Would we need a GWML high speed line?

[Wychwood93]

I think the passengers would feel like electrification is worth it. Plus, if it gets all the way to Cardiff, it might help Westminster look like they actually care about the union, or at least the union between England and Wales.

The fact that there are the 'dangly wires' to Cardiff instead of Bristol TM indicates an element of care/politics. I would suggest that all of us on here would have had the wires done to both in the first place. However.........

 

[zwk500]

The fact that there are the 'dangly wires' to Cardiff instead of Bristol TM indicates an element of care/politics. I would suggest that all of us on here would have had the wires done to both in the first place. However.........

It's partly engineering - Cardiff was ready for the wires and Bristol TM wasn't.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

It's partly engineering - Cardiff was ready for the wires and Bristol TM wasn't.

Partly true - (as there was a bit of work needed to get down the hill from Parkway to Temple Meads and so on) , but a very simple scheme to extend via Bath could have been done , if the budget for wiring , including elsewhere like the MML had not been destroyed.

(I will say it now , and then shut up - I am still just a bit p===ed off the wires have not yet got to Swansea. I offered the first round in a pub when they do. Maybe I should put it my will , and send the cremation urn down on the first train that properly gets to West Wales under electric power)

 

[zwk500]

Partly true - (as there was a bit of work needed to get down the hill from Parkway to Temple Meads and so on) , but a very simple scheme to extend via Bath could have been done , if the budget for wiring , including elsewhere like the MML had not been destroyed.

With bi-modes they certainly could have got the wires through bath to just outside Bristol East Depot.

(I will say it now , and then shut up - I am still just a bit p===ed off the wires have not yet got to Swansea. I offered the first round in a pub when they do. Maybe I should put it my will , and send the cremation urn down on the first train that properly gets to West Wales under electric power)

Yes wires not going to Swansea was maddening, especially as the masts (but not the wires?) had been put in at Landore depot...

 

[Benjwri]

Partly true - (as there was a bit of work needed to get down the hill from Parkway to Temple Meads and so on)

There also isn't a particularly strong use case for Parkway to Bristol TM. Wouldn't eliminate any Diesel/Bi Mode trains, whereas with to Cardiff some services were able to be replaces with 387s.

With bi-modes they certainly could have got the wires through bath to just outside Bristol East Depot.

Bath is a tricky one though, I've discussed it a couple of times before on the forum. Going through the city was always a very contentious point, and a design of the masts was never agreed totally, however whatever it ended up being would be significant more expensive than the normal GWML electrification. A pivotal point of the agreement was also that Bath would stand in the way of full electric trains, as the 801s were still on order. With Bi Modes here it would have to be proven that the electrification would have to mean electric only trains were run through the city.

I also believe the demand if a future proposal was put forward is a large amount of the local fleet would have to be Bi-Mode, as it was fairly rightly pointed out the pollution benefits of the scheme, and therefore only real benefits to the city, would be negligible from just the relatively clean 80Xs running electric.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

With bi-modes they certainly could have got the wires through bath to just outside Bristol East Depot.

Yes wires not going to Swansea was maddening, especially as the masts (but not the wires?) had been put in at Landore depot...

With bi-modes they certainly could have got the wires through bath to just outside Bristol East Depot.

Yes wires not going to Swansea was maddening, especially as the masts (but not the wires?) had been put in at Landore depot...

Yes - quite right - (re Bristol) , one of my many interventions was stopping the sale of what is now Maliphant Sidings at Swansea for some typical South Wales road scheme , (the sidings were unused at the time) - which were then wired for the 800's for servicing and so on) - so there is a spark (pun) of electrification west of Swansea.

Ah well - as they say in West Wales - "we just have to live with it" .......rant over.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Jan 2023 ==

There also isn't a particularly strong use case for Parkway to Bristol TM. Wouldn't eliminate any Diesel/Bi Mode trains, whereas with to Cardiff some services were able to be replaces with 387s.

