Could East-West Rail (EWR) be electrified?

[59CosG95]

STOP PRESS.

Who would like to help me complete the delivery of the £1.2bn East Coast Main Line Power Supply Upgrade, and start the journey on the £5bn East West Rail Project (where Jacobs are EWR Co’s Programme… | Tim Nichols CEng

Who would like to help me complete the delivery of the £1.2bn East Coast Main Line Power Supply Upgrade, and start the journey on the £5bn East West Rail Project (where Jacobs are EWR Co’s Programme Partner)? Due to a significant upturn in OLE work we are looking for OLE designers for these...

www.linkedin.com

Who would like to help me complete the delivery of the £1.2bn East Coast Main Line Power Supply Upgrade, and start the journey on the £5bn East West Rail Project (where Jacobs are EWR Co’s Programme Partner)?

Due to a significant upturn in OLE work we are looking for OLE designers for these, and many other projects. We have an enviable wide-ranging bank of secured work, including early GRIP2/3, New Electrification, Allocation Design, Switching Design, Bonding, Station and Bridge remodelling, and PM and CEM roles within our delivery partners - the full sweep of OLE design.

Jacobs (EWR's Programme Delivery partner) are seeking out OLE Design Engineers for East West Rail.
I think there's more detail to come in tomorrow's IRP announcement...

 

[Ianno87]

STOP PRESS.

Who would like to help me complete the delivery of the £1.2bn East Coast Main Line Power Supply Upgrade, and start the journey on the £5bn East West Rail Project (where Jacobs are EWR Co’s Programme… | Tim Nichols CEng

Who would like to help me complete the delivery of the £1.2bn East Coast Main Line Power Supply Upgrade, and start the journey on the £5bn East West Rail Project (where Jacobs are EWR Co’s Programme Partner)? Due to a significant upturn in OLE work we are looking for OLE designers for these...

www.linkedin.com

Jacobs (EWR's Programme Delivery partner) are seeking out OLE Design Engineers for East West Rail.
I think there's more detail to come in tomorrow's IRP announcement...

*Very* interesting!

 

[SouthEastBuses]

STOP PRESS.

Who would like to help me complete the delivery of the £1.2bn East Coast Main Line Power Supply Upgrade, and start the journey on the £5bn East West Rail Project (where Jacobs are EWR Co’s Programme… | Tim Nichols CEng

Who would like to help me complete the delivery of the £1.2bn East Coast Main Line Power Supply Upgrade, and start the journey on the £5bn East West Rail Project (where Jacobs are EWR Co’s Programme Partner)? Due to a significant upturn in OLE work we are looking for OLE designers for these...

www.linkedin.com

Jacobs (EWR's Programme Delivery partner) are seeking out OLE Design Engineers for East West Rail.
I think there's more detail to come in tomorrow's IRP announcement...

So does this mean that electrification is EWR is now back on track?

This is fantastic. But to make it fully effective, the gap between Didcot and Oxford needs to be filled first

 

[snowball]

So does this mean that electrification is EWR is now back on track?

This is fantastic. But to make it fully effective, the gap between Didcot and Oxford needs to be filled first

Perhaps not first. The most important thing if possible is to do Bicester to Bletchley before it opens.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

Perhaps not first. The most important thing if possible is to do Bicester to Bletchley before it opens.

Why in your opinion?

If you do Didcot-Oxford first then you allow a fully electric service between destinations on the GWML and destinations on the EWR.

 

[snowball]

Because

Why in your opinion?

If you do Didcot-Oxford first then you allow a fully electric service between destinations on the GWML and destinations on the EWR.

Because it's always far easier and cheaper to electrify a line that is not in use than one that is in use. If you've got a limited window to do it before it's in traffic, use it.

 

[59CosG95]

Because

Because it's always far easier and cheaper to electrify a line that is not in use than one that is in use. If you've got a limited window to do it before it's in traffic, use it.

Plus - you never know, Didcot - Oxford may be announced soon too...

 

[Mikey C]

Because

Because it's always far easier and cheaper to electrify a line that is not in use than one that is in use. If you've got a limited window to do it before it's in traffic, use it.

Probably too late to do Bicester to Bletchley before it opens now

 

[Ianno87]

Probably too late to do Bicester to Bletchley before it opens now

Yep - the existing contractors will have a delivery programme that will cost money** if you start messing around with it. You'd have to finish the existing construction, then electrify, then open. Which would probably delay getting the whole thing into service.

**Unless there is some sort of clause in it to 'make way' for electrification teams to come along.

 

[bspahh]

Yep - the existing contractors will have a delivery programme that will cost money** if you start messing around with it. You'd have to finish the existing construction, then electrify, then open. Which would probably delay getting the whole thing into service.

**Unless there is some sort of clause in it to 'make way' for electrification teams to come along.

Even if the railway gets built first, and then it gets electrified, it would be cheaper to do it before the line gets opened, so they don't have work around a running railway.

 

[Ianno87]

Even if the railway gets built first, and then it gets electrified, it would be cheaper to do it before the line gets opened, so they don't have work around a running railway.

