BEMU'S would likely allow a substantial part of local Bristol area services to move to electric operation.
Portsmouth to Cardiff could certainly look to go to BEMU'S as well although electrification would likely be needed between Bristol and Bath as well.to allow this.
It's potentially within range although you'd need a dual voltage + battery train which is likely to be new design of stock.
People buster type solutions only work if you get people to their destinations. The minutes are pretty clear that part 1 is Filton Bank only, with Bristol to Chippenham following later, so no Bath 12-Car 387s yet. And Glasto traffic is on the B&H from Reading largely so wouldn't benefit from Bristol area.
True, but it should be a small modification to add 3rd rail pick-up shoes to a preexisting BEMU design. There will be in-service experience of Stadler's battery-equipped UK FLIRTs for TfW by the time any further wiring is likely to be underway and Alstom should be capable of producing very similar level boarding trains based on their Coradia range for local/regional services. The traction system would need changes too clearly but electric trains typically operate 'natively' on sub 1000VDC and the same companies produce trains based on the same technical platforms that run on lower DC voltages, albeit OHLE supplied for other administrations, so it's something that should be achievable fairly easily on a new fleet. I wonder if the unused 769 fleet might now be adapted for battery operation; a battery is a lot less trouble and risk than diesel generator sets, fuel tanks and exhaust stacks onboard, especially if you choose your battery chemistry wisely.
Filton could be a quick win becasue of the comprehensive reconstruction for 4-tracks. I guess even if there is still the odd old overbridge to raise, the new and modified alignments were fully designed with future wiring in mind. The route is also only about 5 miles end to end, albeit 4 tracks, compared to the ~20 miles of largely double track between Thingley and Bristol. Bristol East is remodelled now with new compatible trackside signalling kit. Others have mentioned the west end of the station and route out to Parsons Street which, although also resignalled and recontrolled to TVSC, is not in its final form layout-wise yet. For a while after electrification was officially paused, I think the Bath and Bathhampton area remained a little island of old WR E10K relay-based signalling but it appears that interlocking and trackside equipment were renewed in wiring-compatible electronic form around 2019.
For sure it's possible and relatively straightforward but it is still an extra modification which costs money and therefore needs some way of paying for it, and the government is disinclined to sign cheques without some reasonable expectation of improved net economic performance to repay the bonds.
Given the problems of converting 30-year old units that were run hard and long in the first service lives, I think it'd be a hell of a lot easier to ask manufacturers to offer revisions to stock currently in production. Siemens have long history of making DV units for the UK, plugging in a battery to that design will be a lot less risky than mucking about with knackered old trains.
For sure, this all makes it a quicker win and as I mentioned earlier sorts out a lot of the most awkward sections, making completion of North Somerset Jn-Chippenham much more straightforward (assuming the Filton Bank project would include Filton Diamond and the access to St Philip's Marsh, if not the west end of Bristol).
Yes it's got a couple more stages to go, although given how BTM operates it's not the worst thing in the world if the West End needs to be a 'Phase 1A'.
While it is certainly true that companies are coming to Bristol in a big way (look at the Temple Quarter development), I'd personally say it's actually the cost of housing that's changing commuting patterns around Bristol. Trying to rent or buy within walking/cycling range of central Bristol is now extremely challenging, especially for buying, so people are moving further out and therefore needing to use the train much more (especially with the CAZ). Also companies are now trying to establish 2/3 day hybrid splits as a new normal rather than full 5-day WFH, so commuter traffic is back up again.
One way of justifying it would be to not require expensive dirty and noisy diesel generators onboard together with their fuel tanks. On a new fleet it should be a lot easier to swallow a small development cost and there could be considerable synergies with SWR West of England fleet replacements.
Totally agree in principle, but battery conversion of the 769s might offer an interesting way for the ROSCO to get some return on their considerable investment in these trains to date. I believe Porterbrook looked at batteries as one of the options originally, but their dismissal was based on out-of-date infrastructure assumptions and didn't consider the possibilities of fast charging. The importance of removing both CO2 and other emissions was already a concern back then clearly but has become ever more pressing with each passing year.
That would be good for freight operations too, especially intermodal diversions as FOCs move over to bi/tri-mode locos (which might also be made suitable for drawing some power from the 3rd rail)
Agreed.
A lot of them have been refurbished recently though, so they would be very good value for money.
Does anyone know what a ‘push out’ cantilever system is?
I guess that means a twin track cantilever (TTC), so that all the work of piling and preparation can be done away from the two running lines.
There would still need to be all-line blocks for anchor portals, both at mid-points and overlaps.
They exist already though... I wonder if it could be some sort of rotating cantilever arm, so they are installed parallel to the track and then turned into position?
Different method perhaps? It mentions temporarily turning quad track into a 2 track railway so I'd assume its a method which allows piling to be done on the outer tracks only during the daytime.
Perhaps, isnt the 6ft gap not enough for a single track cantilever?
Well the major civil works have already been done...
There might be track drainage in the 10-foot gap, and also "back-to-back" cantilevers aren't favoured in new designs.
Plus I suspect they been looking at what tfw are doing to fund the valley lines
