Future of the GWR electrification

[GraphitProjekt]

Why would you want to spend more money on an unsustainable battery rather than some great OHLE trains? I don’t see the point of that when you can just put up some masts and get the job done with a better, more reliable and cheaper service. Some of the crossovers on the GWML are quite maddening but they did it in the end.

Yeah i think the proliferation of discontinuous electrification is a bad thing and particularly silly when it's purely motivated by aesthetic desires. Normally it comes about when a minister decides rebuilding a low structure is of "eye-watering" costs.

There's this idea that you can simply run things off batteries like it's a no-brainer - when actually this has huge consequences for whole life costs, complexity of operations and maintenance, energy inefficiency and increased fault modes etc. Also you significantly harm the ability for freight services to be electrified.

I, for one, don't mind the appearance of OLE - it conveys functionality, competence and a serious commitment to the future of the railway. I get that you might not want to live in a building like that - but those are good things for a railway to be.

Also consider the 99% of passengers here. The vast, vast majority who quite literally don't care. When you talk to someone not interested at all in trains, they don't even know what electrification is and barely notice it. Frankly, the railway is for them - because they are everyone. Once on twitter, i saw someone reacting to a picture of a diesel railway saying "is that railway even open? Where's the wires!" - they were probably from london but they're right - a modern railway is an electric one

Where is the sense in reducing the overall efficiency the railway system (with negligable money saved) purely for the aesthetic concerns of very small number hobbyists compared to the thousands who use Bath's, Oxford's or Bristol's railway every year?

 

[345 050]

There's quite a bit of headspan between Paddington and Hayes and Harlington. I thought this had to be upgraded to allow the new IETs to run at full speed? Is this on Network Rail's to do list?

 

[Energy]

There's quite a bit of headspan between Paddington and Hayes and Harlington. I thought this had to be upgraded to allow the new IETs to run at full speed? Is this on Network Rail's to do list?

The headspans are from the BR installation for Heathrow Express. IIRC the headspan -> portal conversion on the GWML is only where IETs run 125mph.

 

[MarkyT]

The headspans are from the BR installation for Heathrow Express. IIRC the headspan -> portal conversion on the GWML is only where IETs run 125mph.

Furrer+Frey seem to be pitching for it to be carried out more widely to help tackle unreliability on the Elizabeth Line. Here's a video showing the process.

 

[HSTEd]

I still think the Mendip quarries should be a priority to get a lot of heavy freight going into urban areas onto electric, and make them faster so they get in the way less on the congested GWML.
I assume the Mendip quarries will be going plenty long enough to make it worthwhile?

The traction electricity price isn't that far below the price the rail operators pay for diesel though, so there is not a strong driver on that score.

And you run into all the standard problems with the destination and source points not being electrified.
It's not like we are operating from a couple of coal mines to a couple of power stations or anything, there are a lot of varied start and end points and the freight operators aren't going to want extensive shunting operations.

 

[stuu]

The headspans are from the BR installation for Heathrow Express. IIRC the headspan -> portal conversion on the GWML is only where IETs run 125mph.

No, there are still lots of headspans west of Ealing, where it is 125mph

 

[345 050]

No, there are still lots of headspans west of Ealing, where it is 125mph

Yes, this is what I mean. I believe there is some remaining Headspan where line speed is 125. Is there such a thing as Good Headspan that can handle 125??

 

[HSTEd]

Yes, this is what I mean. I believe there is some remaining Headspan where line speed is 125. Is there such a thing as Good Headspan that can handle 125??

I hope so, given the number of headspans in service on the ECML!

 

[paul1609]

Not ordinarily, they all go via Bath other than odd ones at the beginning or end of the day. However if there are engineering works or problems they can divert via Parkway.


It has been mentioned before that the concerns over the OLE were resolved with a special design, the primary issue was that the project run out of money.

The primary issue was that the project had exhausted its 500% overdraught and was in danger of putting Network Rail in to liquidation.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I hope so, given the number of headspans in service on the ECML!

It is 115 mph north of Preston in parts and they are headspans. How do I know? They are outside my back garden in the UK.