Bath is a tricky one though, I've discussed it a couple of times before on the forum. Going through the city was always a very contentious point, and a design of the masts was never agreed totally, however whatever it ended up being would be significant more expensive than the normal GWML electrification. A pivotal point of the agreement was also that Bath would stand in the way of full electric trains, as the 801s were still on order. With Bi Modes here it would have to be proven that the electrification would have to mean electric only trains were run through the city.

I also believe the demand if a future proposal was put forward is a large amount of the local fleet would have to be Bi-Mode, as it was fairly rightly pointed out the pollution benefits of the scheme, and therefore only real benefits to the city, would be negligible from just the relatively clean 80Xs running electric.

Well - I understand the sensitivity - however Don Heath as Project Director for ECML got wiring through sensitive places like York , Newcastle , Durham , the Royal Border Bridge etc........

 

[Benjwri]

Well - I understand the sensitivity - however Don Heath as Project Director for ECML got wiring through sensitive places like York , Newcastle , Durham , the Royal Border Bridge etc........

Yeah, Bath is a bit of a special case obviously, with the whole city covered by World Heritage Status, and UNESCO have made multiple threats to remove that status in recent years over new developments, so the council is a lot more sensitive to anything that could possibly threaten that.

As I understand it the council just want to see proof that there would be a noticeable benefit to Bath from the wiring, and to be honest I agree with them. Wiring through Bath is an eyesore, the railway runs above the city and any wiring, even sensitively done, will threaten that. I used to live further East and watched the eyesore bombproof GWML wiring significant alter the Thames Valley. As it stands wiring alone will just shave a minute or two off the journey times from London to Bristol, if that because even as it is the IETs have a tendency to catch up to the preceding local service by Bathampton Junction. To allow it they would want either:

A commitment to improve services through Bath, through delivery of MetroWest and provision of enough Bi-Mode units. As it stands the local service in Bath is a joke, the stoppers are overcrowded, infrequent and short formed, the IETs save the service to Bristol, but if there's a problem in London they can disappear. Bi modes are wanted because otherwise the benefit of electrification is even more minimal, the 166s and 158s create the majority of pollution from trains, and would otherwise still run on Diesel under the wires. Investment in the West has been very minimal, and the attitude has always been we get the leftovers from London, without improved local services this would further that, basically just decreasing journey times for those on long distance trains from London

I also understand they wouldn't stand in the way of it if the majority of the trains to run through Bath after were electric only (i.e. majority corverted 80X's or 387s, not just 1 387 a day like Cardiff.)

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Yeah, Bath is a bit of a special case obviously, with the whole city covered by World Heritage Status, and UNESCO have made multiple threats to remove that status in recent years over new developments, so the council is a lot more sensitive to anything that could possibly threaten that.

As I understand it the council just want to see proof that there would be a noticeable benefit to Bath from the wiring, and to be honest I agree with them. Wiring through Bath is an eyesore, the railway runs above the city and any wiring, even sensitively done, will threaten that. I used to live further East and watched the eyesore bombproof GWML wiring significant alter the Thames Valley. As it stands wiring alone will just shave a minute or two off the journey times from London to Bristol, if that because even as it is the IETs have a tendency to catch up to the preceding local service by Bathampton Junction. To allow it they would want either:

A commitment to improve services through Bath, through delivery of MetroWest and provision of enough Bi-Mode units. As it stands the local service in Bath is a joke, the stoppers are overcrowded, infrequent and short formed, the IETs save the service to Bristol, but if there's a problem in London they can disappear. Bi modes are wanted because otherwise the benefit of electrification is even more minimal, the 166s and 158s create the majority of pollution from trains, and would otherwise still run on Diesel under the wires. Investment in the West has been very minimal, and the attitude has always been we get the leftovers from London, without improved local services this would further that, basically just decreasing journey times for those on long distance trains from London

I also understand they wouldn't stand in the way of it if the majority of the trains to run through Bath after were electric only (i.e. majority corverted 80X's or 387s, not just 1 387 a day like Cardiff.)