Though on the flipside you lose the passenger benefits over the extended period of time before you can get it open. Open as diesel then progressively electrify might cost more, but you get the benefits release of the new railway sooner.

If EWR have been clever, the actual electrification could be relatively undisruptive if bridges etc are already built with the right clearances - would be "just" a case of turning up at night and driving piles etc.

 

[InTheEastMids]

Looks very promising, is this consistent with the earlier EWR rolling stock tender activity where it suggested they were looking for DMUs for about 4 years? Or did that get binned off in favour of borrowing WMR 196s?

 

[swt_passenger]

Though on the flipside you lose the passenger benefits over the extended period of time before you can get it open. Open as diesel then progressively electrify might cost more, but you get the benefits release of the new railway sooner.

If EWR have been clever, the actual electrification could be relatively undisruptive if bridges etc are already built with the right clearances - would be "just" a case of turning up at night and driving piles etc.

Reconstructed bridges are electrification ready according to the TWA drawings. But not all the bridges are being reconstructed.

 

[Ianno87]

Reconstructed bridges are electrification ready according to the TWA drawings. But not all the bridges are being reconstructed.

Aha - so you'd have to reconstruct the bridges you didn't need to reconstruct the first time around.

 

[47421]

Aha - so you'd have to reconstruct the bridges you didn't need to reconstruct the first time around.

yes pretty sure Roger Ford extracted from DfT a few years ago that E-W was being built with partial passive provision for electrification only

 

[swt_passenger]

Aha - so you'd have to reconstruct the bridges you didn't need to reconstruct the first time around.

Yes, I had a very quick look and it could be a significant extra cost. I think maybe around 30-40% of the original overbridges are only due to get minor alterations and repairs.

 

[dgl]

Also I would assume if it was electrified before opening then it means you will probably have a good choice of EMU's that are sitting idle that could do with a home, whereas you might have to go for new stock if diesel power is the only option. Plus it adds an extra selling point to potential passengers (and I suppose people who live near the line) who would probably prefer a quieter and less polluting EMU.

 

[The Planner]

So unless they have sorted it in the background, the elephant in this room is the feeder? You aren't running it as an extension off the WCML so is the original plan "oven ready"?

 

[MarkyT]

So unless they have sorted it in the background, the elephant in this room is the feeder? You aren't running it as an extension off the WCML so is the original plan "oven ready"?

Where was the original site planned for this Grid feeder? Would the supply at the GW end be sufficient for EWR traffic, once Oxford is wired, or could it be augmented sufficiently? Alternatively, if EWR was to share a new feeder with HS2, could that be brought forward, opening intially for EWR?

 

[59CosG95]

Where was the original site planned for this Grid feeder? Would the supply at the GW end be sufficient for EWR traffic, once Oxford is wired, or could it be augmented sufficiently? Alternatively, if EWR was to share a new feeder with HS2, could that be brought forward, opening intially for EWR?

AIUI, the GWML site at Didcot (ATFS) is the main provider at the Oxford end; there's no OHNS northward so far.
Ledburn Jn (Leighton Buzzard area) ATFS provides the WCML, so I'd expect at least one neutral section overall.
Mind you, Calvert (HS2) also has an ATFS not too far from the intersection between EWR & HS2, so perhaps that could be used. (Then again, East Claydon Substation, south of Winslow, would probably be easiest. A new FS (AT or otherwise) could be established at Verney Jn.)

Looking at it from a 'NR Route' perspective, the "Western" route is fed by Didcot, the "Central" route from Calvert, and the "West Coast South" route from Ledburn. Extending to Bedford would draw power from Chalton ATFS (nr Sundon & M1 Toddington Services). All of these are 400kV National Grid connections, rated (IIRC) at 80MVA.

 

[Cantab26]

I would caution against getting too excited about this announcement for now.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

@59CosG95 I know it's the usual question (my favourite) but will EWR, if it does get electrified, use Siemens Sicat, Bonomi Omnia, Alstom Clever or Furrer Frey Series 1?

I think Sicat should be the standard for any new electrification project, including EWR. Mast distance increased to 100m so think about how much money you're saying as you don't need to plant much masts as you used to do in the past.

 

[mr_jrt]

I have a sad suspicion that the job posting will be for work on Bedford to Cambridge, and possibly planning the design work for the rest.

 

[hwl]

So unless they have sorted it in the background, the elephant in this room is the feeder? You aren't running it as an extension off the WCML so is the original plan "oven ready"?

AIUI, the GWML site at Didcot (ATFS) is the main provider at the Oxford end; there's no OHNS northward so far.
Ledburn Jn (Leighton Buzzard area) ATFS provides the WCML, so I'd expect at least one neutral section overall.
Mind you, Calvert (HS2) also has an ATFS not too far from the intersection between EWR & HS2, so perhaps that could be used. (Then again, East Claydon Substation, south of Winslow, would probably be easiest. A new FS (AT or otherwise) could be established at Verney Jn.)

