Rail electrification scrapped / 'suspended'?

[Olaf]

Other reasons to run electric trains (from the NR website)

- more capacity for passengers: more seats than diesel trains of the same length.
- faster than diesel trains: superior braking and acceleration make journey times shorter.
- quieter than diesel trains: good news for people living near the railway – our lineside neighbours.
- better for the environment: their carbon emissions are 20 to 35 per cent lower than those from diesel trains, and there are no emissions at the point of use, improving air quality in pollution hot spots, such as city centres.
- lighter: less maintenance is needed because electric trains cause less wear to the track, so the railway is more reliable for passengers.

Plus when the electrification programme started, I remember much being made of the superior reliability of electric trains (a look at the reliability figures used for the Golden Spanner awards would appear to confirm that ), lower purchase cost of a pure electric train and increase in flexibility as refuelling not required.

Those benefits haven't suddenly disappeared...

No, they have n't, it is rather that NR has not been able to deliver on the commitments.

 

[Olaf]

Roger Ford has been predicting it for several months.

It was evident that this was the most likely outcome from March 2016.

 

[Olaf]

Could we not do what the East Anglian land owners did centuries ago, when they hired Dutch engineers to drain the marshes, and hire in the SNCF, NS and DB experts to do the work?

You are closer to the truth than you realise.

 

[Olaf]

As I have previously said, AFAIK there is no specific law or regulation that says "no more third rail"
But the general modern safety culture does in effect prohibit all but trivial extensions to conductor rail systems.

Who would be willing to state in writing that they have specified a system "known to be dangerous" rather than readily available and safer alternatives.
Someone ultimately has to accept responsibility for the design and face the risk of criminal conviction for manslaughter, maybe decades later.
Therefore it is not going to happen.

There is no constitutional law, but it is covered by an update to the Industry regulations - it is available somewhere - I think via the ORR site - and is essentially as outlined above.

 

[xotGD]

Bi-mode 1980s style: A 47 on one end and an 86 on the other of a cross country service, eliminating the loco swap at New Street. For some strange reason it wasn't done that way.

It would have spiced up the spotting at Bristol, mind.

 

[Olaf]

CAF must have been in the know when they decided to set up an assembly plant in South Wales. With the only DMU in production and Mk5 coaches likely to be an expedient fallback for routes that had been going to get wires, I imagine they will be quite busy now.

They did not need to be on the inside of this; all anyone needed was to open their eyes as how it is going to play out.

 

[Greybeard33]

It is not essential to providing the required level of service, something which the Digital Railway initiative is expected to deliver more effectively.

How confident are you in the capability of Network Rail to plan, manage and deliver the Digital Railway? The history of ambitious IT projects in other parts of the public sector does not inspire confidence.

 

[Olaf]

I wasn't being ironic. I've tried to find some information about, but it's not that easy when you don't know what to search for. And since I'm not British I don't follow British media. But thank you for your answer! I'll read more about the electric spine.

Current status: Page 21:

CP5 Enhancements Delivery Plan
https://16cbgt3sbwr8204sf92da3xxc5m...7/06/Enhancements-Delivery-Plan-June-2017.pdf
- 2017-06-30

 

[Olaf]

I thought that we were supposed to be inspiring (future) engineers to take a passion in their industry? Or are we simply taking a "mythical bird of the galaxies" approach by damning the engineers when any one failure occurs, but not acknowledging any contribution when impressive feats are achieved?

The whole Electrification program has been some what of an Engineer's whim; it has it's merits, but these have been comprehensively undermined by the failure to execute, so the criticism is valid.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

for a start, Wikipedia says

The Wiki article repeats the original spec for IEPs.
The change to bi-modes for all GWR sets means they will now go at 125mph on diesel where there were supposed to be wires, and the contract has been amended to that effect.
There will be a cost (more power packs, higher maintenance, lower reliability).
Once the wires reach Bristol Parkway/Box there will be no need for 125mph diesel running on GW, and there is no need at all on the ECML.
Any units purchased for the MML will need it though.

The 140mph mentioned in the Wiki article is fictional too, until (if) the route is equipped with ETCS and that speed is deemed necessary.

 

[Olaf]

How does an autonomous vehicle not cause or suffer from congestion?

They are designed to make more efficient use of road space and to adopt to traffic conditions that is too risky for humans. Early days yet, but is the direction it is going in.

 

[Olaf]

How confident are you in the capability of Network Rail to plan, manage and deliver the Digital Railway? The history of ambitious IT projects in other parts of the public sector does not inspire confidence.

Zero at the moment; but who said Network Rail would be delivering "it".

A key factor of the Digital Railway and similar paradigms in other industries is that it allows parts of the solution to be taken out of the critical path to delivery and operation.

