with third rail, so much the better. But right now I wouldn't really want to surrender more or less the last third rail freight capability.

There's very little in the way of routes that could support a 92 on DC anyway. The same would be true of any other heavy freight locos on DC, the system just isn't designed to handle the power draw.

That's something that will need to be addressed in one way or another if electric trains to/from Southampton are an aspiration.

would it be possible to run such a locomotive in a simultaneous dual power mode?, third rail for constant draw but using the on-board engine to assist when the third rail cant provide enough power such as when starting or up inclines?

 

[Zomboid]

You could limit the peak current in that manner, and if it's a diesel booster then it might work.

A battery booster wouldn't help much though, because it wouldn't reduce the amount of energy that needed to be drawn.

 

[GraphitProjekt]

I'm not particularly well versed on the subject but 3rd rail freight seems exceedingly rare and just not something any authority has wanted to do at a useful scale, most 92s have their shoegear isolated/removed i believe. It is possible (though expensive for sure) to build more grid connections, HV feeders and DC substations and such, but I'm entirely sure it's possible to get away with rating the circuit breakers to let the conductor rails supply current to support simultaneous container freight and reasonable passenger service because the conductor rails would now fail to trip in even more fault conditions than they do at the moment. This is speculation from me but surely something worth considering

 

[Zomboid]

I'm not particularly well versed on the subject but 3rd rail freight seems exceedingly rare and just not something any authority has wanted to do at a useful scale, most 92s have their shoegear isolated/removed i believe. It is possible (though expensive for sure) to build more grid connections, HV feeders and DC substations and such, but I'm entirely sure it's possible to get away with rating the circuit breakers to let the conductor rails supply current to support simultaneous container freight and reasonable passenger service because the conductor rails would now fail to trip in even more fault conditions than they do at the moment. This is speculation from me but surely something worth considering

It's entirely doable, Eurostars used to run on DC with a full service of other trains. It just required a lot of power supply upgrades to do so. The same would be required to run 92s (or equivalent other locos) on a DC power supply over routes other than those upgraded for the original Channel Tunnel link.

 

[HSTEd]

I'm not particularly well versed on the subject but 3rd rail freight seems exceedingly rare and just not something any authority has wanted to do at a useful scale, most 92s have their shoegear isolated/removed i believe. It is possible (though expensive for sure) to build more grid connections, HV feeders and DC substations and such, but I'm entirely sure it's possible to get away with rating the circuit breakers to let the conductor rails supply current to support simultaneous container freight and reasonable passenger service because the conductor rails would now fail to trip in even more fault conditions than they do at the moment. This is speculation from me but surely something worth considering

Well electric freight is pretty rare in of itself!
In a world of cheap, very lightly taxed, diesel and Class 66s everywhere, electric freight operation simply hasn't been something many operators have really bothered with on a large scale.

Third rail freight should be achievable assuming suitable power supply upgrades are put in place.
Given that the Class 92 (and the Class 373 of simliar power draw!) exists in the first place, I have to assume that third rail freight operation is achievable in principle!

I imagine it would still be orders of magnitude cheaper than 25kV conversion - even before we consider exotic solutions like SNCF's superconducting DC feeders.

 

[Zomboid]

Given that the Class 92 (and the Class 373 of simliar power draw!) exists in the first place, I have to assume that third rail freight operation is achievable in principle

You can find photos of it in action on DC by googling. It's just restricted to the Channel Tunnel routes.

What I don't know is whether they could deploy their full power on DC. 373s were well short of their 25kV performance on DC.

 

[td97]

I’d do Didcot to Oxford, personally (other than all the electrification schemes already happening).

You're out of luck. Didcot to Culham... more likely

 

[HSTEd]

You can find photos of it in action on DC by googling. It's just restricted to the Channel Tunnel routes.

What I don't know is whether they could deploy their full power on DC. 373s were well short of their 25kV performance on DC.

Well, Wikipedia suggests they have "only" 4MW on DC, as opposed to 5MW on 25kV.

Obviously the usual health warnings about Wiki apply, but if true that is still easily enough to replace diesel operation.

 

[Zomboid]

You're out of luck. Didcot to Culham... more likely

What would be the point of that? Oxford makes sense so the suburban service and Oxford terminators can go over to EMUs and would then allow a future EWR electrification to create a network linking the GWML with the WCML. Going to Culham would spend a lot of money to not change anything operational, and wouldn't even make use of the substation at Radley.

 

[Trainman40083]

Electrification of the Uckfield Line has been spoken about too

I guess you could do it with OHLE and use 387 type units.

 

[Stewart2887]

Didcot to Culham? There was a load of electrical stuff installed at Radley a while back, but it all seems to have been removed. Seems a backward step for Didcot-Oxford.

 

[richard_S]

Crick have it right, OHLE on the arrival and departure sidings only. Trafford Park is the same. The ports need to have OHLE on the arrival and departure lines.

