Snow Hill electrification and 172 cascade?

[TheWalrus]

Hi all

For a while now I have wondered about the possibility of electrifying the snow hill lines and cascading 172s, due to its high frequency of 6 tph. There are two ways I have thought of doing this:

Option 1) electrify worcester-leamington/stratford, the stourbridge line and absorb chilterns leamington-birmingham. Order a batch of emus for the service.
Option 2) electrify kiddy-leamington but not stratford and order bimodes for worcester-stratford services. Stourbridge branch electrified and order a ppm emu, same as option 1.

This would release many 172s but the big question is where should they go? I expect lm would want to keep a few for coventry-nuneaton and bedford-bletchley. However they should help retire the remaining pacers and maybe some other older dmus. My thoughts was to go to fgw and operate weymouth-bristol or northern rail as two possibilities. The 139s would be good to operate liskeard-looe. Any other ideas?

After I have feedback from here I am considering starting a number 10 petition to try and push through what could be a valuable project.

Thank you for your time.

 

[moggie]

Before taking 172's off us it would be quite nice to actually have use of them for a while first - if that's alright with you!

Maybe a better option would be to electrify somewhere else as presumably this option was considered when they decided to continue with diesel traction on the Worcester - Leamington / Stratford lines.

As for 139's......... not sure of their suitabiulity for Lisleard Looe due to the gradients and lack of capacity during the summer season. Maybe ATW would take them for Quees St - Cardiff Bay - just keep going west once they get to the bay station.

 

[150222]

How about LM keep the 172's so the 170's can go to northern. This in turn can release 158's to replace northern pacer diagrams and then some 158's can go to fgw to replace some of their pacers through putting some long distance 150 and 153 diagrams to 158 operation.

 

[fgwrich]

Before taking 172's off us it would be quite nice to actually have use of them for a while first - if that's alright with you!

Maybe a better option would be to electrify somewhere else as presumably this option was considered when they decided to continue with diesel traction on the Worcester - Leamington / Stratford lines.

As for 139's......... not sure of their suitabiulity for Lisleard Looe due to the gradients and lack of capacity during the summer season. Maybe ATW would take them for Quees St - Cardiff Bay - just keep going west once they get to the bay station.

After the trial of the PPM50 On the mid hants...I wouldnt trust a PPM To head up the gradient from Coombe to Liskeard!

Certainly ATW's Cardiff Bay shuttle would be better suited for them...another thing with the Looe Valley line is that the Stourbridge Shuttle is about 5 minutes journey time, the Looe valley's what, 25?

 

[MCR247]

You couldn't put a PPM
on Looe. 5 minutes is long enough

 

[moggie]

After the trial of the PPM50 On the mid hants...I wouldnt trust a PPM To head up the gradient from Coombe to Liskeard!

Certainly ATW's Cardiff Bay shuttle would be better suited for them...another thing with the Looe Valley line is that the Stourbridge Shuttle is about 5 minutes journey time, the Looe valley's what, 25?

On reflection the Looe Branch may be the best thing for the PPM's. At least it would be a one way trip only!

They could crane them off at the bottom and use them as a fancy bus shelter. Would make a nice little tourist tram operation around the crowded streets of Looe perhaps but if I had my way I wouldn't assist them back up the hill to Liskeard - ever!

But then it takes allsorts.:roll:

 

[LE Greys]

How far do you continue the electrification. Does it extend towards Oxford with the GW going north and meet in the middle? If so, can it go the other way at Aynho Junction and end up in Marylebone? That adds a bunch of 168s to the mix, plus either 165s or 172s, depending on what is on the Aylesburys at the time. With a bit of internal refurbishment, the 168s would be good for longer routes such as Cardiff-Portsmouth, providing a few 158s to replace various 150s over FGW. So we have a lot of spare 150s. Is this another 'Electrify something and Pacers will be a thing of the past' thread?

 

[tbtc]

How about LM keep the 172's so the 170's can go to northern

Good shout, since LM do operate their 170s in multiple (or coupled to a 153), so this would allow them to use the corridor connections of the 172s instead.

Maybe give the 170s to FSR to release a similar number of 158s (since FSR already run 170s and Northern already run 158s), so that keeps things operationally easier?

 

[TheWalrus]

Im not entirely sure! But i am thinking of Basingstoke-Coventry and maybe Brum-Sheffield.

 

[fgwrich]

Good shout, since LM do operate their 170s in multiple (or coupled to a 153), so this would allow them to use the corridor connections of the 172s instead.

Maybe give the 170s to FSR to release a similar number of 158s (since FSR already run 170s and Northern already run 158s), so that keeps things operationally easier?

And with more electrification planned for Scotland, the Ex LM 170s could replace the Scotrails 158s, which in turn with electrification could then release some 156s aswell - And at the same time, electrify various strectches of the Transpennine network, replace the 170s and send them to Scotrail aswell - that way, various operators can have more of a common fleet rather than a microfleet...And, you lucky people up north can have your ex Wessex 158s back from Scotrail then!

 

[Class172]

I would electrify Leamington-Tyseley-Snow Hill-Stourbridge-Worcester, and Stratford-Tyseley. However I wouldn't electrify Stratford-Leamington (wait for Chiltern electrification). I would also electrify Leamington-Coventry, Droitwich-Bromsgrove and the curve at Smethwick.

I would convert all Snow Hill services to EMU operation. Furthermore the Leamington-Coventry service can go to EMU. By electrifying Droitwich-Bromsgrove, you could extend the Cross-city to Worcester and allow the BHM-HFDs to run fast after Droitwich or Bromsgrove.

