Electrification the DFT needs to get on with

[adrock1976]

I think sacrificing Cross Country running south of Reading wouldn't necessary be a bad thing, given the time consuming reversal. Manchester to Reading electric with a separate service Reading to Bournemouth.

You could even arguably just give up the paths south of Basingstoke to SWR and have people connect at Reading and Basingstoke, improving the Reading to Basingstoke GWR shuttle to 4tph timed evenly across the hour.

Splitting services to allow electric operation is not a bad thing and, indeed, should probably be encouraged as a short term development.

I would like to mention that Birmingham, Coventry, Leamington Spa, Banbury, and Oxford have direct trains to Basingstoke, Winchester, Southampton, Brockenhurst, and Bournemouth which is a long standing route that goes back to 1988 (when I first purchased the Great Britain Passenger Railway Timetable book) and possibly before then.

From the West Midlands Region, the alternative is the M6, M42, M40, and A34 to Hampshire, something we should be discouraging as much as possible.

First 2 yes for priority. The Chiltern and North end of the MML should be candidates for the next phase of electrification. Conversion of the entire 3rd rail network isn't going to happen - only selected lines such as Basingstoke-Weymouth.

Although the Electric Spine project appears to have been shelved, there may be some elements that may stage a comeback (Note "may").

 

[Hey 3]

First 2 yes for priority. The Chiltern and North end of the MML should be candidates for the next phase of electrification. Conversion of the entire 3rd rail network isn't going to happen - only selected lines such as Basingstoke-Weymouth.

As an offshoot of Lostock-Wigan how about the Atherton line(as both ends will be wired) and is a few miles.

 

[zwk500]

As an offshoot of Lostock-Wigan how about the Atherton line(as both ends will be wired) and is a few miles.

From a technical standpoint, all 4 lines through Wigan Wallgate seem fairly straightforward to wire. It makes sense with wires at Wigan and Bolton-Manchester. However, given that no line has more than 2tph, is it enough to justify priority above, say, Transpennine?

 

[adrock1976]

In North West Region, I would electrify:

Manchester Victoria - Rochdale/Huddersfield
Lostock - Wigan - Southport
Salford Crescent - Hindley via Atherton
Ashburys and Guide Bridge - New Mills Central or Chinley
Stockport - Stalybridge
Hazel Grove - Buxton/Chinley
Oxenholme - Windermere and Lancaster - Morecambe (only needs tram wire style electrification similar to Wolverhampton - Oxley Depot)
Carnforth - Barrow
Ormskirk - Preston (transferred to Merseyrail)
Kirkby - Wigan Wallgate (transferred to Merseyrail)

If I have worked this out right in my mind, this means that Newton Heath Depot in Manchester would no longer have diesel trains, and Manchester Piccadilly would also no longer have diesel trains barring Intercity Crosscountry and the Wales services. Also, for the Calder Valley route, the Class 158s that are used have their home depot at Neville Hill in Leeds if I remember right.

 

[Fincra5]

To me the obvious, for the South/ South East area are:

• Uckfield Branch (The 10 or so Miles of it)
• Marshlink Line (All 26miles of it)

I know certain groups and people aren't a fan of 3rd Rail DC but it exists around 90% of the Southeast, so infill it and be done.

 

[Greybeard33]

From a technical standpoint, all 4 lines through Wigan Wallgate seem fairly straightforward to wire. It makes sense with wires at Wigan and Bolton-Manchester. However, given that no line has more than 2tph, is it enough to justify priority above, say, Transpennine?

The decrepit low bridge that carries Wigan Wallgate (the road) over the line into Wigan Wallgate station has been reliant on steel props to save it from collapse for many years. There are buildings on the bridge deck, so electrification would be far from straightforward.

That is why the postponed scheme is only to wire Lostock to Wigan North Western, not Wallgate.

 

[zwk500]

To me the obvious, for the South/ South East area are:

• Uckfield Branch (The 10 or so Miles of it)
• Marshlink Line (All 26miles of it)

I know certain groups and people aren't a fan of 3rd Rail DC but it exists around 90% of the Southeast, so infill it and be done.

It's actually 25 miles of the Uckfield branch.

Those 'certain groups' happen to be the people authorising electrification equipment on the railway, so it won't be 3rd Rail.