 

[Railman]

Forgetting franchise boundaries, and the effect on rolling stock allocations etc etc.
What about a fleet of air conditioned coaches, riding on modern, air bag suspension bogies. Able to go anywhere towed by anything, and provide nice quiet spacious seating. Then use an electric locomotive if you have wires, and a diesel if you haven't. Through trains from one end of the country to the other, meaning less station overcrowding because people only use platforms to join or leave trains, through passengers stay on board. Its simple, flexible and makes enviromental sense. maximises the use of the OLE and provides a great passenger experience.
Sorry i forgot we used to do that!

 

[HowardGWR]

Forgetting franchise boundaries, and the effect on rolling stock allocations etc etc.
What about a fleet of air conditioned coaches, riding on modern, air bag suspension bogies. Able to go anywhere towed by anything, and provide nice quiet spacious seating. Then use an electric locomotive if you have wires, and a diesel if you haven't. Through trains from one end of the country to the other, meaning less station overcrowding because people only use platforms to join or leave trains, through passengers stay on board. Its simple, flexible and makes enviromental sense. maximises the use of the OLE and provides a great passenger experience.
Sorry i forgot we used to do that!

If 'piecemeal electrification' had been actually planned for, instead of that it just 'grew' like Topsy in Uncle Tom's Cabin, I am sure that is what would have been done.

 

[AndrewE]

They are designed to make more efficient use of road space and to adopt to traffic conditions that is too risky for humans. Early days yet, but is the direction it is going in.

We'll see how that works out when they have to mix with pedestrians and cyclists (who have the absolute right to use the road, unlike powered vehicles that are there while they - or the driver - still has their licence...)

 

[Class 170101]

Which is slow, expensive, wasteful of resources and land, labour-intensive, error-prone and unreliable. Power changes on the move are basically the opposite of these.

The skills have been lost for loco changes en-route as well. The East Coast drags via Carlisle add around half hour to the schedule vice a HST. So whilst great for the spotters it would be better if XC allowed East Coast to use their HSTs between Edinburgh and Newcastle / London.

Additionally Batteries seemt o be the in thing again.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40699986

Electricity shake-up could save consumers 'up to £40bn'
By Roger Harrabin BBC environment analyst

Consumers in the UK could save billions of pounds thanks to major changes in the way electricity is made, used and stored, the government has said.

New rules will make it easier for people to generate their own power with solar panels, store it in batteries and sell it to the National Grid.

If they work, consumers will save £17bn to £40bn by 2050, according to the government and energy regulator Ofgem.

The rules are due to come into effect over the next year.

They will reduce costs for someone who allows their washing machine to be turned on by the internet to maximise use of cheap solar power on a sunny afternoon.

And they will even support people who agree to have their freezers switched off for a few minutes to smooth demand at peak times.

They'll also benefit a business that allows its air-conditioning to be turned down briefly to help balance a spell of peak energy demand on the National Grid.

Among the first to gain from the rule changes will be people with solar panels and battery storage. At the moment they are charged tariffs when they import electricity into their home or export it back to the grid.

The government has realised that this rule must change because it deters people from using power more flexibly in a way that will benefit everyone.

Thanks to improvements in digital technology, battery storage and renewables, these innovations in flexibility are already under way with millions of people across the UK generating and storing electricity.

The new rules have been designed to cash in on this.

The government will set up a "battery institute" to fund firms seeking major breakthroughs in battery research and development.

Its critics say it has been slow to support the burgeoning battery industry - and has allowed South Korea, Japan and China to take a lead.

The tiny energy savings of millions of people and firms will be pulled together into packages by traders, who will offer substantial chunks of energy saving to the National Grid at the click of a computer.
Under the new system you should be able to tell your machine to do the washing when the sun comes out, to take advantage of solar power

So instead of predicting peak demand then building power stations to meet it, energy managers will be able to trade in Negawatts - negative electricity.

In a speech made in Birmingham, Business Secretary Greg Clark outlined further a £246m investment in the UK's industrial strategy, with energy at its heart.

He gave details of a competition for innovation in battery technology, which he says will help make the UK a world leader in battery design and manufacture.

Nicola Shaw, executive director of National Grid, previously told BBC News that between 30% and 50% of fluctuations on the grid could be smoothed by households and businesses adjusting their demand at peak times.
'Moment of change'

"We are at a moment of real change in the energy industry," she said.

"From an historic perspective, we created energy in big generating organisations that sent power to houses and their businesses.

"Now we are producing energy in those places - mostly with solar power."

An Ofgem source told BBC News the current rules on trading energy are not fit for the digital age because they often discourage people using energy flexibly.

The rules were made before the digital revolution and before the boom in variable renewable energy.
Hacking fears

Industry figures talk about the seismic change that's sweeping them along.