Yes - I fully understand the issues on "visual environment" etc , but in a medium / longer term a 387 resourced semi-fast service from say Swindon to Cardiff via Bath or whatever would materially improve the local / regional services. We can but dream.........

 

[mangyiscute]

And they still haven't done (or even planned) the short task of Didcot to Oxford which would provide even better use for the 387s than cardiff

 

[ChiefPlanner]

And they still haven't done (or even planned) the short task of Didcot to Oxford which would provide even better use for the 387s than cardiff

Depends on the Oxford remodelling - but very much a JFDI .....

 

[mangyiscute]

Depends on the Oxford remodelling - but very much a JFDI .....

It's almost like the Oxford remodelling (which will almost certainly shut the line for periods) is the perfect time to do the wires

 

[zwk500]

Depends on the Oxford remodelling - but very much a JFDI .....

As ever, somebody has to sign the cheque. I strongly suspect a very large number of projects will be kicked to the right in the hope inflation will fall again soon.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Jan 2023 ==

It's almost like the Oxford remodelling (which will almost certainly shut the line for periods) is the perfect time to do the wires

There's only so many people you can have working on a site at one time, and a limit to how long you can shut the line. It may have been possible to plan OLE into the scheme, but adding it on later will be very difficult. As long as the design is OLE-Ready though that will solve many challenges.

 

[Benjwri]

but in a medium / longer term a 387 resourced semi-fast service from say Swindon to Cardiff via Bath or whatever would materially improve the local / regional services. We can but dream........

I think the want, which was promised with MetroWest, but is yet to appear, is to uplift the frequency for the stoppers, and those that go through Westbury, as the line between Bath and Westbury is a significant source of tourists for Bath. In the summer trains are full and standing towards Bath from Bradford Upon Avon. Therefore unless there are plan to electrify that section bi-mode would be needed.

 

[Bald Rick]

I will say it now , and then shut up - I am still just a bit p===ed off the wires have not yet got to Swansea. I offered the first round in a pub when they do. Maybe I should put it my will , and send the cremation urn down on the first train that properly gets to West Wales under electric power)

I interviewed someone once, who when asked ‘give an example of a time you overcame many challenges to deliver a successful outcome’ question (or similar wording), gave the example that he wrote the paper that went to Grayling, and personally championed, the cancellation of Cardiff Swansea wiring. He didn’t get the job!

 

[zwk500]

I interviewed someone once, who when asked ‘give an example of a time you overcame many challenges to deliver a successful outcome’ question (or similar wording), gave the example that he wrote the paper that went to Grayling, and personally championed, the cancellation of Cardiff Swansea wiring. He didn’t get the job!

A bold strategy, assuming he was going for a job in NR!

 

[Mikey C]

Yeah, Bath is a bit of a special case obviously, with the whole city covered by World Heritage Status, and UNESCO have made multiple threats to remove that status in recent years over new developments, so the council is a lot more sensitive to anything that could possibly threaten that.

As I understand it the council just want to see proof that there would be a noticeable benefit to Bath from the wiring, and to be honest I agree with them. Wiring through Bath is an eyesore, the railway runs above the city and any wiring, even sensitively done, will threaten that. I used to live further East and watched the eyesore bombproof GWML wiring significant alter the Thames Valley. As it stands wiring alone will just shave a minute or two off the journey times from London to Bristol, if that because even as it is the IETs have a tendency to catch up to the preceding local service by Bathampton Junction. To allow it they would want either:

A commitment to improve services through Bath, through delivery of MetroWest and provision of enough Bi-Mode units. As it stands the local service in Bath is a joke, the stoppers are overcrowded, infrequent and short formed, the IETs save the service to Bristol, but if there's a problem in London they can disappear. Bi modes are wanted because otherwise the benefit of electrification is even more minimal, the 166s and 158s create the majority of pollution from trains, and would otherwise still run on Diesel under the wires. Investment in the West has been very minimal, and the attitude has always been we get the leftovers from London, without improved local services this would further that, basically just decreasing journey times for those on long distance trains from London

I also understand they wouldn't stand in the way of it if the majority of the trains to run through Bath after were electric only (i.e. majority corverted 80X's or 387s, not just 1 387 a day like Cardiff.)

