David Shirres article on Electrification July Modern Railways

[GRALISTAIR]

Especially if we electrify the Chilterns out of London Marylebone etc.

 

[furnessvale]

Especially if we electrify the Chilterns out of London Marylebone etc.

Which neatly encapsulates one of the main priorities, removal of diesel from major cities.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Which neatly encapsulates one of the main priorities, removal of diesel from major cities.

Exactly. And I swear I am not trying to regurgitate the boring north/south debate, but as it is London and Chilterns I would argue has to be high priority. Removing diesel from Birmingham New Treet also has to be extremely high priority too.

 

[furnessvale]

Exactly. And I swear I am not trying to regurgitate the boring north/south debate, but as it is London and Chilterns I would argue has to be high priority. Removing diesel from Birmingham New Treet also has to be extremely high priority too.

Agreed. Whatever is said, London is our biggest city and it has nearly eliminated diesel (for passenger) so it makes sense to complete the process.

Obviously that process needs repeating around the country.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Agreed. Whatever is said, London is our biggest city and it has nearly eliminated diesel (for passenger) so it makes sense to complete the process.

Obviously that process needs repeating around the country.

Indeed so Sheffield has ZERO electrification at the moment and projects such as MML and then rolling would be a great start.

 

[Polarbear]

Having skim-read the article, (I need to sit down & read it properly), I can't help but have a large sense of "deja-vu" when looking at that map. Although de-carbonisation wasn't on the agenda 40 years ago, the issue of what parts of the network to electrify (or not) was considered in some detail by BR back in the early 1980's. Here's a link to the report, which includes various options for increased network electrification.

1981 Electrification Report

The maps for each of the schemes can be found at the end of the report.

 

[37424]

Personally rather than concentrating on Intercity Routes at the moment where we have a good Bi-mode train available and particularly the Midland line where we have just ordered a new fleet of Bi-modes, Instead we should concentrate on busy Regional and Commuter where DMU's can be replaced or cascaded as appropriate. We have a very large fleet of regional DMU's many of which are approaching life expiry and a couple of unproven and potentially flaky alternatives to electrification In the form of the Battery EMU and the Hydrogen train.

So my Priorities would likely be Transpennine Manchester-York, the missing bits of the North West Electrification plus a bit more, missing bits of GWML, and yes electrification out of Marylebone.

 

[BrianW]

1981 Electrification Report

Ah yes, Polar Bear.
Thank you for the reminder of taxpayer-paid crayonists of the 1980s, PSBR (Public Sector Borrowing Requirement) etc.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I see the author left NR in 2009.
This was the date that NR published its infamous electrification RUS.
That listed every line in the country with a priority and linkage to neighbouring schemes.
It was a work of art, but was rendered useless within 5 years because the cost basis was unrealistic and the priorities were not those of HMG.
NR also has no great insight into the commercial or strategic planning situation around railway routes, so can only plan on operational things like DMU-mileage saved.
Only the government can take a full view of the economic prospects of a line/region/industry sector, for instance inventing a business case for the East-West line from new housing development, which the railway would never have done for itself.
This time round it is likely to be about "levelling up" in the north and other regions.
That will change priorities, even if the government allocates a decent budget for the work.
So railway priorities like finishing GW pockets may not get the money, especially as they have new trains already.
My money would be on north/midlands wiring extension across the urban areas (not unlike what Scotland has done), plus routes that link into HS2.
And don't forget HS2 will be a new electrified railway, which will dictate which services use it.
eg If Chester/Shrewsbury remain unwired, their London services will not be routed via HS2.

 

[edwin_m]

The number of vehicle-miles converted from diesel is a pretty good proxy for the operating cost savings of electrification and also on the emissions - they don't depend on how full the vehicles are. There may be some "sparks effect" on demand too, but this would probably be more on a route where there is plenty of capacity than on one that's already uncomfortably busy!

NR also runs a long-term planning process looking at demand on a 20yr+ horizon. I think that takes account of government projections on land use. Having seen the results of the last time the government started "planning" electrification policy I suggest it would be better left to NR.

Having said that there is a good argument for concentrating on smaller infill-type schemes, which would potentially start to get rid of the 150s which are the oldest diesels still in the fleet. But there is also a good case for finishing the MML in particular, as this could better ensure continuity of work than other routes where no design work has been done. It would also allow most of the bi-modes to be replaced by electric-only units and cascaded to Cross Country, eliminating such things as an hourly Voyager under the wires between York and Edinburgh or beyond. Completing the original GWML scheme to Bristol and Swansea is less attractive, as the number of non-electrified offshoots probably still needs most of the fleet to remain as bi-modes.

