What is the delay exteding electrification to Oxford and Bristol TM?

[deltic08]

Moderator note: split from Northern Class 195: Construction/Introduction Updates (CAF built new units confirmed)

If that was the case, they would have gone already, like the Leyland National road buses they were based on. Where I live, more than half the trains are still pacers. I seriously doubt if there are enough 156s in existence to replace them all.

No, the two Scottish, one Northwest and Newbury electrification schemes are not operating yet and the 195s have not been delivered into squadron service but when they are from next month you will see the first of the Pacers withdrawn.

We should not be ordering more air polluting diesels that will last 40+years. We should be electrifying now.

What is the delay extending to Oxford? That remodelling has been completed.

What is the delay extending to Bristol TM? Resignalling was completed in April 2018 and Filton Bank quad tracking almost complete.

 

[Midnight Sun]

In the end it is down to one thing, C.A.S.H lack of

 

[snowball]

Network Rail bit off more than it could chew in terms of electrification in CP5, both in terms of time and in terms of money. There have been numerous discussions of the reasons for that. Don't let's start another unless somebody has some brilliant new insights. Let's take that bit as read.

The money for CP5 has been spent.

The whole GWR scheme, including Cardiff, Oxford, both approaches to Bristol and the two minor Thames branches, were originally supposed to be completed by the end of CP5. But it became clear that that lot could not be done to schedule or budget, so some bits were deferred. Which bits to defer? Oxford for one, because the remodelling had to be done before electrification.

The remodelling has now been done, and we're approaching the end of CP5. I imagine Oxford electrification will be a strong candidate for reintroduction in CP6, but I have no inside or specialist knowledge.

Something else big had to be deferred as well as Oxford. They chose to defer Bristol rather than Cardiff, presumably because Cardiff resignalling has already been done, whereas Bristol had to wait for the Filton four-tracking and possibly other remodelling and/or resignalling and/or recontrol work around Temple Meads.

Will electrification to Bristol also be a strong candidate for early reintroduction in CP6? Here I can't say much, because I don't have a clear enough idea of what else needs to be done around TM and the rest of the Bristol area.

 

[edwin_m]

Temple Meads has now been re-signalled but with little or no change to the layout, but because the new signalling is data-driven it's somewhat easier to change it (as they did at Reading) than it was with the old relay equipment. It's likely that the big job of re-modelling the station throats will have to be tackled before electrification can extend to Temple Meads itself, and I'm not sure where that is in terms of funding. Related is the question of re-opening the platforms in the old train shed, which involves demolishing the power box which can't happen until the areas it still controls (west of TM) are re-signalled or re-controlled. This is tied in to a "masterplan" for the station and surrounding area, which I would guess involves extending the subway to create an underground concourse linking to the old shed platforms and also to new northern and eastern entrances.

I guess it's possible that the question of electrifying into TM itself will be ducked, using as justification the fact that no electric-only trains are planned to use it. The wires could extend round the Rhubarb Curve to give diversity of feeds, and the 80x units would do the last mile on diesel. This would of course leave TM full of noisy and polluting diesel trains - although nearly as many would be present if it was electrified, unless the XC and regional services got new bi-modes.

 

[alangla]

Given the twin facts of the Oxford remodelling being done & the E&G, SDA and Shotts electrifications being as good as complete, if there was an ounce of sense in the world, the people & equipment from those projects would be on their way to Oxford & we’d have the 387 operated services running to their logical terminus.

 

[S-Bahn]

As electrification, like most major railway infrastructure is a long term project then costs shouldn't be as big an issue. Also the government has the ability to create it's own money and set up a national infrastructure bank to finance these things, so it's a fallacy for politicians to say there is no money.

With an ever growing population, demand for transport networks is only going to increase and this means both road building and upgrading the railway infrastructure, including significant electrification.

I for one would not only welcome completing the electrification of Oxford and Bristol, but the electrification of the core Cross-Country routes down to Exeter/Plymouth and Southampton and the extensions from Newbury to Taunton, Cardiff to Swansea and all the branch lines between London and Reading.

 

[Ken H]

did I read there was a problem with listed building consent for electrification at TM? And also making the bit through Bath safe and not to visually intrusive?

 

[swt_passenger]

did I read there was a problem with listed building consent for electrification at TM? And also making the bit through Bath safe and not to visually intrusive?

Wiring Bristol Temple Meads should have no more issues than any all the other listed stations where it’s already been done. It’s usually one of the first straws clutched at by those who’d object to anything on principle.

 

[edwin_m]

They produced impressions of a special form of OLE for Sydney Gardens in Bath.

 

[59CosG95]

Temple Meads has now been re-signalled but with little or no change to the layout, but because the new signalling is data-driven it's somewhat easier to change it (as they did at Reading) than it was with the old relay equipment. It's likely that the big job of re-modelling the station throats will have to be tackled before electrification can extend to Temple Meads itself, and I'm not sure where that is in terms of funding. Related is the question of re-opening the platforms in the old train shed, which involves demolishing the power box which can't happen until the areas it still controls (west of TM) are re-signalled or re-controlled. This is tied in to a "masterplan" for the station and surrounding area, which I would guess involves extending the subway to create an underground concourse linking to the old shed platforms and also to new northern and eastern entrances.