 

[Hey 3]

The decrepit low bridge that carries Wigan Wallgate (the road) over the line into Wigan Wallgate station has been reliant on steel props to save it from collapse for many years. There are buildings on the bridge deck, so electrification would be far from straightforward.

That is why the postponed scheme is only to wire Lostock to Wigan North Western, not Wallgate.

It also provides a diversion in times of trouble on the WCML.

 

[Bald Rick]

Are there any shovel-ready but cancelled schemes?

The shovelliest ready are Didcot to Oxford, and Bristol via both routes.

Uckfield Branch (The 10 or so Miles of it)

25 miles. But still in battery range

 

[Bletchleyite]

The decrepit low bridge that carries Wigan Wallgate (the road) over the line into Wigan Wallgate station has been reliant on steel props to save it from collapse for many years. There are buildings on the bridge deck, so electrification would be far from straightforward.

That is why the postponed scheme is only to wire Lostock to Wigan North Western, not Wallgate.

This doesn't pose a great problem as the stations are very close together so can effectively function as one. Electrifying Wallgate itself probably has less value until you electrify to Southport, on the assumption that Kirkby-Wigan is very likely to end up as a Merseyrail branch before too long.

The bridge issue might be best solved with batteries in the EMUs used to Southport, once that eventually does get wired, but that'll be years.

As for Atherton that should either be electrified or Metrolinked, stopping services benefit from it massively. Same with the CLC. With 25kV and 323s or similar you'd easily get a number of minutes off the timetable of an all-stops run - probably 5-10 minutes in the case of CLC, I'm less sure about Atherton.

Of course if you do Atherton that then renders Westhoughton a bit pointless until Southport is done, because you're still needing DMUs or bi-modes on the Southports anyway.

 

[zwk500]

It also provides a diversion in times of trouble on the WCML.

It doesn't really because in order to get Anglo-Scottish Pendos through Castlefield you'd destroy the timetable for TPE & Northern. It's far easier for Avanti to stop short and tell people to go to Manchester and change for TPE to Preston.
It's very, very rare nowadays for IC trains to divert over routes they are not regularly booked over without advance planning, because it has such a massive knock-on effect.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ormskirk - Preston (transferred to Merseyrail)

I'm slightly less convinced by that because the demand profile north of Ormskirk is very different from south of it, and it would leave Merseyrail with a potential microfleet of OHLE equipped units - remember the strength of Merseyrail is its simplicity and that it doesn't interact with much else, so giving it microfleets and imported delays from the WCML would not be great. (Altering the track and platform layout at Wallgate could have it completely isolated from Southport-Manchester workings there with little difficulty - but even using the existing bay it would interact with less than it already does at Chester).

I'd propose reinstating the two Curves, mothballing the straight through line and operating Merseyrail through to Burscough Bridge (third rail, or if short extensions are really out then battery, but preferably third rail, it could be shielded to the sides if that helps?) and an hourly Southport to Preston service (25kV in the long term), which would also pick up the calls at "the Lanes" and so speed up Southport-Manchester a bit.

 

[Class360/1]

To name a few I will start with
Lostock Parkway to Wigan North Western
Market Harbrough and Corby to Leeds and Doncaster
TPE routes(North and South inc Calder Valley)
And GWML wiring.
Please put your thoughts below.

East west rail, full MML and GWML, port of Felixstowe and Shrewsbury

 

[Ianno87]

It also provides a diversion in times of trouble on the WCML.

You've already got via Chorley/Bolton and via Chat Moss in that respect; a third won't really add much more.

 

[Greybeard33]

This doesn't pose a great problem as the stations are very close together so can effectively function as one. Electrifying Wallgate itself probably has less value until you electrify to Southport, on the assumption that Kirkby-Wigan is very likely to end up as a Merseyrail branch before too long.

The bridge issue might be best solved with batteries in the EMUs used to Southport, once that eventually does get wired, but that'll be years.

As for Atherton that should either be electrified or Metrolinked, stopping services benefit from it massively. Same with the CLC. With 25kV and 323s or similar you'd easily get a number of minutes off the timetable of an all-stops run - probably 5-10 minutes in the case of CLC, I'm less sure about Atherton.