 

[59CosG95]

No, there are still lots of headspans west of Ealing, where it is 125mph

Precisely - the conversions are only due to be taking place where the linespeed is 125mph on the Mains. If it's less than 125mph, they might not happen.
This starts at 4m 40ch (on the DM) and 4m 60ch (on the UM), therefore I suspect it'll start in earnest beyond Acton ML (at 4m 21ch).
Indeed, a large number of headspans between Acton ML & Ealing B'way were replaced by new portals as part of the Diveunder works.

Most everything in the OOC area will be replaced for that station anyhow, and the limited number of partial spanwire portals (and similar) in the Westbourne Park area could also be a quick & easy win for resilience, especially as those works could be done while OOC closes the route into Paddington.
Perhaps most interestingly of all, I wait to see how they tackle Hanwell (& Elthorne, as it's properly known ) with its listed buildings and CHS (cylindrical hollow section) headspan masts.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

The primary issue was that the project had exhausted its 500% overdraught and was in danger of putting Network Rail in to liquidation.

To this day, that expenditure on the GWML blows my mind.

 

[stuu]

The primary issue was that the project had exhausted its 500% overdraught and was in danger of putting Network Rail in to liquidation.

Overdraft surely? Overdraught would be a good name for a pub though!

 

[zwk500]

To this day, that expenditure on the GWML blows my mind.

‘Onus on industry’ to prove costly rail electrification mistakes are in the past | New Civil Engineer

Network Rail’s project report – drawn up in July 2020 and obtained by NCE via freedom of information request – concedes that there is a lack of public and

www.newcivilengineer.com

The electrified railway between Cardiff and London Paddington finally opened in January 2020, after years of delays and a substantial budget increase. The line was initially earmarked for completion in 2017, and included a budget of £874M, as determined in 2013.

However the Great Western scheme was reset in January 2016, with the cost of electrifying the line rising to £2.8bn. Network Rail now puts the final cost as high as £5.5bn.

It's horrifying, but at a scale that's intriguing. The NAO report does not make pretty reading https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Modernising-the-Great-Western-railway.pdf

 

[MarkyT]

‘Onus on industry’ to prove costly rail electrification mistakes are in the past | New Civil Engineer

Network Rail’s project report – drawn up in July 2020 and obtained by NCE via freedom of information request – concedes that there is a lack of public and

www.newcivilengineer.com

It's horrifying, but at a scale that's intriguing. The NAO report does not make pretty reading https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Modernising-the-Great-Western-railway.pdf

In 2015, I was working on a heritage railway signalling commissioning project alongside a senior principles tester also involved with GWML modernisation. I recall frantic mobile calls in the ancient signal box about all the replanning unfolding as DfT was completely rephasing the project ... again! At one point, a revised strategy had been to concentrate on getting continuous wires through to Cardiff ASAP, so at least some electric-only IETs could start rolling and get to a major destination. Soon after, the strategy changed again, no doubt on the strength of this report and that DfT had already changed their minds and were instructing Hitachi to construct all GWML IETs as bi-mode. That resulted in new infrastructure priorities and a rephasing of signalling work again, changing interlocking stage boundaries and other details. They clearly had no appreciation the interlocking data had all been designed and verified months before, fully tested on simulators and was ready to be installed, but this rephasing threw all those hours away. The new instructions were doubly wasteful as once an interlocking stage is designed and tested in site specific geographic data, the next stage of alterations to that site can commence design. In theory you can have a whole series of data stages predesigned and tested. And contractors had done that. If you thow away the first iteration, all the subsequent stages become junk too. This kind of rework wastage was repeated across other engineering disciplines and government decisions even led to a huge quantity of custom-made 80-year life steelwork for the Swansea line stanchions being sold for scrap, no doubt at a tiny fraction of the price paid.