 

[HSTEd]

I very much doubt the MML will get carried forward any time soon.

NR will be hoping to get the Chesterfield-Sheffield section paid for by HS2 after all.
And the Sheffield to Leeds section paid for by NPR.

 

[Ianno87]

I very much doubt the MML will get carried forward any time soon.

NR will be hoping to get the Chesterfield-Sheffield section paid for by HS2 after all.
And the Sheffield to Leeds section paid for by NPR.

And presumably hold off doing Leicester area until some certainty about its future layout.

 

[Mikey C]

Having skim-read the article, (I need to sit down & read it properly), I can't help but have a large sense of "deja-vu" when looking at that map. Although de-carbonisation wasn't on the agenda 40 years ago, the issue of what parts of the network to electrify (or not) was considered in some detail by BR back in the early 1980's. Here's a link to the report, which includes various options for increased network electrification.

1981 Electrification Report

The maps for each of the schemes can be found at the end of the report.

It's interesting that the order of priority bore little resemblance to what actually happened

For example Option 2 had comprehensive electrification for the MML and the Birmingham to Derby line, but cut ECML short at Newcastle

Indeed in Option 4 where large parts of the network are to be electrified, the lines to Kings Lynn and Hastings aren't included.

 

[Polarbear]

It's interesting that the order of priority bore little resemblance to what actually happened

For example Option 2 had comprehensive electrification for the MML and the Birmingham to Derby line, but cut ECML short at Newcastle

Indeed in Option 4 where large parts of the network are to be electrified, the lines to Kings Lynn and Hastings aren't included.

I seem to recall that when the ECML electrification was in the planning stage, there was some thought given to not wiring north of Newcastle. Tonbridge to Hastings was done mainly because the DMU's were life expired and the stock could be resourced through efficiencies in diagramming.

 

[ainsworth74]

I seem to recall that when the ECML electrification was in the planning stage, there was some thought given to not wiring north of Newcastle.

There absolutely was. I believe the plan was for loco swaps at Newcastle Central but I seem to recall from what I've read on the subject that BR managed to finagle the business case so that wiring to Edinburgh actually increased the BCR of the entire project despite increasing the capital cost.

 

[davetheguard]

Indeed so Sheffield has ZERO electrification at the moment and projects such as MML and then rolling would be a great start.

Pedant alert! - apart from the Parkgate Network Rail-owned Tram Train line. But yes, MML should be up there in the projects to be tackled next.

 

[HSTEd]

There absolutely was. I believe the plan was for loco swaps at Newcastle Central but I seem to recall from what I've read on the subject that BR managed to finagle the business case so that wiring to Edinburgh actually increased the BCR of the entire project despite increasing the capital cost.

Supposedly earlier schemes had accidentally on purpose ordered too many masts and then BR said that they could do it at a very low price because look at all these spare masts.
Probably apocryphal though.

 

[43096]

Supposedly earlier schemes had accidentally on purpose ordered too many masts and then BR said that they could do it at a very low price because look at all these spare masts.
Probably apocryphal though.

The opposite of what Network Rail have done where materials for the cancelled bits of Great Western electrification have been sold off.

 

[yorksrob]

It's interesting that the order of priority bore little resemblance to what actually happened

For example Option 2 had comprehensive electrification for the MML and the Birmingham to Derby line, but cut ECML short at Newcastle

Indeed in Option 4 where large parts of the network are to be electrified, the lines to Kings Lynn and Hastings aren't included.

After a quick skim of the maps, I was taken by the lack of any Southern Region electrification proposed.

I guess the Southern were particularly adept at making a business case out of infill and rolling stock cascades.

 

[edwin_m]

After a quick skim of the maps, I was taken by the lack of any Southern Region electrification proposed.

I guess the Southern were particularly adept at making a business case out of infill and rolling stock cascades.

The Southern is and always has been primarily a commuter railway. Economics of electrification works better on shorter but busier routes where less new infrastructure is needed but is used more intensively. This was particularly so with early forms of electrification like the third rail, more suited to that sort of duty than to high speeds or long distances. So most of the Southern is electrified already and the few routes that aren't are shown as Definite or Possible, except Romsey-Eastleigh and Salisbury-Exeter.

In the same magazine Ian Walmsley makes a good case for lifting the effective prohibition on third rail, but points out that this would be for infills and it would be short-sighted to stick with third rail for major extensions such as Salisbury.