All across Europe there are beautiful historic cities and towns with OHLE railways running through them. At some point it will surely have to be done, unless they end up with battery bimodes just so that they run through Bath?

 

[Benjwri]

All across Europe there are beautiful historic cities and towns with OHLE railways running through them. At some point it will surely have to be done, unless they end up with battery bimodes just so that they run through Bath?

As I continued to say in my post, it’s not a ‘no wires ever’ situation, it’s a no wires when you’re running bi modes through Bath anyways, and they don’t bring any actual benefit to the city, except years of disruption and an eyesore.

 

[zwk500]

As I continued to say in my post, it’s not a ‘no wires ever’ situation, it’s a no wires when you’re running bi modes through Bath anyways, and they don’t bring any actual benefit to the city, except years of disruption and an eyesore.

They bring the immediate benefit of Switching the diesel engines of the Bi-Modes off, reducing particulate emissions and noise in the city centre.

 

[Benjwri]

They bring the immediate benefit of Switching the diesel engines of the Bi-Modes off, reducing particulate emissions and noise in the city centre.

And the city councils point is the benefit of this on the Class 800s, which are comparatively quiet and lower emissions, does not outweigh the disadvantages when the far noisier and more polluting Class 166s and 158s are still running, and doing more stops.

 

[zwk500]

And the city councils point is the benefit of this on the Class 800s, which are comparatively quiet and lower emissions, does not outweigh the disadvantages when the far noisier and more polluting Class 166s and 158s are still running, and doing more stops.

You've got to start somewhere or it's a case of 'After you, sir' that ends up with nothing happening. The Wessex line isn't getting electrified any time soon so you'll need bi-modes, which means wiring routes currently worked by bi-modes to allow EMUs to start the cascade. Also the acceleration benefits of electrics may make a Swindon-Bath-Bristol local stopper with a 378 possible. Maybe.

 

[stuu]

And the city councils point is the benefit of this on the Class 800s, which are comparatively quiet and lower emissions, does not outweigh the disadvantages when the far noisier and more polluting Class 166s and 158s are still running, and doing more stops.

This would be the same city council that built the beautiful multi storey car park on the opposite side of the river to the station? Pots and kettles spring to mind

 

[Benjwri]

You've got to start somewhere or it's a case of 'After you, sir' that ends up with nothing happening. The Wessex line isn't getting electrified any time soon so you'll need bi-modes, which means wiring routes currently worked by bi-modes to allow EMUs to start the cascade. Also the acceleration benefits of electrics may make a Swindon-Bath-Bristol local stopper with a 378 possible. Maybe.

As I say this is just the view of the city council, they see it as a way to force an improvement in the cities rail service. They mentioned sports would be nice, but from what I hear the council wants improvements from towards Westbury, because of the mentioned tourist flow from people staying in ’picturesque locations’ outside of Bath. Currently the train services are seen as limiting that flow.
The acceleration benefits are minimal anyways because even as it is fast services often get stuck behind stoppers, but aren’t needed for more local services. They stopping factor behind the promised 30 minute frequency for Oldfield and Keynsham is the lack of units.

This would be the same city council that built the beautiful multi storey car park on the opposite side of the river to the station? Pots and kettles spring to mind

I am 100% sure there has never been a multi storey car park south of the river. There was one on the same side as the station but further down, however this was demolished half a year ago.

 

[mangyiscute]

Is there even that much need for a local stopper for Swindon to either Bristol or Cardiff - if we can maintain a 9/10 car half hourly intercity service is that not enough, and there's no way you'd be able to replace any of these services with a service that terminates in Swindon without severe complaints

 

[stuu]

I am 100% sure there has never been a multi storey car park south of the river. There was one on the same side as the station but further down, however this was demolished half a year ago.

Sorry you're right, I meant railway not station, the Avon St monstrosity, but if that has gone already then that's an improvement.