 

[paul1609]

In 2015, I was working on a heritage railway signalling commissioning project alongside a senior principles tester also involved with GWML modernisation. I recall frantic mobile calls in the ancient signal box about all the replanning unfolding as DfT was completely rephasing the project ... again! At one point, a revised strategy had been to concentrate on getting continuous wires through to Cardiff ASAP, so at least some electric-only IETs could start rolling and get to a major destination. Soon after, the strategy changed again, no doubt on the strength of this report and that DfT had already changed their minds and were instructing Hitachi to construct all GWML IETs as bi-mode. That resulted in new infrastructure priorities and a rephasing of signalling work again, changing interlocking stage boundaries and other details. They clearly had no appreciation the interlocking data had all been designed and verified months before, fully tested on simulators and was ready to be installed, but this rephasing threw all those hours away. The new instructions were doubly wasteful as once an interlocking stage is designed and tested in site specific geographic data, the next stage of alterations to that site can commence design. In theory you can have a whole series of data stages predesigned and tested. And contractors had done that. If you thow away the first iteration, all the subsequent stages become junk too. This kind of rework wastage was repeated across other engineering disciplines and government decisions even led to a huge quantity of custom-made 80-year life steelwork made for the Swansea line stanchions being sold for scrap, no doubt at a tiny fraction of the price paid.

Realistically there's always going to wastage on a project that you have to descope because it's 500% over budget. You do have to ask: a) how much the project would have cost if it was carried through to it's conclusion b) the rail industry/ network rail believed that the budget was effectively unlimited because of political pressures. Regardless it has effectively cancelled major rail electrification projects for the foreseeable future

 

[The exile]

Regardless it has effectively cancelled major rail electrification projects for the foreseeable future

Fortunately, none of the three remaining bits to complete the initial GW electrification (in England at least) is really a “major project”. Biggest challenge would presumably be the Temple Meads station area itself.

 

[MarkyT]

Realistically there's always going to wastage on a project that you have to descope because it's 500% over budget. You do have to ask: a) how much the project would have cost if it was carried through to it's conclusion b) the rail industry/ network rail believed that the budget was effectively unlimited because of political pressures. Regardless it has effectively cancelled major rail electrification projects for the foreseeable future

Many of these wastage-generating changes occurred before the project was finally descoped. There were changes initiated by DfT in response to late delivery and dependencies with the IET programme. What they didn't want was to have a large proportion of the new fleet sitting idle while they were contractually obliged to pay for it and the infrastructure wasn't ready. I think they allowed this consideration to override most others. I think foreseeable future is a somewhat nebulous concept at the moment generally. I hope further electrification is one of those things we may be unable to foresee now, but nonetheless happens surprisingly when engineers make affordable again, including using battery techniques where suitable. There's wiring going on around UK today, just not in big showy projects. That can be a method for expansion and is enabled by bi-mode and battery techniques.

 

[Jurassicjewel]

Hopefully the Oxford Didcot section will be wired and Chippenham to Bristol TM and TM to Filton at some point, there was mention after the HS2 funds were "reallocated" and some mention that the Chippenham to Bristol section would be wired perhaps using cheaper catenary. On a related matter the speed restriction under Steventon Bridge is probably going to be reviewed assuming Network Rail have enough data now on pantograph and wear on the wires now, that is of course assuming the Bridge won't need replacing in the next decade. Its an unfinished project as they say and I even mentioned this to our local Labour candidate for Swindon North when he knocked on my door.

 

[td97]

Biggest challenge would presumably be the Temple Meads station area itself.

Of which GRIP 3 was completed in 2019, as described here

Bristol Temple Meads – Wentworth House Rail Systems

www.railelectrification.com

 

[snowball]

Of which GRIP 3 was completed in 2019, as described here

Bristol Temple Meads – Wentworth House Rail Systems

www.railelectrification.com

The text at that link begins "PROJECT: EGIP: Great Western Route Modernisation Electrification".

I thought EGIP was the Edinburgh-Glasgow Improvement Programme!

 

[Grumpy]

This kind of rework wastage was repeated across other engineering disciplines and government decisions even led to a huge quantity of custom-made 80-year life steelwork for the Swansea line stanchions being sold for scrap, no doubt at a tiny fraction of the price paid.

I never understood this. Was there something peculiar to the Swansea line stanchions that prevented them being used on another scheme elsewhere in the UK at some time in the future?
Given an 80 year life could they not simply have been stored in the open somewhere until needed?

 

[The exile]

I never understood this. Was there something peculiar to the Swansea line stanchions that prevented them being used on another scheme elsewhere in the UK at some time in the future?
Given an 80 year life could they not simply have been stored in the open somewhere until needed?