 

[yorksrob]

The Southern is and always has been primarily a commuter railway. Economics of electrification works better on shorter but busier routes where less new infrastructure is needed but is used more intensively. This was particularly so with early forms of electrification like the third rail, more suited to that sort of duty than to high speeds or long distances. So most of the Southern is electrified already and the few routes that aren't are shown as Definite or Possible, except Romsey-Eastleigh and Salisbury-Exeter.

In the same magazine Ian Walmsley makes a good case for lifting the effective prohibition on third rail, but points out that this would be for infills and it would be short-sighted to stick with third rail for major extensions such as Salisbury.

I was commenting more on the BR plans from the early 80's, but I agree that the remaining gaps in the Southern network should be infilled ASAP.

 

[Bald Rick]

After a quick skim of the maps, I was taken by the lack of any Southern Region electrification proposed.

I guess the Southern were particularly adept at making a business case out of infill and rolling stock cascades.

It’s not often realised, and BR didn’t exactly shout about it, but the Southern infill electrification from the 80s often had their business cases significantly helped by not needing anymore trains to operate them. Hastings and Grinstead were both done this way, with rolling stock found from ‘efficiencies’ within the existing fleet. In reality, this meant other lines saw fewer and/or shorter trains.

Given the prospect of traffic levels for the next few years, there may well be a similar opportunity now.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It’s not often realised, and BR didn’t exactly shout about it, but the Southern infill electrification from the 80s often had their business cases significantly helped by not needing anymore trains to operate them. Hastings and Grinstead were both done this way, with rolling stock found from ‘efficiencies’ within the existing fleet. In reality, this meant other lines saw fewer and/or shorter trains.

Given the prospect of traffic levels for the next few years, there may well be a similar opportunity now.

Even the Weymouth electrification had the Traction motors recovered from the 4-REPs IIRC

 

[Bald Rick]

Even the Weymouth electrification had the Traction motors recovered from the 4-REPs IIRC

Indeed so, and the 442s were just a direct replacement of the REPs and TCs.

 

[yorksrob]

It’s not often realised, and BR didn’t exactly shout about it, but the Southern infill electrification from the 80s often had their business cases significantly helped by not needing anymore trains to operate them. Hastings and Grinstead were both done this way, with rolling stock found from ‘efficiencies’ within the existing fleet. In reality, this meant other lines saw fewer and/or shorter trains.

Given the prospect of traffic levels for the next few years, there may well be a similar opportunity now.

Yes, I've often thought that they must have had a good stock of outer-suburban/main line EMU's, particularly considering quite a large cull of HAP units had happenned in the early 1980's.

To be fair, the refurbished CEP's on the Hastings line had a rather more modern ambience than the thumpers !

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Yes, I've often thought that they must have had a good stock of outer-suburban/main line EMU's, particularly considering quite a large cull of HAP units had happenned in the early 1980's.

Of course even Gatwick Express - intense 3rd rail electric service used converted HAP units for the push pull portion. Great use of assets.

 

[yorksrob]

Of course even Gatwick Express - intense 3rd rail electric service used converted HAP units for the push pull portion. Great use of assets.

Indeed, although the HAP driving trailer would have been somewhat less comfortable after the conversion.

A rare example of HAP stock replacing VEP stock as opposed to the other way round !

 

[Polarbear]

It’s not often realised, and BR didn’t exactly shout about it, but the Southern infill electrification from the 80s often had their business cases significantly helped by not needing anymore trains to operate them. Hastings and Grinstead were both done this way, with rolling stock found from ‘efficiencies’ within the existing fleet. In reality, this meant other lines saw fewer and/or shorter trains.

Given the prospect of traffic levels for the next few years, there may well be a similar opportunity now.

The early 1980's weren't generally a good time for UK rail. Declining passenger numbers often produced surpluses of stock. As you have said, the Southern Region were quite canny in using this as a lever to extend the third rail (Portsmouth - Southampton was another one justified on that basis).

 

[GRALISTAIR]

The early 1980's weren't generally a good time for UK rail. Declining passenger numbers often produced surpluses of stock. As you have said, the Southern Region were quite canny in using this as a lever to extend the third rail (Portsmouth - Southampton was another one justified on that basis).

Agreed and perhaps that is what Shirres and CEBR et al are hoping for - hey look we have these surplus EMUs - we could electrify and there will be little extra cost - similarly wasn't the Northwest scheme predicated on use of Class 319s?

 

[Mikey C]

Yes, I've often thought that they must have had a good stock of outer-suburban/main line EMU's, particularly considering quite a large cull of HAP units had happenned in the early 1980's.

To be fair, the refurbished CEP's on the Hastings line had a rather more modern ambience than the thumpers !

Yes, the Hastings CEPs in their Jaffa Cake livery looked pretty good for units built in 1066