This would release many 170s - I would put the cascaded 172s on Chase Line and Shrewsbury services; along with Leamington-Coventry wiring it would displace 153s and 170s.

 

[The Planner]

You would never get a business case to go past Stourbridge, and it is unlikely you would get one to there unless you suddenly started running from New St again as just doing the Snow Hill lines would leave an island. Stratford unless it suddenly went to 4 or 5 tph would never get off the fag packet either. In my opinion you leave the 172s where they are and wire up the Chase and to Shrewsbury but that's been done before on other threads.

 

[Class172]

In a way I sort of get bored having to repeat ideas in multiple threads, each time I forget something else.

The fact is, if we weren't receiving the new 172s then I'd be after electrification. But as we are, I'm not bothered and id like to keep these trains for a while.

 

[trains2064]

Lets just use the 172's for a while suggest that maybe this topic be reviewed in 8 - 10 years.

 

[jopsuk]

I reckon if Chiltern (under a future Evergreen programme?) went electric, the case for the Snow Hill commuter lines would be rather stronger. But that's rather unlikely/far off as it stands

 

[tbtc]

I reckon if Chiltern (under a future Evergreen programme?) went electric, the case for the Snow Hill commuter lines would be rather stronger. But that's rather unlikely/far off as it stands

I agree - you do the two together (plus Oxford - Coventry) or not at all.

 

[TheWalrus]

The planner, how did the crouch valley ever get done?

 

[The Planner]

God knows, it was 1986 and under BR, things were a lot different then. As it is a branch off an already electrified line it makes a difference as it removes the need to have a diesel shuttling back and forth and the ability to do through services if required. All before my time.

 

[Bald Rick]

God knows, it was 1986 and under BR, things were a lot different then. As it is a branch off an already electrified line it makes a difference as it removes the need to have a diesel shuttling back and forth and the ability to do through services if required. All before my time.

IIRC the Southminster Line and Romford - Upminster were done as add ons to the Anglia East and Anglia West schemes. Although the branches in themselves had no case, electrifying them on the back of other work lowered the cost considerably. Most importantly it resulted in the elimination of pockets of diesel working, thus avoiding the need to retain London based diesel maintenance facilities for 3(?) units once all the others had gone with the major electrification schemes.

 

[TheWalrus]

So why are they not doing branches like Slough-Windsor?

 

[tbtc]

So why are they not doing branches like Slough-Windsor?

Search me - surely the cost of not doing so (maintaining a small DMU fleet, messing up through running to London etc) is higher than the cost of a small extension?

Same also with Windermere etc

 

[chiltern_chidg]

Sounds to me that electrification is taking over?

Matthew

 

[TomJ93]

If the Chilterns were electrified they could stick 90s on the LHCS!

 

[150222]

If the Chilterns were electrified they could stick 90s on the LHCS!

Where from? You may aswell just have more emu's.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Plus 90's are c*ap anyway.

 

[anthony263]

So why are they not doing branches like Slough-Windsor?

The thames valley branches might still be done. I know FGW have said that they would be willing to pay for it if the next great western franchise is long enough.

Personally think they should be wired as part of the crossrail scheme. I know the Marlow platform at Bourne end will require extending towards the mainroad slighly so that i can accomodate a 3 carriage emu.

The dispalced class 165's can then be used by FGW on services around Bristol to Severn Beach/Avonmouth - Great Malvern, Weymouth etc providing they can be cleared to work those routes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Where from? You may aswell just have more emu's.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Plus 90's are c*ap anyway.

Still a few class 90's in store or perhaps order some of those Traxx locomotives

 

[150222]

What if 165's cannot be cleared around bristol?

 

[jopsuk]

So why are they not doing branches like Slough-Windsor?

Lunacy, basically.

 

[tbtc]

What if 165's cannot be cleared around bristol?

Thats a good question.

If the 165/166s can't easily fit onto lines around Bristol (or elsewhere) then what do we do with them? They ought to have a longer life expectancy than a Pacer, yet it may not be economical to make significant infrastructure improvements to lines where they'd only be one train an hour (or so) - could put more on Chiltern to release the 168s (which are "normal size")? Dunno...

 

[fgwrich]

Thats a good question.

If the 165/166s can't easily fit onto lines around Bristol (or elsewhere) then what do we do with them? They ought to have a longer life expectancy than a Pacer, yet it may not be economical to make significant infrastructure improvements to lines where they'd only be one train an hour (or so) - could put more on Chiltern to release the 168s (which are "normal size")? Dunno...

I was thinking about that too, problem is though, is what happends to the 165 Fleet if and when the Chiltern Lines become electrified?

I think one of the better solutions is as you say, if the 165s cannot be used anywhere else, the transfer most if not all to the Chiltern Fleet, then release some of the 168s to other TOCs?

 

[Class172]

Thats a good question.

If the 165/166s can't easily fit onto lines around Bristol (or elsewhere) then what do we do with them? They ought to have a longer life expectancy than a Pacer, yet it may not be economical to make significant infrastructure improvements to lines where they'd only be one train an hour (or so) - could put more on Chiltern to release the 168s (which are "normal size")? Dunno...

It is just a coincidence that it is local to me but bar Chiltern/Thames valley, the largest area in which 165/166s are cleared is around Worcestershire - you could diplace 'normal' width 170s. Remember the thread for where should the 165/166s go next?