Future of Island Line

[MarkyT]

What about the use of the "radio token" system used on some routes in Scotland (can't remember the proper name of the system)

Radio Electronic Token Block (RETB). Today that system needs all the paraphernalia of TPWS with indicators, motor points with indicators etc. Originally they used hydropneumatic train operated points but those are now obsolete and have all been replaced.

The quantity of equipment required for conventional TCB colour light signalling on single track branches has decreased significantly in recent years with the latest techniques. A good example of this is the axle counter replacing lots of individual track circuits through a long single line section. Each track circuit is limited typically to about 1km maximum length (they simply will not work reliably or safely over a longer distance), so for a 10km single line block section you'd need around 10 individual track circuits distributed evenly along the track, each with feed equipment and relays housed in lineside cabinets with power supplies and repeater circuits. All this equipment has to be maintained and periodically tested and adjusted. By contrast the same railway using axle counters would require only one low maintenance counting head sensor fitted to the rail at either extremity with no intermediate equipment whatsoever between, save for data link cables connecting each sensor to an evaluator unit situated at one end or the other.

 

[NorthernSpirit]

Having just returned from IOW and using the Island Line twice, it seems an awful lot of people buy tickets on the train but the guard has to obviously return at each stop to open the doors, so I can see why fare evasion could be a problem.

The longitudinal seats had a fair bit of padding in places, but not in others. It was like a sine wave!

I had to wonder when these trains will be ready for cascading to Northern Rail...

Those Island Line units can be buried in the Solent and then they can have some class 230's instead.

 

[MarkyT]

Those Island Line units can be buried in the Solent and then they can have some class 230's instead.

I'd agree if they're a success and they'd fit in the Ryde tunnel, which I think they might based on information up-thread*. The electrification system could then be decommissioned, avoiding any future expensive renewals and the ongoing safety liability of the exposed ground level conductor rail.

Another idea might be a D-Train-inspired diesel conversion of some examples of the Picadilly Line 73-stock vehicles. Although the bogies are different, the traction motors on these units are the same type as the D78s, so a conversion might work if the same diesel alternator rafts and control gear modules could be made to fit beneath the car bodies of the tube trains.

A self-powered diesel solution for the Island Line fleet might also allow some public transport service along the Newport line shared with the steam heritage operation. An extension into Newport would be difficult along the old alignment now with development having taken place, the alignment in use as a path and the problem of reinstating level crossings, but a new route might be possible instead. Diverging from the historic route and bridging the A3054 at Binfield then crossing farmland to follow the river into a new terminal station near Newport Quay, this would pass right through the middle of the festival site and a station could be included there that could also serve the Medina school and leisure centre. Newport town centre would be a short largely traffic free level walk from the new Quay station, alongside the harbour and under the Medina way road bridge.

* The peak of the arch is about 13ft 4in above rail level and the D78s are 11ft 11in tall, a few inches lower than other LU SSL stock. Detailed surveys for clearance would be required and perhaps a little work to lower the formation very slightly, perhaps a slab formation might be used. With a higher floor than current stock and greater width, platforms heights and edges might need to be adjusted throughout the route to achieve level boarding.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

If MerseyRail went for S-stock units, if S-stock could be confirmed to fit through the tunnel, could the Island Line tag a small order onto the end of that?

 

[D365]

If MerseyRail went for S-stock units, if S-stock could be confirmed to fit through the tunnel, could the Island Line tag a small order onto the end of that?

:roll: There's no guarantee whatsoever that Merseyrail is considering Bombardier/Movia-based replacement stock. In any case we have previously discussed that without the funds for a major upheaval, Island Line will not be purchasing new stock for itself. It will have to secure second-hand deep-level tube stock again when the time comes for the ex-1938TS to be replaced.

 

[Chris125]

That is most certainly not good business practice to follow and not one to endear itself to normal commercial company practice.

Not everything can or should be run on a purely commercial basis.

 

[A0]

If MerseyRail went for S-stock units, if S-stock could be confirmed to fit through the tunnel, could the Island Line tag a small order onto the end of that?

Not without making significant changes to the tunnel between Ryde Esplanade and St Johns.

The tunnel floor was raised when the line was electrified so it has a *very* small loading guage - hence the use of former Bakerloo line (deep level) tube stock and former Piccadilly line stock before that.