Of course if you do Atherton that then renders Westhoughton a bit pointless until Southport is done, because you're still needing DMUs or bi-modes on the Southports anyway.

I doubt more than 2tph could terminate at North Western, so it would be pointless to wire both the Westhoughton and Atherton lines unless you wire into Wallgate too. The Westhoughton line is much shorter and would avoid slow DMUs/769s clogging up the Bolton line. The Atherton linespeed is only 50mph.

An issue with Merseyrail to Wigan is that it would compromise Merseyrail's status as a segregated network. There are twice daily binliner trains between the Knowsley terminal on the Kirkby line and Wilton on Teeside. They fit ok between the hourly Northern DMUs, but a more frequent Merseyrail service could be problematic.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I doubt more than 2tph could terminate at North Western, so it would be pointless to wire both the Westhoughton and Atherton lines unless you wire into Wallgate too. The Westhoughton line is much shorter and would avoid slow DMUs/769s clogging up the Bolton line. The Atherton linespeed is only 50mph.

The Westhoughton line is shorter, yes, but that being the case (and it having Bolton on it, also a useful destination) means it's likely to be preferable for Southports to go that way, which means DMUs or bi-modes at least for now. Though I suppose if you did wire that bit as far as just outside Wallgate, then the remaining bit to Southport could well be short enough to go for battery 331s.

Wiring Atherton would be about the service on Atherton itself - it's a Merseyrail esque local service with a large number of stations, so you can improve the running times substantially with high acceleration EMUs.

 

[Greybeard33]

The Westhoughton line is shorter, yes, but that being the case (and it having Bolton on it, also a useful destination) means it's likely to be preferable for Southports to go that way, which means DMUs or bi-modes at least for now. Though I suppose if you did wire that bit as far as just outside Wallgate, then the remaining bit to Southport could well be short enough to go for battery 331s.

Wiring Atherton would be about the service on Atherton itself - it's a Merseyrail esque local service with a large number of stations, so you can improve the running times substantially with high acceleration EMUs.

No, it would be preferable for the Southport trains to go via Atherton and have fast accelerating EMUs under the wires on the more roundabout Westhoughton/Bolton route to Salford Crescent. Change at Wigan for Southport to Bolton.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No, it would be preferable for the Southport trains to go via Atherton and have fast accelerating EMUs under the wires on the more roundabout Westhoughton/Bolton route to Salford Crescent. Change at Wigan for Southport to Bolton.

We will have to disagree. Southport is the long distance service on this line, not the secondary one, and as such it should not be tied to all-stations stoppers via Atherton, it should run fast via Bolton (i.e. after Wallgate calling at Westhoughton, Bolton, Salford Crescent, Salford Central and Victoria-and-beyond only). The Athertons should be an all stations, 4tph (ideally) EMU service terminating at Wigan, Merseyrail-style, or even a Metrolink conversion (TBH I strongly favour Metrolink for this line).

 

[The Planner]

East west rail, full MML and GWML, port of Felixstowe and Shrewsbury

Shrewsbury will be quite far down the list I suspect.

 

[HSTEd]

With our new proliferation of electrodiesels, and the ability of SFCs to reduce the cost of electrification islands - surely we would better be looking at major unelectrified stations and surrounding track work as likely targets.

Which probably means bits of the southern half of Chiltern, things like that.

 

[HST43257]

We will have to disagree. Southport is the long distance service on this line, not the secondary one, and as such it should not be tied to all-stations stoppers via Atherton, it should run fast via Bolton (i.e. after Wallgate calling at Westhoughton, Bolton, Salford Crescent, Salford Central and Victoria-and-beyond only).

Southport should have the Bolton service, although I’d consider extending 2tph Merseyrail as well.

The Athertons should be an all stations, 4tph (ideally) EMU service terminating at Wigan, Merseyrail-style, or even a Metrolink conversion (TBH I strongly favour Metrolink for this line).

Don’t forget Skelmersdale. Send 2 there If you don’t want 2tph Kirkby to Manchester as well as the Merseyrail you can take them to Wigan North Western.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Southport should have the Bolton service, although I’d consider extending 2tph Merseyrail as well.

I'd not take Merseyrail past Wigan - running it to Bolton would be a punctuality nightmare.

