Rail electrification scrapped / 'suspended'?

[coppercapped]

Do you honestly think no one has thought of that? May I recommend one or all of the Bowe, Hendy or Shaw reviews to you?

Sadly it isnt as easy as writing a list of bodies to be done away with and shouting make it so. If it were we could start with the government............



However to much movement the other way and the problem is then reversed. The makers (lets call them engineers) can exert little control over their project. They agree to change because they consider it the right thing to do rather than the best thing to do to deliver on time, change the scope on the fly, change materials, agree contracts on a shake of the hand and let the costs go up because they aren't interested in that kind of thing. They simply want to deliver regardless of cost. You need to have decent controls (or a process) over a project to help ensure a timely and cost effective delivery.

'Makers' doesn't have to be synonymous with 'engineers'. I spent all my working life in manufacturing and service industries both in the UK and on the Continent and your depiction cannot be further from the truth. There are enormous pressures to get the specification of your product or service right, or it won't address the target market; there are enormous pressures to get the cost right, or people won't buy it; there are enormous pressures to get the timing right, or you will miss the market; and there are enormous pressures to get the quality right, or you won't have any repeat customers.

Doing all this requires a mix of skills and a 'can-do' attitude. It is the attitude that is important - and it saddens me to observe that such an attitude seems sadly lacking in many of the posts made on this forum. In manufacturing and in the service industries making products for the open market covering your bottom will not work in the long term. Well, it might work once, but as somebody once said 'You are only as good as your next product'.

 

[Dave1987]

If bimodes didn't exist we simply would have seen a lot more diesel running under the wires. Do you really think the government would have happily funded billions more in electrification if bimodes didn't exist?

They miraculously found a billion pounds down the back of the Downing Street sofa to give to the DUP. The simple fact is that if it were not for the bi-modes they would not have had the excuse to cancel the electrification schemes. I have noticed it's only the bi-mode fans on here that think this is anything other than a calamity. Most of the industry experts I read from see this for what it is. And then they have the cheek to say new build petrol and diesel cars will be banned in 20 years time. Yet their pet project will still be wasting energy carting tonnes and tonnes of dead Diesel engines and fuel under the wires. It's simple, get electrification done. Order cheap electric trains. Once the wires are up it's done. Instead of all this political posturing.

 

[muddythefish]

The north's newly devolved metropolitan mayors today hit back at the electrification cancellation. A statement co-ordinated by Andy Burnham, mayor of Greater Manchester, said the government must redress “longstanding imbalances in transport funding” between the capital and the north.

“If the government can’t be trusted to stick to promises already given, then it is hard to have confidence that they will deliver longer-term agreements,” it said.

 

[furnessvale]

I'd hope this too. It's also a reason I'm happy to accept discontinuous Electrification. Over time the problematic structures will inevitably have work done, allowing gaps to be closed, until the cost/benefit the next fleet of trains means that it makes more sense to close the remaining gaps and order EMUs.

Indeed, a side benefit of bi-modes would be the ability to coast through certain shorter problem areas, safe in the knowledge that there is a diesel engine to get you out of trouble should there be an out of course stop.

I should like to see an automatic pan dropper, or we may finish up with bridges like the Santa Fe approaches to Chicago in steam days, which were festooned with the remains of steam loco chimney extensions that the engineers had forgotten to drop!

 

[HSTEd]

Once you have a diesel engine on that section that is likely already running at idle - all you have to do is run the engine all the time and the discontinuous electrification is rendered near worthless.

 

[xotGD]

Might we expect a fleet of battery powered super-shunters to drag trains in and out of Marylebone to overcome the air quality issues?

 

[TheKnightWho]

They miraculously found a billion pounds down the back of the Downing Street sofa to give to the DUP. The simple fact is that if it were not for the bi-modes they would not have had the excuse to cancel the electrification schemes. I have noticed it's only the bi-mode fans on here that think this is anything other than a calamity. Most of the industry experts I read from see this for what it is. And then they have the cheek to say new build petrol and diesel cars will be banned in 20 years time. Yet their pet project will still be wasting energy carting tonnes and tonnes of dead Diesel engines and fuel under the wires. It's simple, get electrification done. Order cheap electric trains. Once the wires are up it's done. Instead of all this political posturing.

The government being able to have a confidence and supply agreement is *slightly* more important than environmental concerns with running diesel under the wires. They would have cancelled it anyway, with diesels running the routes going off-wires.

