Pendolinos and WCML at 140.

[Philip]

Should the money be spent to upgrade the WCML fast lines to allow Pendolinos to run at their top speed, 140mph? It is the signalling which needs upgrading I believe, rather than anything to do with the trains themselves?

HS2 has put this project on the backburner, but the HS2 is at least 10-15 years away, so in the meantime why isn't there more focus to upgrade the route in the present?

 

[Ianno87]

Even if you started now, you might, with some luck, have 140mph running in operation in about, ooh, 10-15 years or so...

 

[Philip]

Even if you started now, you might, with some luck, have 140mph running in operation in about, ooh, 10-15 years or so...

Why so long? It only took 3-4 years to complete the last upgrade, in the early 2000s.

 

[Ianno87]

Why so long? It only took 3-4 years to complete the last upgrade, in the early 2000s.

That's just the physical works. You need to plan out and design what you're going to do first, given the number of things that need to be upgraded to permit 140mph running, e.g. signalling, wires, tunnels, bridges, platforms, etc etc.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

There have been previous suggestion that 135 might be achieved with existing signalling in the Trent Valley but I don't think these ever got much progression. Might save around one minute between Rugby and Colwich? I haven't done the maths!

 

[The Planner]

Why so long? It only took 3-4 years to complete the last upgrade, in the early 2000s.

What would be the benefit? The signalling doesn't need replacing yet so it wouldnt be cost effective. Also remember you would need 20 plus miles of it to save one minute.

 

[Elecman]

What would be the benefit? The signalling doesn't need replacing yet so it wouldnt be cost effective. Also remember you would need 20 plus miles of it to save one minute.

Warrington, Preston and Carlisle PSBs will need replacing soon

 

[The Planner]

Warrington, Preston and Carlisle PSBs will need replacing soon

Yes, and they are planned to be ETCS during CP7/8. South of Crewe where its pretty much solid 125mph railway you are years away from replacement. Crewe has a slim chance of it when that starts in a few years.

 

[Bald Rick]

Should the money be spent to upgrade the WCML fast lines to allow Pendolinos to run at their top speed, 140mph? It is the signalling which needs upgrading I believe, rather than anything to do with the trains themselves?

Signalling, the track, the OLE, many structures would need rebuilding; all maintenance arrangements would have to be completely revised, and any stations with platforms on the fast lines would need some form of rebuilding... all for 4 seconds a mile on the straighter sections. I posted about this recently, but it’s a couple of minutes south of Rugby, maybe a couple of minutes north of their to Manchester / Preston / Liverpool.

There’s plenty of the WCML that cannot be upgraded beyond its current speed due to geometry.

In short, it would be cheaper and quicker to finish HS2, for much greater benefit. So, the answer is no.

 

[Philip]

Signalling, the track, the OLE, many structures would need rebuilding; all maintenance arrangements would have to be completely revised, and any stations with platforms on the fast lines would need some form of rebuilding... all for 4 seconds a mile on the straighter sections. I posted about this recently, but it’s a couple of minutes south of Rugby, maybe a couple of minutes north of their to Manchester / Preston / Liverpool.

There’s plenty of the WCML that cannot be upgraded beyond its current speed due to geometry.

In short, it would be cheaper and quicker to finish HS2, for much greater benefit. So, the answer is no.

I don't see why structures and platforms would need rebuilding for this, nor upgrading of the OLE or the track. We're not talking Formula One speeds, just an extra 15mph. The ECML has sections of 140 running. I'm sure the high quality continuous welded rail of the WCML could handle much greater speeds than even 140.

 

[JonathanH]

The ECML has sections of 140 running.

Where?

I don't see why structures and platforms would need rebuilding for this, nor upgrading of the OLE or the track. We're not talking Formula One speeds, just an extra 15mph.

It cost quite a lot to get the speeds up from 110mph to 125mph let alone 125mph to 140mph.

 

[MarkyT]

I don't see why structures and platforms would need rebuilding for this, nor upgrading of the OLE or the track. We're not talking Formula One speeds, just an extra 15mph. The ECML has sections of 140 running. I'm sure the high quality continuous welded rail of the WCML could handle much greater speeds than even 140.