 

[The Planner]

Crick have it right, OHLE on the arrival and departure sidings only. Trafford Park is the same. The ports need to have OHLE on the arrival and departure lines.

Crick? Do you mean DIRFT?

 

[richard_S]

Crick? Do you mean DIRFT?

Yes

 

[GraphitProjekt]

Well electric freight is pretty rare in of itself!

This is true generally, and I get the impression it was much more common in the BR era and immediately after. And they did sometimes put up wires just for freight like on the North London Line where 25kV existed side-by-side with 3rd rail for the passenger service (this was a rather unreliable setup I might add however) and a number of connections and chords around London. This meant that they were okay putting up with the operational hassle of changing locomotives to use electrics more often, I think when the whole thing is under one organisation it must pay off to use electric traction more often than reduce the number of loco swaps. However I never hear about DC freight in the BR era anyway even with the 92s.
But these days, as far as I know, Freightliner only keep around their class 90s so that they can encounter a red signal on the WCML north of Carlisle without ruining the timetable trying to accelerate up Beattock. Do DB and GBRf just use 66s in that area?

 

[Halish Railway]

Do DB and GBRf just use 66s in that area?

You still see the odd DRS or GBRF 66 around there but they’re not as common as they used to be. I’d say that Class 68s are more common on WCML North freight now.

(Attached is a picture of a GBRf 66 working an intermodal service through Carlisle that I took in March).

 

[BerkshireRails]

So complicating operations?

You have to run the locos around anyway to get out of London Gateway, so you might as well do it on arrival and then shunt into the unloading/loading sidings.

 

[HSTEd]

However I never hear about DC freight in the BR era anyway even with the 92s.

I think most of what there was was run mostly by Class 73s, I think mostly departmental stuff and various lighter freights such as MoD vans.

 

[WAO]

Surely train miles aren't affected by number of carriages?

sorry - ton miles!

WAO

 

[47701]

Aren't there schemes in Scotland?

I was on Meadowplace Rd yesterday,Corstorphine-Broomhouse in Edinburgh,most of the equipment is present,no wiring yet though. This will be for the Fife circle.

 

[Bald Rick]

Sorry I’ve been lut of action for a few days (real life gets in the way), so a bit delayed in some repsonses.

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.

But we are not doing a rolling programme.

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.

Fortunately, physics can’t tell the difference between a passenger train and a freight train.

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.

I (indeed no one) is saying that we are not electrifying those routes. No one is saying anything about electrification of those routes, so it is reasonable to assume that it is up to the freight companies to make their own decisions. Two of them already have. I’d have a tenner on at least one more making a decision on the newr future.

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?

The latter.

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.

If there is clearly a case, why hasn’t it happened ? Funders are presented with various projects that have a clear case, and we see the results of that all over the network. I would love to see the clear case for Felixstowe electrification. I’ve never seen one.

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.

But Gateway isn’t going to be electrified tomorrow. With the best will in the world, even if initial feasibility finding were approved tomorrow, it wouldn’t have wires until 2028/9. By which time the Class 90s will be 40 years old, with microprocessors controlling them that are increasingly difficult to get hold of. At some point relatively soon their owners will decide to replace them. What type of loco do you think they will buy?

 

[eldomtom2]

If there is clearly a case, why hasn’t it happened ? Funders are presented with various projects that have a clear case, and we see the results of that all over the network. I would love to see the clear case for Felixstowe electrification. I’ve never seen one.

Not everything with a clear positive BCR gets done, though. Not everything can be funded and decisions on prioritisation have to be made.

 

[The exile]

Fortunately, physics can’t tell the difference between a passenger train and a freight train.

No - but the difference in operational requirements of the two means that the same physics has (in part) different implications. To give a 3rd rail example -,”gapping” is “gapping” no matter what the train is carrying. However, it is much more likely to happen to dc loco hauled freight trains than to a 12 car emu. The laws of physics haven’t changed - but the implications have.

 

[Bald Rick]

Not everything with a clear positive BCR gets done, though. Not everything can be funded and decisions on prioritisation have to be made.

Quite so, but generally those proposals with a cast iron case rise to the top and get done. As I said, I’ve never seen a clear case for Felixstowe electrification.

No - but the difference in operational requirements of the two means that the same physics has (in part) different implications. To give a 3rd rail example -,”gapping” is “gapping” no matter what the train is carrying. However, it is much more likely to happen to dc loco hauled freight trains than to a 12 car emu.

Well, yes, but we’re talking about AC.
.

 

[The exile]

Quite so, but generally those proposals with a cast iron case rise to the top and get done. As I said, I’ve never seen a clear case for Felixstowe electrification.



Well, yes, but we’re talking about AC.
.

That was purely an example of how the laws of physics might be the same but have different implications. An AC example would be that it is much more beneficial operationally to enable a long heavy freight to restart from a red signal protecting the access from a branch to the main line on electric power than it is to do the same for a 3-car multiple unit.