I guess it's possible that the question of electrifying into TM itself will be ducked, using as justification the fact that no electric-only trains are planned to use it. The wires could extend round the Rhubarb Curve to give diversity of feeds, and the 80x units would do the last mile on diesel. This would of course leave TM full of noisy and polluting diesel trains - although nearly as many would be present if it was electrified, unless the XC and regional services got new bi-modes.

Is it known when the final panel of Bristol PSB (controlling the stretch of route between the south end of Flax Bourton Tunnel & Cogload Jct) is due to recontrol to the TVSC? Such a recontrol could be done in parallel with the remodelling of the track around Temple Meads (as they no longer affect each other) if no date has yet been announced. The PSB could be demolished further down the line in those circs.

 

[Muzer]

Is it known when the final panel of Bristol PSB (controlling the stretch of route between the south end of Flax Bourton Tunnel & Cogload Jct) is due to recontrol to the TVSC? Such a recontrol could be done in parallel with the remodelling of the track around Temple Meads (as they no longer affect each other) if no date has yet been announced. The PSB could be demolished further down the line in those circs.

Assuming of course that doing both in parallel doesn't require more signalling engineers than NR have to spare...

 

[59CosG95]

Assuming of course that doing both in parallel doesn't require more signalling engineers than NR have to spare...

Indeed - that's probably why they left this stretch until last!

 

[Kingham West]

Given the twin facts of the Oxford remodelling being done & the E&G, SDA and Shotts electrifications being as good as complete, if there was an ounce of sense in the world, the people & equipment from those projects would be on their way to Oxford & we’d have the 387 operated services running to their logical terminus.

Is not the Logical Turnback Hanborough, Oxford is very congested .

 

[HowardGWR]

The DfT's SOFA (Statement of Funds Available) for NR stands at 9.2 billion for NR as a whole, which has to cover schemes deferred from CP5. This includes these schemes. (Modern Railways December Issue Page 8). I have no idea how this figure was arrived at, but it would be interesting to see a breakdown and how much Oxford and Bristol would cost. In the latter case, one could envisage TM to the Filton / Patchway rhombus being done before TM to Thingley.

 

[Andyjs247]

Is not the Logical Turnback Hanborough, Oxford is very congested .

Hanborough is in the middle of the single track section between Wolvercot Jn and Charlbury; not the best place to turn a service around. If you were to have a turnback elsewhere to Oxford a better place would be Oxford Parkway where there are facilities; although even OXP will be congested when EWR gets going.

 

[FGW_DID]

Is not the Logical Turnback Hanborough, Oxford is very congested .

After the Oxford resignalling recently, one of the sidings next to the student accommodation is the ‘Oxford Turnback Road’

 

[Kingham West]

We must wait for the Cotwold Line Taskforce , and the Corridor Study , this will inform the funders ( HMT) , and it may not be single to Hanborough after that, the outcomes are obviously not known at present .

Hanborough is in the middle of the single track section between Wolvercot Jn and Charlbury; not the best place to turn a service around. If you were to have a turnback elsewhere to Oxford a better place would be Oxford Parkway where there are facilities; although even OXP will be congested when EWR gets going.

 

[jimm]

Hanborough is in the middle of the single track section between Wolvercot Jn and Charlbury; not the best place to turn a service around. If you were to have a turnback elsewhere to Oxford a better place would be Oxford Parkway where there are facilities; although even OXP will be congested when EWR gets going.

I can assure you that a turnback at Hanborough, and all the additional infrastructure required, are in the sights of the Cotswold Line Taskforce - which is due to issue an initial report imminently - and the county council and Oxfordshire LEP, which are looking at a rail-based park-and-ride for West Oxfordshire to keep cars off roads closer to Oxford - something they would not get at Oxford Parkway.

Vegetation around the disused island platform was cut back in September so that the condition of the structure could be checked.

http://www.clpg.org.uk/blog/hanborough-disused-platform-assessed/

 

[simple simon]

Since the main reason for the delay is finance, I am curious to know if the GW scheme was affected by the Office of Road And Rail (ORR) changing the 'below bridge' overhead wire safety clearance rule after work had commenced?

My understanding of this is that the ORR even imposed its new rules on electrification schemes that were already underway, causing road bridges over the railway which (over the years) had been rebuilt in a way that complied with the old rules but did not meet the new rules to be rebuilt yet again.

As a result there was significant extra unplanned expense carrying out works which when the electrification project was planned and costed did not need doing.

 

[TheWalrus]

I don’t understand why Newbury was prioritised over Oxford and Bristol?

 

[jimm]

Resignalling and track layout alterations - as has been mentioned elsewhere on this forum rather a lot. The Berks & Hants had signalling immunised against 25kv interference - resignalling at Oxford was only completed this August and the work at Bristol is not finished yet.

And continuing to serve Newbury with dmus would presumably take up a lot more Turbos, due to the running time, than shuttling up and down between Oxford and Didcot does.