There are plenty of world heritage sites with electrified railways though, it can be done sensitively so it really shouldn't be a big deal. Especially with the clean air zone in place

 

[Annetts key]

I’m wondering if this is just another way of trying to get a new line past that bit of pesky coast at Dawlish that allows the sea to get the existing railway a bit too damp during winter storms…

Also, gert long lengths of the (existing) main lines were the Victorian equivalent to high speed lines. Such as the South Wales main line between Swindon and Stoke Gifford.

6 tracks Paddington - Airport junction. Upgrade Wootton Bassett & Didcot East junctions. Possibly 250km/h Airport junction to Bristol Parkway. Upgrade & electrify Berks & Hants, Cherwell Valley, Cotswold and South Wales lines with higher speeds and straighter track. New 125mph cross-country line to enable fast Cardiff/Bristol to Southampton/Portsmouth services. New 125mph Exeter - Penzance line. All electric of course.

Surely we need twelve lines between Pad and Airport junction in case there are OHL failures!

I think much better use could be made of any loose change that is knocking about rather than trying to build a new high speed line to the south west.

There are many places where the existing lines could be improved to allow higher speed running. There are sections which are straighter than current 125mph lines, but which have line speed between 90mph and 110mph. And there are junctions and layouts that limit the speed of trains compared to what is now possible.

If money was available, the first thing I would want to do, would be to build a new junction nearer Bristol Parkway and then a line to join to the line to Gloucester. Hence removing the need for long distance trains to use the painfully slow curve at Westerleigh junction/Yate.

I suspect adding a extra line along the existing route would be the more practical solution if we are taking about needing more capacity. In many places the existing line has space one side or the other because there were sidings that have long since gone, or it’s just countryside / farm land. Yes, lots of bridges would need alterations or to get replaced.

 

[Benjwri]

Sorry you're right, I meant railway not station, the Avon St monstrosity, but if that has gone already then that's an improvement.

Yeah the car park was torn down last summer, and although it remains a car park for now it is planned to be turned into offices, shops and a hotel.

There are plenty of world heritage sites with electrified railways though, it can be done sensitively so it really shouldn't be a big deal. Especially with the clean air zone in place

Yeah I agree, but I think the council basically want to see if they would be. able to strong arm the government into investment in the railways around Bath and Bristol, with to be honest is horrifically underinvested when you take into account both the size of the local economy and population, compared to other cities.

 

[zwk500]

There are plenty of world heritage sites with electrified railways though, it can be done sensitively so it really shouldn't be a big deal. Especially with the clean air zone in place

Are there any UNSCO sites with railways of any kind within the actual enscribed area though? AFAICT Bath is rare or unique in having the entire city enscribed, whereas most other site are specific parts of the old city (or whatever).

 

[Sad Sprinter]

I interviewed someone once, who when asked ‘give an example of a time you overcame many challenges to deliver a successful outcome’ question (or similar wording), gave the example that he wrote the paper that went to Grayling, and personally championed, the cancellation of Cardiff Swansea wiring. He didn’t get the job!

Thanks, now I have to get a new laptop, and a new window...

 

[stuu]

Are there any UNSCO sites with railways of any kind within the actual enscribed area though? AFAICT Bath is rare or unique in having the entire city enscribed, whereas most other site are specific parts of the old city (or whatever).

Venice and the Cinque Terre in Italy both do (as does the Forth Bridge, but that's cheating)

 

[Mikey C]

Sorry you're right, I meant railway not station, the Avon St monstrosity, but if that has gone already then that's an improvement.

There are plenty of world heritage sites with electrified railways though, it can be done sensitively so it really shouldn't be a big deal. Especially with the clean air zone in place

It would be frankly bizarre for Bath to have a clean air zone - one which the railway goes through - and not want diesels removed from the railway.

And while UNESCO can be ridiculous, surely they'd accept the "green" necessity of electrifying the line, which in its own small way will reduce global warming and the rising sea levels which will no doubt badly impact many UNESCO heritage sites by the coast!