The S stock is the sub-surface level stock so is virtually the same as regular mainline stock - so won't fit through the tunnel as it stands.

IIRC, back in the 80s when a couple of class 03s were transferred to the Island to replace a life expired class 05, the cab roofs had to be lowered before they were sent from the mainland as they would not have fitted through the tunnel.

 

[D365]

IIRC, back in the 80s when a couple of class 03s were transferred to the Island to replace a life expired class 05, the cab roofs had to be lowered before they were sent from the mainland as they would not have fitted through the tunnel.

One of these modified shunters (03179 Clive), on returning to the mainland, was reinstated by WAGN as a depot mascot for Hornsey!

 

[Chris125]

The tunnel floor was raised when the line was electrified so it has a *very* small loading guage - hence the use of former Bakerloo line (deep level) tube stock and former Piccadilly line stock before that.

As previously posted the reality is rather more complex - the biggest issue with the tunnel is actually "the arch shape and width combined with 9-10 chain reverse curves within the tunnel", restricting vehicle length.

The track through the tunnel was not actually raised by a significant amount, and though the headroom isn't generous it still allowed 05001 to reach the Pier Head and for BR to conduct a gauging test for the possible use of Merseyrail 503s in the 80s.

IIRC, back in the 80s when a couple of class 03s were transferred to the Island to replace a life expired class 05, the cab roofs had to be lowered before they were sent from the mainland as they would not have fitted through the tunnel.

The first 03 was actually delivered to Sandown with her cab unmodified, but she was trapped south of the arched bridge carrying Smallbrook Lane until she was cut down.

Chris

 

[Class 170101]

Can't believe they didn't take the 1983 Stock when it became available.

 

[birchesgreen]

I recently went on a tour of the LTM's Acton depot when i was there i was told that they didn't take the 1983 stock because it was "too digital"!

 

[Nym]

They have quite a lot of prototype equipment on the 83TS, having electrical safety brakes, fault annunciators, problems with one of the types of Motor-Alternators etc etc etc.

 

[CockneySparrow]

As previously posted the reality is rather more complex - the biggest issue with the tunnel is actually "the arch shape and width combined with 9-10 chain reverse curves within the tunnel", restricting vehicle length.

The track through the tunnel was not actually raised by a significant amount, and though the headroom isn't generous it still allowed 05001 to reach the Pier Head and for BR to conduct a gauging test for the possible use of Merseyrail 503s in the 80s.



The first 03 was actually delivered to Sandown with her cab unmodified, but she was trapped south of the arched bridge carrying Smallbrook Lane until she was cut down.

Chris

Are the 03s still on the Island, there was 2 if memory served me correct painted in NSE livery

 

[NSEFAN]

There is a class 03 at the IoW steam railway, but it's 03059. The IoW loco was 03179 which was later moved to Hornsey depot and received WAGN colours. I believe this one is now preserved in FCC livery.

The IoW steam railway also has 05001, which was the resident diesel loco before 03179 went to the island.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Are the 03s still on the Island, there was 2 if memory served me correct painted in NSE livery

There is a class 03 at the IoW steam railway, but it's 03059. The IoW loco was 03179 which was later moved to Hornsey depot and received WAGN colours. I believe this one is now preserved in FCC livery.

The IoW steam railway also has 05001, which was the resident diesel loco before 03179 went to the island.

The other 03 that worked on the island line was 03079. 179 was given full NSE livery, 079 was in BR blue with toothpaste logos. Not sure what became of 079 after being withdrawn from Island Line.

 

[Chris125]

03079 was sold to the Derwent Valley Light Railway

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Thread going off topic I fear .....

 

[Class 170101]

I recently went on a tour of the LTM's Acton depot when i was there i was told that they didn't take the 1983 stock because it was "too digital"!

Surely anything that becomes available now is going to be even more 'digital' the 1983 Tube Stock though?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Thread going off topic I fear .....

You could argue that the absence of a Rolling Stock plan to replace the 1938 Stock could harm the future of the line.

 

[birchesgreen]

Surely anything that becomes available now is going to be even more 'digital' the 1983 Tube Stock though?

1973 stock was mentioned wasn't it?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Not everything can or should be run on a purely commercial basis.