Literally the only person entirely blaming bimodes is you, and you've had a well-known vendetta for years.

 

[AndrewE]

Might we expect a fleet of battery powered super-shunters to drag trains in and out of Marylebone to overcome the air quality issues?

Sounds good... combine the loco attachment with a Watford Junction-type stop to set down (or pick up) the inner-area passengers and you improve the service without spoiling the end-to-end times too much. Could work on lines into other polluted conurbations too. London isn't the only place where people live and work!

E.g. make NE-SW trains pick up an electric loco from say Lichfield or Tamworth as far as Longbridge or somewhere similar...

...of course it would require TDM-type or similar compatability (maybe just battery and elec locos pretending to be a sister unit?) between locos and the trains/units used, but I'm sure that would be do-able.

 

[Bantamzen]

Do you honestly think no one has thought of that? May I recommend one or all of the Bowe, Hendy or Shaw reviews to you?

Sadly it isnt as easy as writing a list of bodies to be done away with and shouting make it so. If it were we could start with the government............

I haven't read said reviews (I will make a point of doing so), but I am afraid your second paragraph sounds just like the many excuses I have heard over the years in many meetings to not do something that would be remotely challenging. The government, if it had the will of course, could reform the whole structure easily within the lifetime of this Parliament. Many of the regulations around line clearances could be debated and reformed by the time we formally leave the EU, taking away the need for a myriad risk assessments currently required by the ORR. Indeed the very same could be reformed from a body that seems more to hinder than regulate in not much longer. And the processes could start now, if there was the will....

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Does the required clearances vary at all depending on the speed of the trains?

 

[gsnedders]

Does the required clearances vary at all depending on the speed of the trains?

No. The concern is all about the risk of the current arcing to nearby objects (be that metalwork of bridges or people on platforms holding umbrellas); speed doesn't alter the positioning of the wire and so doesn't affect it.

 

[trash80]

Might we expect a fleet of battery powered super-shunters to drag trains in and out of Marylebone to overcome the air quality issues?

No new fleet of bi-modes, you can electrify out to PRR and AYS. As OHLE and third rail are verboten just do it as LU 4th rail

 

[3141]

'Makers' doesn't have to be synonymous with 'engineers'. I spent all my working life in manufacturing and service industries both in the UK and on the Continent and your depiction cannot be further from the truth. There are enormous pressures to get the specification of your product or service right, or it won't address the target market; there are enormous pressures to get the cost right, or people won't buy it; there are enormous pressures to get the timing right, or you will miss the market; and there are enormous pressures to get the quality right, or you won't have any repeat customers.

Doing all this requires a mix of skills and a 'can-do' attitude. It is the attitude that is important - and it saddens me to observe that such an attitude seems sadly lacking in many of the posts made on this forum. In manufacturing and in the service industries making products for the open market covering your bottom will not work in the long term. Well, it might work once, but as somebody once said 'You are only as good as your next product'.

It sounds as if your experience was in area where there were competitors and you had to be better or cheaper than them, or both, in order to sell the product. NR has no competitors and had no incentive to keep the cost of electrification within the budget - even the escalating budget trying to keep up with the rising estimates. But there are ways in which the outcome matches what you described: NR's last product in the electrification field has been such a disaster that it won't have a "next product", and "won't have any repeat customers" for electrification in the foreseeable future.

 

[Dave1987]

The government being able to have a confidence and supply agreement is *slightly* more important than environmental concerns with running diesel under the wires. They would have cancelled it anyway, with diesels running the routes going off-wires.

Literally the only person entirely blaming bimodes is you, and you've had a well-known vendetta for years.

Hmmm that is why all the "experts" on here said bi-modes wouldn't result in electrification being cancelled. That's why the "experts" on here said the likes of Ian Walmsley were wrong to say that bi-modes had sounded the death call of electrification yet here we are.... hmmm wonder who actually knows what they are talking about? I've seen plenty of comments from proper rail experts saying bi-modes have directly contributed to the death of electrification. Yet you guys seem to be revelling in the fact that it's been cancelled and the bi-mode reigns supreme.

 

[najaB]

I've seen plenty of comments from proper rail experts saying bi-modes have directly contributed to the death of electrification.

Could you be kind enough to provide quotes? I'm surprised that any experts are saying that in quite the terms you are using since bi-mode trains were always going to be needed to enable service to points beyond where the wires stopped.