But that would be the definition of a bean counter's nightmare. Far tidier (on the books, I mean, not the ground) and therefore "better", to flog them off at a 99% discount than have something on the books that you don't need within the next 5 minutes (!)

 

[WiredUp]

Precisely - the conversions are only due to be taking place where the linespeed is 125mph on the Mains. If it's less than 125mph, they might not happen.
This starts at 4m 40ch (on the DM) and 4m 60ch (on the UM), therefore I suspect it'll start in earnest beyond Acton ML (at 4m 21ch).
Indeed, a large number of headspans between Acton ML & Ealing B'way were replaced by new portals as part of the Diveunder works.

Most everything in the OOC area will be replaced for that station anyhow, and the limited number of partial spanwire portals (and similar) in the Westbourne Park area could also be a quick & easy win for resilience, especially as those works could be done while OOC closes the route into Paddington.
Perhaps most interestingly of all, I wait to see how they tackle Hanwell (& Elthorne, as it's properly known ) with its listed buildings and CHS (cylindrical hollow section) headspan masts.

The first conversion is a spanwire portal at J/01/02, just over 1km from Paddington.

 

[John R]

But that would be the definition of a bean counter's nightmare. Far tidier (on the books, I mean, not the ground) and therefore "better", to flog them off at a 99% discount than have something on the books that you don't need within the next 5 minutes (!)

Far better to flog them off than have to spend money keeping them in secure storage for years and risk them being nicked.

 

[paul1609]

Many of these wastage-generating changes occurred before the project was finally descoped. There were changes initiated by DfT in response to late delivery and dependencies with the IET programme. What they didn't want was to have a large proportion of the new fleet sitting idle while they were contractually obliged to pay for it and the infrastructure wasn't ready. I think they allowed this consideration to override most others. I think foreseeable future is a somewhat nebulous concept at the moment generally. I hope further electrification is one of those things we may be unable to foresee now, but nonetheless happens surprisingly when engineers make affordable again, including using battery techniques where suitable. There's wiring going on around UK today, just not in big showy projects. That can be a method for expansion and is enabled by bi-mode and battery techniques.

How are these battery techniques going in Europe? I dont think we have any experience in the UK other than some Merseyrail Units that shuffle 1/2m at 40 mph and a class 379 conversion that did PR stunts to greenwashing audiences for 6 months by which time its batteries were absolutely shagged.
Im kind of the opinion that if your looking to power a 1.5 MW 4 car train by batteries thats going to need some pretty high end and expensive thermal management technology that we havent really seen in squadron use in the rail industry.

 

[Taunton]

Perhaps most interestingly of all, I wait to see how they tackle Hanwell (& Elthorne, as it's properly known ) with its listed buildings and CHS (cylindrical hollow section) headspan masts.

I think there are a fair number who couldn't give a hoot about the listed structure at Hanwell. There was quite a nice project done architecturally on it 10 or so years ago, then the Elizabeth Line "One Size Fits All" team smashed their purple image over everything there.

Reminiscent of dogs marking their territorial lamp post.

 

[eldomtom2]

‘Onus on industry’ to prove costly rail electrification mistakes are in the past | New Civil Engineer

Network Rail’s project report – drawn up in July 2020 and obtained by NCE via freedom of information request – concedes that there is a lack of public and

www.newcivilengineer.com

It's horrifying, but at a scale that's intriguing. The NAO report does not make pretty reading https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Modernising-the-Great-Western-railway.pdf

The NAO report raises one key question for me - have lessons been learned from the GWML electrification and applied to the MML and Huddersfield electrifications? Can anyone with any knowledge comment?

 

[59CosG95]

The NAO report raises one key question for me - have lessons been learned from the GWML electrification and applied to the MML and Huddersfield electrifications? Can anyone with any knowledge comment?

Can't speak too much for TRU (2 separate teams doing the work: Amey on the West and VolkerRail/Siemens on the East), but SPL Powerlines on the MML managed to get costs down really well, without needing to use the hugely expensive on-track plant used (briefly) on the GWML.

 

[John R]

Maybe “without needing to use” should read “because they didn’t use”?