Agreed but what would you do first. MML gets done to just north of Sheffield as currently planned.
Sheffield to Doncaster is the obvious first extension. Followed by Sheffield to Nottingham, then to Leeds and only last to York.
I tend to agree. If planning is done well (I can hope!) then a nice full length wire run would be done at each junction to make subsequent electrification easier. A bit like Fylde Junction being done in 1973 to make Preston-Blackpool easier later.
My order would be with first at the top:
But assuming the other routes are done Sheffield to York would actually only be Moorthorpe to Church Fenton. May be useful for freight - particularly if the Erewash is also done.
That was my thought pattern too. Assuming Nottingham to Sheffield is done, then Sheffield to Doncaster first, followed by Sheffield to Leeds (again parts would be done already) then Moorthorpe to Church Fenton - it is the absolute beauty of a rolling programme - each bit gets easier and shorter.
Wouldn't really reduce any carbon though, operating a new service.
Could a class 88 do that run? The un-electrified part from Gateway to Stanford-le-hope must be very flat, so would a 940hp diesel be enough?
Although putting a container on a flat wagon under an electrified wire doesn't always work very well, so you either need expensive moveable OLE or a diesel/battery shunter on site to use 90s (88s of course would be fine shunting the trains on their own).
Put the yard on a slope, let the train roll and have blokes legging it along applying the brakes.
Dowty retarders would be better!Put the yard on a slope, let the train roll and have blokes legging it along applying the brakes.
Worked on the old hump shunt yards - what could possibly go wrong?
Still got to get the train out again! (Yes you can just wire the ends like Willesden SW Sidings and Trafford Park Had/Have). You also need a fair bit more space for a hump yard.Put the yard on a slope, let the train roll and have blokes legging it along applying the brakes.
Worked on the old hump shunt yards - what could possibly go wrong?
Nah…the sidings go uphill. Push the train in and let it roll out agai……
Yeah can't see the ORR/RSSB having any problems with that
Would make Container loading more fun though if you've got to time it right on a train impersonating a Pirate Ship fairground ride.Not sure I quite understand the question, but if you are running around first you will either need the loop available, or 2 wired reception roads and then a long headshunt. Reach wagons in the Cripple siding would somewhat negate the point of a cripple siding, as well as being a maintenance liability.
Or a looped headshunt if you can’t run round on the mainline.Yeah can't see the ORR/RSSB having any problems with that
Not sure I quite understand the question, but if you are running around first you will either need the loop available, or 2 wired reception roads and then a long headshunt. Reach wagons in the Cripple siding would somewhat negate the point of a cripple siding, as well as being a maintenance liability.
The land take for this is getting slightly silly.
For a single loading road, moveable catenary is one potential answer. It may even be viable to have Twin-Track cantilever swingable Overhead power so that Reach Stackers could be used (they can span to a second track). However yes for gantry cranes it's unlikely to be feasible without shunters or some element of complicated operations.
Healey Mills Yard in the 1970s?
Only wire the entrance/exit to the freight yard, and have the locos shunt there.
So what happens with the wagons on arrival?
battery tugs of some sort ( they don't even have to be railed if it's an apron with embedded sidings ) seem the sensible route for shunting either way.
This. Use a class 88 or Class 93 and you only benefit from electrification where linespeeds are over 10-15mph. The diesel has quite enough to power to shunt trains of any weight at low speeds in flat freight yards and docksides.
Clayton Battery Electric shunters?I think the idea is to wire the head end of sidings only, which is ok until it isn't
The diesel/battery curve for the class 93 is, I assume, for the locomotive running with both its 900kW diesel supplemented by the 400kW battery pack. I doubt if the 93s battery would give many minutes of shunting if it were working on its own. I think the 93's battery will only last long enough to accelerate a heavy loaded train to line speed, in conjunction with the diesel. Or maybe twice that. The battery is, I believe, big enough to absorb the whole kinetic energy of a heavy train at linespeed without using friction brakes.