Looking at it from a 'NR Route' perspective, the "Western" route is fed by Didcot, the "Central" route from Calvert, and the "West Coast South" route from Ledburn. Extending to Bedford would draw power from Chalton ATFS (nr Sundon & M1 Toddington Services). All of these are 400kV National Grid connections, rated (IIRC) at 80MVA.

There happens to be a Nat Grid feeder ("East Claydon") is helpfully located adjacent to the former Met. Granborough Road station that will feed HS2 and has spare capacity after that. Just 3/4 of mile along the old railway alignment to the former Verney Jn if you were looking to feed EWR...
(The HS2 feed is along the other direction of the former Met line alignment towards Quainton then straight lining the last bit to HS2)

400 kV substation at Cowley and the 400kV line runs along side the railway in Kennington - Hinksey and goes into tunneled cables next to Hinksey Yard (with isolators...)
132 kV substation at Yarnton Just North of Wolvercote Jn which is why there is interest in electrifying to Hanborough as it provides the feed and electrifies

 

[59CosG95]

@59CosG95 I know it's the usual question (my favourite) but will EWR, if it does get electrified, use Siemens Sicat, Bonomi Omnia, Alstom Clever or Furrer Frey Series 1?

I think Sicat should be the standard for any new electrification project, including EWR. Mast distance increased to 100m so think about how much money you're saying as you don't need to plant much masts as you used to do in the past.

Assuming it does, I think it'll be different equipment between "the routes", with "Western" opting to use Series 1. "Central" might well choose Sicat. Unfortunately, no design range in the UK has structure spacings of 100m - Sicat SX (used on the continent) I believe has only been modelled for it. Personally, I think if they do use Sicat, it'll be the SA range (already in UKMS). Plus, because SA's rated for 230 km/h, it's suitable for UKMS140 (225km/h), so it's unlikely that the innovations of SX will be ported to NR's range any time soon.

 

[ac6000cw]

I think (in relation to EWR) people are reading far too much into what is a just a job advert - which is inevitably trying to make the job sound as attractive and secure as possible.

Even just to make sensible 'passive provision' I suspect you need the involvement of OLE design engineers at some point.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

There happens to be a Nat Grid feeder ("East Claydon") is helpfully located adjacent to the former Met. Granborough Road station that will feed HS2 and has spare capacity after that. Just 3/4 of mile along the old railway alignment to the former Verney Jn if you were looking to feed EWR...
(The HS2 feed is along the other direction of the former Met line alignment towards Quainton then straight lining the last bit to HS2)

400 kV substation at Cowley and the 400kV line runs along side the railway in Kennington - Hinksey and goes into tunneled cables next to Hinksey Yard (with isolators...)
132 kV substation at Yarnton Just North of Wolvercote Jn which is why there is interest in electrifying to Hanborough as it provides the feed and electrifies

Off topic I know but with that 132 KV substation in Yarnton, doesn't it make more sense to electrify to Banbury or even try to reach as far as Coventry, so you get introduce dual voltage EMUs on XC Manchester-Bournemouth. Plus the Cherwell Valley Line carries far more traffic than the Cotswold Line?

I think (in relation to EWR) people are reading far too much into what is a just a job advert - which is inevitably trying to make the job sound as attractive and secure as possible.

Even just to make sensible 'passive provision' I suspect you need the involvement of OLE design engineers at some point.

Still don't rule out electrification. Maybe not when it immediately opens but over the next years. I can think of other new railway lines in the UK that were temporarily run with DMUs before electrification - an example is the Edinburgh to Bathgate Line, initially opened in 2004 (?) With 156/158/170 DMUs, then electrified in 2010 and extended to Drumgelloch as a result of the Airdrie, and now run with 334 EMUs.

I guess the same could happen with EWR. Initially, as a temporary measure beginning with 165s, 168s and 170s, then with EMUs with who knows what (could be GWR 387s, could be LNWR 350s or 730s).

 

[hwl]

Off topic I know but with that 132 KV substation in Yarnton, doesn't it make more sense to electrify to Banbury or even try to reach as far as Coventry, so you get introduce dual voltage EMUs on XC Manchester-Bournemouth. Plus the Cherwell Valley Line carries far more traffic than the Cotswold Line?

You going to need another feed further north any way. A key performance issue on the corridor is the DMU stopping service from Didcot - Oxford, extending to Hanborough to reverse there (timings work well) and electrifying it solve some of the Oxford area performance issues, hence the benefit (outside of EWR) of electrifying Didcot - Hanborough

 

[59CosG95]

You going to need another feed further north any way. A key performance issue on the corridor is the DMU stopping service from Didcot - Oxford, extending to Hanborough to reverse there (timings work well) and electrifying it solve some of the Oxford area performance issues, hence the benefit (outside of EWR) of electrifying Didcot - Hanborough

That 132kV sub in Yarnton's only planned, isn't it? Nothing on Google Maps shows it yet.

 

[hwl]

That 132kV sub in Yarnton's only planned, isn't it? Nothing on Google Maps shows it yet.

Have a look at the industrial estate next to the "Banbury" line next to the A44 Woodstock Road bridge