 

[AndrewE]

Once you have a diesel engine on that section that is likely already running at idle - all you have to do is run the engine all the time and the discontinuous electrification is rendered near worthless.

...except that not many of these (auxiliary) diesel engines will have anything like the power of the basic electric train, which will itself be handicapped and waste energy dragging the diesel kit around wherever there are wires to draw power from...

Just electrify the core network and procure (or adapt) big push/pull-capable diesel locos to drop onto the trains to reach beyond the wires. If the Southern Region could do it this way from London to Bournemouth and on to Weymouth, surely we can work out how do it now?

 

[158756]

They miraculously found a billion pounds down the back of the Downing Street sofa to give to the DUP. The simple fact is that if it were not for the bi-modes they would not have had the excuse to cancel the electrification schemes. I have noticed it's only the bi-mode fans on here that think this is anything other than a calamity. Most of the industry experts I read from see this for what it is.

It is not great news that electrification has been cancelled. But this is primarily an issue for engineers - the passengers/taxpayers who use and pay for the railway don't care how their trains are powered, aside from when they're stood next to an HST at New Street. To most people, new bi-modes, or straight diesels, are basically equivalent to new electric trains, with a trade off of a 1-2 minute time saving versus billions on the national debt.

If the concept of a bi mode train didn't exist, the Great Western project would, given that realistically locomotive changes are out, mean cutting numerous through services or having loads of diesels running on the electrified section, both of which would significantly dent the business case for electrification in the first place, and given the true costs said business case is likely flimsy or non existent anyway.

If electric only trains had been ordered, they'd be spending years rotting in sidings, whilst the government poured endless amounts of public funding down the drain to one day eventually provide tracks they could run on. The MML needs new trains to replace the HSTs at least. Without the bi modes, we'd now have to be ordering diesels, which would only be able to run on diesel for the next 40 years, and I don't believe that Network Rail would be anywhere near capable of ensuring there isn't work for a 125mph diesel in 40 years time, maybe even on the MML.

 

[Dave1987]

It is not great news that electrification has been cancelled. But this is primarily an issue for engineers - the passengers/taxpayers who use and pay for the railway don't care how their trains are powered, aside from when they're stood next to an HST at New Street. To most people, new bi-modes, or straight diesels, are basically equivalent to new electric trains, with a trade off of a 1-2 minute time saving versus billions on the national debt.

If the concept of a bi mode train didn't exist, the Great Western project would, given that realistically locomotive changes are out, mean cutting numerous through services or having loads of diesels running on the electrified section, both of which would significantly dent the business case for electrification in the first place, and given the true costs said business case is likely flimsy or non existent anyway.

If electric only trains had been ordered, they'd be spending years rotting in sidings, whilst the government poured endless amounts of public funding down the drain to one day eventually provide tracks they could run on. The MML needs new trains to replace the HSTs at least. Without the bi modes, we'd now have to be ordering diesels, which would only be able to run on diesel for the next 40 years, and I don't believe that Network Rail would be anywhere near capable of ensuring there isn't work for a 125mph diesel in 40 years time, maybe even on the MML.

Sorry but I've been told by someone who has over 30 years of experience in the railways and has an engineering degree that some years back the idea of a bi-mode was floated in the corridors of power at the DFT and suddenly it became their new thing which they had to have and that everything would be planned around them. What should have happened was that electrification was properly planned with electric trains ordered for service when it was completed. My source told me that electrification would be scrapped ages ago and thus has been proven true. Despite certain people on here saying it would not be. And now bi-modes will be virtually everywhere there is some major doubt as to when electrification will start again in earnest. The politicians don't care as they will get their PR from new trains. Saying the Government would be pouring money down the drain getting electrification done is completely disingenuous. Once it's done it's done. Using bi-modes and putting it off is just kicking the can down the road.

 

[Bantamzen]

I wonder if that same source is now seeing panic in the corridors of DfT as the government announces a move away from petrol & diesel on the roads? Because it won't be long before are lobbies notice the scale back in electrification....

 

[Grumbler]

They miraculously found a billion pounds down the back of the Downing Street sofa to give to the DUP.

Actually, the money did not go to the DUP, but to Northern Ireland. I far prefer my taxes go to support services in the United Kingdom rather than being squandered abroad. We could do a lot with the £13 billion currently going to foreign aid and the £10 billion in net EU contributions every year.