I see no reason whatsoever why this principle should not be applied to the Island Line. It is a self-contained mode of land-based transport and as I said before, why did the other railway companies on the Isle of Wight go to the wall. Your question could well have been applied to those charged with the running of those railway companies. However, reality still has a role to play in the financial operation of any commercial organisation. If losses do so occur, would you have the Isle of Wight governing body pick up the deficit from their budget at the cost of other services run by them suffering?

The island itself is of small mileage both in terms of North to South and from East to West. Most sizable settlements are served by the buses of Southern Vectis and the ferries to and from the island carry a healthy number of vehicular traffic.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Isn't there a chance that LU could end up adding ATO to all the Picadilly and Bakerloo line stock making either useless for a future cascade to the Island Line?

 

[D365]

Isn't there a chance that LU could end up adding ATO to all the Picadilly and Bakerloo line stock making either useless for a future cascade to the Island Line?

No, it won't happen. ATO will not be retrofitted to any of the remaining pre-92 Stock fleets, other than for departmental purposes. For example, it would have been expensive to kit out D Stock trains, bearing in mind the efficiencies that come with a unanimous SSL replacement fleet.

 

[CockneySparrow]

There is a class 03 at the IoW steam railway, but it's 03059. The IoW loco was 03179 which was later moved to Hornsey depot and received WAGN colours. I believe this one is now preserved in FCC livery.

The IoW steam railway also has 05001, which was the resident diesel loco before 03179 went to the island.

Is there a connection from the steam line from the island line
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Also remember the late 80s early 90s when there was only around 5 class 03s still in service in the old platform 5 books, later to be reduced to the remaining two in the IOW

 

[HSTEd]

I'd agree if they're a success and they'd fit in the Ryde tunnel, which I think they might based on information up-thread*. The electrification system could then be decommissioned, avoiding any future expensive renewals and the ongoing safety liability of the exposed ground level conductor rail.

The renewals of electrical equipment for the Island line are unlikely to be very expensive - for the simple reason that the power demand on the line is so low that it can probably be handled by tram derived equipment.

Aluminium conductor rail would probably allow the entire thing to be supported by a single substation.
(Each set has a pair of 250hp motors IIRC, which means that you could support a two-car train with a substation fed off of 400V, not even 11kV)

How many trains are in motion at once? Only six sets are in existence which means total theoretical maximum demand is only 2.2MW.
That demonstrates just how simple the electrical system is.

 

[swt_passenger]

1973 stock was mentioned wasn't it?

That was certainly the plan the last time SWT mentioned it (in a web chat)...

 

[SpacePhoenix]

How much would it cost to convert the entire line into a tram route? Somewhere in the 100s millions range or in the 10s millions range?

 

[A0]

Is there a connection from the steam line from the island line

Google-earth suggests not - it appears the IOWSR runs beyond the platform to a buffer-stop - there's no physical link to the mainline. However it doesn't appear to need much to add one in.....

 

[Bletchleyite]

I see no reason whatsoever why this principle should not be applied to the Island Line. It is a self-contained mode of land-based transport and as I said before, why did the other railway companies on the Isle of Wight go to the wall. Your question could well have been applied to those charged with the running of those railway companies. However, reality still has a role to play in the financial operation of any commercial organisation. If losses do so occur, would you have the Isle of Wight governing body pick up the deficit from their budget at the cost of other services run by them suffering?

That could be said of any line, not just Island Line. Outside London commuterland, it would be viable (though not desirable) to replace more or less any regional line with buses if not profitable.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

How much would it cost to convert the entire line into a tram route? Somewhere in the 100s millions range or in the 10s millions range?

The first two Manchester Metrolink conversion from heavy rail to light rail (Altrincham to Manchester and Bury to Manchester) were not dissimilar in length to the Island Line and because the decision was taken to retain the original station platforms, the trams had to be of the high door style to accommodate this. Perhaps you could use this information as a benchmark for your deiberations.

How many new trams of that particular nature would be required to run the service and what costs would be needed for OHLE installation and any updated signalling requirements.

 

[paul1609]

Google-earth suggests not - it appears the IOWSR runs beyond the platform to a buffer-stop - there's no physical link to the mainline. However it doesn't appear to need much to add one in.....

No theres not the 03 goes by lowloader to Sandown when its hired by the mainline.