At a recent UK conference, energy managers were asked which of them could foresee the shape of the industry in a decade; only half a dozen people raised their hands.

Some will urge a degree of caution amongst the enthusiasm: the more the energy industry embraces the digital age, the more vulnerable it will be to hacking.

Recent reports suggest that Russian hackers may already have tried to compromise the system.

Ofgem says the new rules will put measures in place to combat interference.

 

[Greybeard33]

Zero at the moment; but who said Network Rail would be delivering "it".

A key factor of the Digital Railway and similar paradigms in other industries is that it allows parts of the solution to be taken out of the critical path to delivery and operation.

Well...

Group Digital Railway is a national function of Network Rail. Collectively, the group delivers information and telecoms services that keep the railway running today – whilst working with industry partners to introduce new technology and digital solutions to support the future growth of rail and the UK economy.

As Managing Director of Group Digital Railway, David [Wabaso] oversees the strategic operation of the four business units which form the group: two service providers; Asset Information Services and Network Rail Telecom and two national programmes; ORBIS programme and the cross-industry Digital Railway programme.

http://digitalrailway.co.uk/department/leadership-team/

 

[AndrewE]

The Wiki article repeats the original spec for IEPs.

The 140mph mentioned in the Wiki article is fictional too, until (if) the route is equipped with ETCS and that speed is deemed necessary.

So who publishes the IEPtrain webpage where I got the 3 diesels per 5 cars then?
http://www.ieptrain.co.uk/technical-configuration/

 

[jimm]

Bi-modes are a fortunate contingency that came good.

A contingency? Hardly.

They were absolutely essential to maintaining through services between London and a number of locations beyond the limit of the overhead wires being installed under the Great Western electrification scheme.

Even if all had gone swimmingly with the electrification work, routes like the Cotswold Line from Oxford to Worcester and Hereford were highly unlikely to be electrified for a very long time into the future.

 

[Domh245]

So who publishes the IEPtrain webpage where I got the 3 diesels per 5 cars then?
http://www.ieptrain.co.uk/technical-configuration/

Certainly no-one official - just look at the website and see if it looks corporate enough to have been the product of either Hitachi, the DfT, or Agility Trains.

The 3 out of 5 motored cars is correct however, front and rear carriages are driving pantograph trailers, with the middle carriages motored

 

[najaB]

So who publishes the IEPtrain webpage where I got the 3 diesels per 5 cars then?

According to the WHOIS information:

Domain name:
ieptrain.co.uk

Registrant:
Stephen Cross

Registrant type:
UK Individual

 

[coppercapped]

The whole Electrification program has been some what of an Engineer's whim; it has it's merits, but these have been comprehensively undermined by the failure to execute, so the criticism is valid.

I think you need to understand some of the history.

The Department of Transport had set its face against electrification for years - its main priority was reducing the on-going subsidy for train operations and getting over the lousy performance and publicity that was the result of the Hatfield disaster and the loss of control of the finances of the infrastructure part of the railway in the years that followed.

Then in July 2009 in the run-up to the 2010 general election the then Secretary of State for Transport, Andrew Adonis, announced two large electrification schemes, the Great Western from London to Bristol and Swansea and the 'Northern Triangle' between Manchester, Liverpool and Blackpool.

So from having done no electrification for years, suddenly there were two big schemes and then a third was added, the Midland Main Line.

So rather than being an engineers' whim, the electrification was quite definitely a politician's whim trying to win votes. It didn't work - the Conservative - Liberal Democrat coalition won the election. (And don't think it doesn't happen in other countries as well - the electrification of the almost completely flat Hamburg - Lübeck - Travemunde line was sprung on a surprised DBAG by Chancellor Schröder in 2004 or 2005 in an attempt to win votes in the region. It also didn't work - the CDU/CSU coalition won. And after spending all the money the trains are only a couple of minutes faster).

Where I do agree with you is that some of NR's staff may not be completely on top of their jobs. For example I attended a presentation to the IMechE in Swindon two years ago where a senior NR manager with the job title of (something like) 'Infrastructure - Change' gave a talk on the GW scheme. He gave a list of some 9 'deliverables' for the GW electrification - but in truth there was one objective in the list and the other eight were constraints. The tenor of the talk was 'it's all very difficult...'

I'm not surprised he found it difficult if he couldn't even distinguish between an objective and a constraint.

I came away with a very bad feeling.

NR's fundamental problem is that it did not/does not have an identifiable 'Mr. Electrification' who chews six-inch nails for breakfast.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I remember the point at which NR announced the purchase of HOPS to deliver the GW electrification, along with its supposed "mile a night" capability.
A project manager was quoted as saying that there would be no repeat of the blunders of the recent WCRM project, as "all the lessons had been learnt"
There was some scoffing in the direction of the WCML team about GWML getting it right this time.
As toe-curling today as is re-reading the 2009 Electrification RUS.
I'd say all that was "engineer's whim".