There is what might be allowed for a single or series of test runs for a short time and what may be permitted routinely. Much of the curvy south end of the WCML is already at the maximum that could ever be squeezed out of the alignment, even with maximum permitted tilt. 125mph is also the acceptable limit for optical lineside signals. At speeds above that, the time to read, interpret and act on colour light aspects is considered insufficient and full in-cab signaling is considered necessary.

Where?

Nowhere!

 

[Philip]

Where?


It cost quite a lot to get the speeds up from 110mph to 125mph let alone 125mph to 140mph.

North of York.

 

[Journeyman]

North of York.

No, it doesn't. 140mph running never happened in service anywhere on the ECML, because the technical and safety challenges were never successfully resolved.

 

[JonathanH]

North of York.

No. You might want to check your facts in this document - https://sacuksprodnrdigital0001.blo... Eastern Sectional Appendix December 2020.pdf

 

[Journeyman]

It cost quite a lot to get the speeds up from 110mph to 125mph let alone 125mph to 140mph.

Yeah. If the jump from 110 to 140 could have been made in one go, it would have been worth the money and effort. The jump from 125 to 140 just isn't worth it. Pendolino journey times are already far better than their loco hauled predecessors, and spending millions for a very, very small boost isn't worth it. New stock on the WCML will be non-tilt anyway, and won't be able to operate as fast as Pendolinos in some locations. Journey times will be maintained by their superior acceleration.

 

[class26]

There have been previous suggestion that 135 might be achieved with existing signalling in the Trent Valley but I don't think these ever got much progression. Might save around one gby and Colwich? I haven't done the maths!

135 mph was also suggested by Virgin around the Lockerbie area

 

[Philip]

Is there anything to actually stop the driver from pushing the speed up to 140mph, obviously all planned and authorised beforehand with Avanti and Network Rail? I can see the risk of doing this on the more curved sections, but on a clear straight run such as Crewe to Stafford or the Trent Valley?

 

[CBlue]

Is there anything to actually stop the driver from pushing the speed up to 140mph, obviously all planned and authorised beforehand with Avanti and Network Rail? I can see the risk of doing this on the more curved sections, but on a clear straight run such as Crewe to Stafford or the Trent Valley?

Assuming Avanti and NR would authorise it in the first place, and why would they?


I think your question here has already been answered up thread as to why 140mph wouldn't happen.

 

[Bald Rick]

I don't see why structures and platforms would need rebuilding for this, nor upgrading of the OLE or the track. We're not talking Formula One speeds, just an extra 15mph. The ECML has sections of 140 running. I'm sure the high quality continuous welded rail of the WCML could handle much greater speeds than even 140.

It is not permitted to have open platforms next to lines with a linespeed greater than 125mph.

It is not permitted to have any discontinuity in the rail - such as at points - on track with a linespeed greater than 125mph.

Track with a linespeed above 125mph requires certain specifications (componentry, quality) which much of the track on the WCML does not have.

Certain types of undertack structure will not be suitable for speeds above 125mph. Metal bridges being a particular concern due to resonance effects.

The WCML OLE is specified for max 125 mph running.

The power supply is specified for a certain quantum of trains at 125mph; it may well need upgrading for 140mph.

It is not permitted to have any staff lineside on lines with a speed greater than 125mph. That means completely revising any maintenance arrangements that require this, of which there are many.

This is just part of of it. I’ll stop now.

 

[popeter45]

It is not permitted to have any discontinuity in the rail - such as at points - on track with a linespeed greater than 125mph.

how does that work for HS1 that has points around Dagenham and passing loops past Ebbsfield?

 

[Bald Rick]

how does that work for HS1 that has points around Dagenham and passing loops past Ebbsfield?

Swing nose crossings. Some were installed on the WCML at Ledburn Junction. Not a success, and removed a couple of years later.

If 140 was to deployed on the WCML, every set of points on track above 125mph would have to be completely replaced (There’s 60 sets on the fast lines on the 125mph sections south of Rugby Tv Junction). They would be about £2m each, and each one would need the fast lines closing on that section for 24-48 hours. The extra set of moving parts would also need detection designed into the logic - hopefully not in the interlocking, otherwise it would get very very expensive.

 

[swt_passenger]

135 mph was also suggested by Virgin around the Lockerbie area

AIUI Virgin argued that if cab signalling was only explicitly required for 140 mph and above then they’d be ok without it at 135 mph. I think it was then pointed out that the finding from trials was that cab signalling would be required above 125 mph.