 

[The Ham]

Hmmm that is why all the "experts" on here said bi-modes wouldn't result in electrification being cancelled. That's why the "experts" on here said the likes of Ian Walmsley were wrong to say that bi-modes had sounded the death call of electrification yet here we are.... hmmm wonder who actually knows what they are talking about? I've seen plenty of comments from proper rail experts saying bi-modes have directly contributed to the death of electrification. Yet you guys seem to be revelling in the fact that it's been cancelled and the bi-mode reigns supreme.

The problem is that we don't have enough time to wire up enough lines to free up enough DMU's to do without any bimodels before 2020.

Other than some high speed trains there's not lots of bimodel units being planned yet and some of those are old trains which would otherwise be scrapped.

Once the sprinters start to come to the end of their life, towards the middle of the 2020's (which will also be the same time as the 769's) there will be pressure to electrify some small sections to allow replacement by EMU's.

Electrification isn't dead, rather the government will be looking for others to champion (and therefore contribute towards) small projects which will release the most units to allow pure EMU'a to run.

Given the announcement that all new cars will be electric or hybrid (i.e. bimodal) from 2040 then I wouldn't expect that there would be a similar policy for trains. However there are too many lines where straight DMU's would be most suitable due to only having short, or no, wires. As such there will be need for more wires by the time the currently on order DMU's reach the end of their lives.

It may take longer than many hoped, but we will continue to add wires to our railways and a greater number of services will be run by EMU's. It's not funny to be 2020, or even 2025, but more like 2025 to 2030 and beyond.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Actually, the money did not go to the DUP, but to Northern Ireland. I far prefer my taxes go to support services in the United Kingdom rather than being squandered abroad. We could do a lot with the £13 billion currently going to foreign aid and the £10 billion in net EU contributions every year.

Like spend it on the NHS?????

Don't think this thread needed to turn into a swipe at foreigners. The same foreigners who are a damn site better than us at electrification.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Like spend it on the NHS?????

Don't think this thread needed to turn into a swipe at foreigners. The same foreigners who are a damn site better than us at electrification.

Would these be the same foreigners who-

• Didn't spend the investment budget for the early to mid 90's on employing consultants and lawyers to privatise the network meaning the ECML Electrification team was split up and skills knowledge lost?
• Didn't give the Infrastructure to a company who thought its was property landlord first and ignored engineering/maintenance meaning more skills and knowledge were lost as well as the records as to where such things as signalling cables were buried etc. Oh and contracted out jobs to people who didn't know the local infrastructure throwing away non written knowledge that previously existed in teams?
• Didn't have to cure Railtrack with a company who has a culture of "over engineering" things and didn't care about costs as not being on the Govt Balance sheet meant it just borrowed against the RAB?
• Didn't increase overhead line clearances because a Govt Dept insisted on standards meant for brand new high speed lines were appropriate on pre existing Victorian infrastructure?
• Didn't let Civil Servants specify Trains?

 

[Railman]

Think Gareth is onto something, The best Railway advances come from evolving existing working/equipment. Steady improvements (didnt the ECML staff develop the Pile foundation for OHL masts). Big roll outs usually end in cock up and overspend. I think the conservative's are the worst for this (Eurostar to Manchester, HS2 etc). They like big show projects and believe the answer is always the private sector to show how it should be done. ( Large goverment blank cheque behind the scenes). I agree the nation must move towards more electric services long term, smaller area teams should carry on with Low cost solutions to installation. Engineers who will make the decision's on site and know the management will support them. As each section goes live it will allow the Bi modes to use less and less diesel power. Obviously the longer plan of supply points etc would need to be considered, but a slowly growing OHL would avoid big promises and let downs.
Slightly off topic but will Digital Railway REALLY produce all the capacity prommised??

 

[Gareth Marston]

Think Gareth is onto something, The best Railway advances come from evolving existing working/equipment. Steady improvements (didnt the ECML staff develop the Pile foundation for OHL masts). Big roll outs usually end in cock up and overspend. I think the conservative's are the worst for this (Eurostar to Manchester, HS2 etc). They like big show projects and believe the answer is always the private sector to show how it should be done. ( Large goverment blank cheque behind the scenes). I agree the nation must move towards more electric services long term, smaller area teams should carry on with Low cost solutions to installation. Engineers who will make the decision's on site and know the management will support them. As each section goes live it will allow the Bi modes to use less and less diesel power. Obviously the longer plan of supply points etc would need to be considered, but a slowly growing OHL would avoid big promises and let downs.
Slightly off topic but will Digital Railway REALLY produce all the capacity prommised??