Don’t forget Skelmersdale. Send 2 there If you don’t want 2tph Kirkby to Manchester as well as the Merseyrail you can take them to Wigan North Western.

Yeah, a second, also good option would be to run Merseyrail to Skem and extend the Atherton line service to meet it at Skem cross-platform as well, ideally 25kV electrified. That provides for Skem-Wigan journeys (a not inconsiderable demand by bus and car), which sending half of Merseyrail to Skem and half to Wigan doesn't do.

 

[HST43257]

I'd not take Merseyrail past Wigan - running it to Bolton would be a punctuality nightmare.

This was my only issue

Yeah, a second, also good option would be to run Merseyrail to Skem and extend the Atherton line service to meet it at Skem cross-platform as well, ideally 25kV electrified.

Agreed, though I’d still keep the Liverpool to Wigan (or Bolton maybe) service. Either way, Skem should and would have a 2tph service to Liverpool and Manchester.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

It isn't ludicrous. 8-car 387s are too much capacity for Didcot to Oxford and, in any case, every fourth 165 trip goes to Banbury.

I think there is a very good case for keeping 8-car Paddington to Didcot and 4-car Didcot to Oxford even after electrification.

You could certainly make a case for splitting an 8-car at Didcot and only sending a 4-car onto Oxford, but I strongly suspect the operational hassle of splitting trains would outweigh the benefits.

It's pretty much always the case that outer-suburban stoppers carry more fresh air at the ends of their journeys. I'm sure that's true of London-Cambridge, for example, but you wouldn't run full-size trains from KX to Hitchin/Royston and then a shuttle service on to Cambridge.

In the case of the 387s to Didcot/Oxford, the compelling reason is serving the major employment sites north of Didcot that attract commuters and business travellers from across the Thames Valley. Tilehurst, Pangbourne, Goring and Cholsey to Oxford are obvious flows, but don't discount Culham, which is increasingly important. For the past 10 years, Oxfordshire's economic development has been oriented to the "Science Vale" which takes in Didcot, Culham and thereabouts.

In contrast, through travel from Banbury and the Cherwell Valley stations has always seemed pretty feeble. TBH outside peak times, even pre-pandemic, most Banbury stoppers could have coped with a 153 in my experience.

At which point you might as well do Coventry to Oxford as well; then the Manchester-Bournemouth could be entirely electric

Not really a "might as well", I'm afraid. Didcot-Oxford is 10 miles and much of the groundwork has been done. Oxford-Coventry is 52 miles and hasn't had a single spade in the ground. I'd like to see Coventry-Oxford electrified, but it's a different magnitude of project.

 

[Class360/1]

Snow hill lines would be in great need of electrification- commuter and regional express services use the lines

 

[Mikey C]

I don't get why an 8 car 387 going to Oxford, a major economic and tourist destination would be considered excessive anyway. After all nobody is suggesting that on the MML the Class 360s should be split at Kettering so that only 4 cars go to Corby

 

[HST43257]

Snow hill lines would be in great need of electrification- commuter and regional express services use the lines

Most certainly.

I don't get why an 8 car 387 going to Oxford, a major economic and tourist destination would be considered excessive anyway. After all nobody is suggesting that on the MML the Class 360s should be split at Kettering so that only 4 cars go to Corby

could you not just have a separate EMU service like the Newbury to Reading stopper

 

[Kieran1990]

Was anything announced in the budget today regarding a rolling programme wiring?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't get why an 8 car 387 going to Oxford, a major economic and tourist destination would be considered excessive anyway. After all nobody is suggesting that on the MML the Class 360s should be split at Kettering so that only 4 cars go to Corby

It wouldn't be excessive. It's no different than them going to Northampton - indeed, demand would likely be much greater.

 

[Alex27]

The Oxford - Didcot stopper can get pretty busy and a decent number of people get off a culham during the peak, so I think running 8 car 387s through to oxford wouldn't be a complete waste and most certainly easier than splitting at didcot. Although SDO would have to be used at Appleford, Culham and Radley.

I have also seen it suggested that didcot - oxford electrification should include hanborough (assuming the line was redoubled etc.) To allow the didcot - oxford stopper to continue to hanborough (when not going to banbury), as this is the closet station to Woodstock and witney. However this would probably overcomplicate matters, so I'll be more than happy with just didcot - oxford being electrified.