MML was not announced for the 2010 election by the way.
Crossrail, GW and NW were re-authorised at the end of 2010 (by Philip Hammond) after the Coalition paused everything for 6 months for review.
TP was the first major extension (Dec 2011), and MML and Electric Spine were not added until the CP5 HLOS in 2012 (by Justine Greening).
Patrick McLoughlin then added a few bits and bobs, but then spent his time defending NR slips and cost overruns, including "pausing" and "unpausing" TP and MML.
They were not election bribes, but they were intended to kick-start engineering after the financial crash, as an antidote to austerity.

 

[snowball]

The Department of Transport had set its face against electrification for years - its main priority was reducing the on-going subsidy for train operations and getting over the lousy performance and publicity that was the result of the Hatfield disaster and the loss of control of the finances of the infrastructure part of the railway in the years that followed.

Then in July 2009 in the run-up to the 2010 general election the then Secretary of State for Transport, Andrew Adonis, announced two large electrification schemes, the Great Western from London to Bristol and Swansea and the 'Northern Triangle' between Manchester, Liverpool and Blackpool.

So from having done no electrification for years, suddenly there were two big schemes and then a third was added, the Midland Main Line.

So rather than being an engineers' whim, the electrification was quite definitely a politician's whim trying to win votes. It didn't work - the Conservative - Liberal Democrat coalition won the election. faster).

However the politician's whim followed a bit of campaign for electrification from within the industry. There was a famous letter to the DfT by Adrian Shooter of ATOC and Iain Coucher of NR.

 

[Olaf]

Well...

http://digitalrailway.co.uk/department/leadership-team/

There is a difference between present and future tense; I am not expecting it to remain wholly within NR's remit.

 

[coppercapped]

I remember the point at which NR announced the purchase of HOPS to deliver the GW electrification, along with its supposed "mile a night" capability.
A project manager was quoted as saying that there would be no repeat of the blunders of the recent WCRM project, as "all the lessons had been learnt"
There was some scoffing in the direction of the WCML team about GWML getting it right this time.
As toe-curling today as is re-reading the 2009 Electrification RUS.
I'd say all that was "engineer's whim".

All those bits were 'engineers whims' certainly. But the electrification programmes themselves were pure politics.

MML was not announced for the 2010 election by the way.

I know, my phrasing was not as clear as it should have been. GW and the Northern Triangle came first and the Midland was added later.

But the point remains that no significant electrification had been done for years, if one classifies Stoke - Crewe as insignificant, and then suddenly there was a huge quantity of work to be done and no organisation to do it.

Crossrail, GW and NW were re-authorised at the end of 2010 (by Philip Hammond) after the Coalition paused everything for 6 months for review.
TP was the first major extension (Dec 2011), and MML and Electric Spine were not added until the CP5 HLOS in 2012 (by Justine Greening).
Patrick McLoughlin then added a few bits and bobs, but then spent his time defending NR slips and cost overruns, including "pausing" and "unpausing" TP and MML.
They were not election bribes, but they were intended to kick-start engineering after the financial crash, as an antidote to austerity.

Adonis' announcement was an election bribe pure and simple. The others were certainly intended to boost the economy - it was said at the time that spending money on infrastructure had a greater effect on total domestic demand than spending the same amount on social security payments.

 

[Olaf]

A contingency? Hardly.

They were absolutely essential to maintaining through services between London and a number of locations beyond the limit of the overhead wires being installed under the Great Western electrification scheme.

Even if all had gone swimmingly with the electrification work, routes like the Cotswold Line from Oxford to Worcester and Hereford were highly unlikely to be electrified for a very long time into the future.

Yes indeed, that was the main purpose for their specification, but it also offered flexibility in their future utilisation, which as I have said has come good.

 

[Olaf]

So who publishes the IEPtrain webpage where I got the 3 diesels per 5 cars then?
http://www.ieptrain.co.uk/technical-configuration/

An individual based in Leeds; no indication of connection to any party involved in the delivery of the product, though that does not mean the individual is not an informed source.

 

[Olaf]

I think you need to understand some of the history.

Thanks, but I need no lessons in this. The whole project had become heavily Engineer driven with no recourse for practical outcomes so that makes it an Engineering folly. Sorry.

 

[ac6000cw]

NR's fundamental problem is that it did not/does not have an identifiable 'Mr. Electrification' who chews six-inch nails for breakfast.

I like the description

But, yes, on a big project you definitely do need hard-nosed, blunt, know-how-to-use-a-spade project management who can tell if they're getting the whole story from their subordinates instead of what they think the boss wants to hear. Those sort of managers don't come cheap, but they're worth it.