We must continue with Electrification we have no idea what the impact of Europe going to electric vehicles will have on world oil supply and prices. One thing you can guarantee is that it wont be "were using less so it will be cheaper" the relation will be very complex based on commercial decisions, long term future- after all theirs a finite supply and we've used most of the easy and cheap to get at supply already.

 

[Senex]

Like spend it on the NHS?????

Don't think this thread needed to turn into a swipe at foreigners. The same foreigners who are a damn site better than us at electrification.

Absolutely! TransPennine difficult? Think of some of what the Swiss, German, and Austrians have managed to wire up without any great fuss and delays — and probably a good many other European countries too and then think of the hoo-ha, pauses, retrenchments, over-runs, etc we seem to have had with every single project from EML onwards.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Absolutely! TransPennine difficult? Think of some of what the Swiss, German, and Austrians have managed to wire up without any great fuss and delays — and probably a good many other European countries too and then think of the hoo-ha, pauses, retrenchments, over-runs, etc we seem to have had with every single project from EML onwards.

I'm afraid its typical Government speak that's been coming out. A decision has been made but the real reasons for it being made cant be made public so something has to be made up.

 

[squizzler]

Are there similarities between the current situation and the 1955 Modernisation Plan to Beeching Plan period? In the Modernisation Plan a huge sum was found to carry out a much needed clearance of investment backlog. Instead there was an ill-considered wish-list of projects that made it all to easy to claim the rail industry was wreckless when government priorities changed, and come up with a draconian "solution" in the form of the reshaping Plan.

But whilst with current electrification the railway industry, through accident or design, was handed a poisoned chalice, we as the railway enthusiasts and the general public do not have to accept the government framing of poor financial management as anything other than politically driven plan and timescale imposed by the Government. As George Bush famously failed to say: "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me".

 

[Gareth Marston]

Are there similarities between the current situation and the 1955 Modernisation Plan to Beeching Plan period? In the Modernisation Plan a huge sum was found to carry out a much needed clearance of investment backlog. Instead there was an ill-considered wish-list of projects that made it all to easy to claim the rail industry was wreckless when government priorities changed, and come up with a draconian "solution" in the form of the reshaping Plan.

But whilst with current electrification the railway industry, through accident or design, was handed a poisoned chalice, we as the railway enthusiasts and the general public do not have to accept the government framing of poor financial management as anything other than politically driven plan and timescale imposed by the Government. As George Bush famously failed to say: "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me".

Another similarity is with rolling stock, Govt told BR to buy British despite the fact that some of the Diesel Manufacturers had never built a Diesel before. The multiplicity of trip diesel locos is held up in the standard narrative of the times of evidence of railway incompetence and why the railways were not to be trusted however it was Govt that insisted on placing work with private British manufacturing and it was also Govt that kept in place the common carrier legislation that meant that BR had no choice but to devious a plan to deal with anything that was brought to it hence the trip diesels and marshaling yards.

Today we have the Bi-Mode IEP......which no one would have selected without DfT interference.

 

[eastdyke]

Another similarity is with rolling stock, Govt told BR to buy British despite the fact that some of the Diesel Manufacturers had never built a Diesel before. The multiplicity of trip diesel locos is held up in the standard narrative of the times of evidence of railway incompetence and why the railways were not to be trusted however it was Govt that insisted on placing work with private British manufacturing and it was also Govt that kept in place the common carrier legislation that meant that BR had no choice but to devious a plan to deal with anything that was brought to it hence the trip diesels and marshaling yards.

Today we have the Bi-Mode IEP......which no one would have selected without DfT interference.

In the 1950's the country was strapped for foreign exchange, there was absolutely no chance of buying diesel locos from overseas. The nearest we got to that was probably the Warships which were built under licence. They were 'scaled down' from the West German originals due to, a common theme for differences with our Continental counterparts, the loading gauge. Apart from HS1/2 we continue to be so limited on our legacy infrastructure.

The marshaling yards were entirely another matter.

Abellio seem quite happy to order bi-modes for GA without there ever having been any short-term prospect of electrification of all of their rural routes.