I think it’s likely that no one had previously asked about using intermediate speeds between 125 and 140 mph, ie 140 was always seen as the next logical step up.

 

[MarkyT]

AIUI Virgin argued that if cab signalling was only explicitly required for 140 mph and above then they’d be ok without it at 135 mph. I think it was then pointed out that the finding from trials was that cab signalling would be required above 125 mph.

I think it’s likely that no one had previously asked about using intermediate speeds between 125 and 140 mph, ie 140 was always seen as the next logical step up.

The 125mph practical limit was established years ago following ECML IC225 trials with an extra flashing green signal aspect added to ensure the extra braking distance was catered for on certain suitably straight sections. I don't think the flashing green was ever seriously proposed as a suitable long term solution for higher routine passenger speeds, rather as a means to carry out the many repeated test runs safely.

 

[Trackman]

The power supply is specified for a certain quantum of trains at 125mph; it may well need upgrading for 140mph.

This was mentioned the first time around, Railtrack said 140mph working could cause blackouts and became a headache in the scheme of things.
I think the supply was updated years later, but not upgraded.

 

[Ianno87]

Is there anything to actually stop the driver from pushing the speed up to 140mph, obviously all planned and authorised beforehand with Avanti and Network Rail? I can see the risk of doing this on the more curved sections, but on a clear straight run such as Crewe to Stafford or the Trent Valley?

It is not permitted to have open platforms next to lines with a linespeed greater than 125mph.

It is not permitted to have any discontinuity in the rail - such as at points - on track with a linespeed greater than 125mph.

Track with a linespeed above 125mph requires certain specifications (componentry, quality) which much of the track on the WCML does not have.

Certain types of undertack structure will not be suitable for speeds above 125mph. Metal bridges being a particular concern due to resonance effects.

The WCML OLE is specified for max 125 mph running.

The power supply is specified for a certain quantum of trains at 125mph; it may well need upgrading for 140mph.

It is not permitted to have any staff lineside on lines with a speed greater than 125mph. That means completely revising any maintenance arrangements that require this, of which there are many.

This is just part of of it. I’ll stop now.

Also, the TASS (Tilt And Speed Supervision) limits Pendolinos to something like 127.2mph.

 

[Trackman]

Did they ever do any test runs up to 140mph?
It's ringing bells.

 

[Bald Rick]

This was mentioned the first time around, Railtrack said 140mph working could cause blackouts and became a headache in the scheme of things.
I think the supply was updated years later, but not upgraded.

There was a very big power supply upgrade for the WCRM, yes. However that was based on 8 x 9 car Pendolinos an hour doing 140mph on the fast lines south of Rugby, and broadly the same level of service as then applied on the slows, with some longer commuter trains and more electric freight, plus a bit spare.

Of course now (in normal times) we have 9 x 9/11 car 125mph Pendolinos an hour, plus 2 (arguably 3) 110mph WMT services on the fast lines, plus longer commuter trains and not quite as much electric freight as anticipated. Very, very roughly, the extra traffic is accommodated through the spare capacity in the system plus that not used to get the Pendolinos up to 140mph and keep them there.

Also, the TASS (Tilt And Speed Supervision) limits Pendolinos to something like 127.2mph.

That can be quite easily changed on the train.

Did they ever do any test runs up to 140mph?
It's ringing bells.

Yep. 10% overspeed tests.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

If memory serves (and this is very vague), the only 140mph capable TASS software version number was designed for the 8 car Pendolinos, they never bothered with 140mph compliant TASS software for the 9s and 11s.

Oh, and you'll need to do something with the OLE. It's not all 140mph compliant as such...

Can't remember all what would need done on the actual route or where, but the usual culprits for higher speeds in general are increased tensioning, which can lead to increased contact wire and catenary wire thickness which in turn can lead to additional mass of the system which then needs additional cantilevers to hold the catenary up, and with higher speeds, there's greater uplift for which changes to the registration arm design/heel setup can be needed.

Pantograph changes might well be needed on the Pendolinos too, plus, coming full circle, the updated TASS software which controls the dynamic positioning of the pantograph assembly on the roof of the Pendolino (the pan assembly moves counter to the tilt of the carriage to ensure it remains correctly alligned with the contact wire).

 

[Philip]

On a slightly different note, why is the down track on the Bolton line 100mph, but the up track in the same place only 95?