Taking advantage of such an electrification would require substantial expenditure on new electrodiesel rolling stock and require something annoying to be done about Hunts Cross's Merseyrail service.
It is being looked at though.
Yes, they can be either AC or have a large traction battery, but not both. All 777s have a small traction Battery for depot and emergency use.
It's not a bad idea.
yeah i'm sure it hurts the ECML timetable that that train can only go 90 and accelerates kinda slow. Back when MML electrification was going to do the Erewash Valley lines there'd be quite a few miles on AC on that service.
Not just the ECML timetable, but you could probably shave a decent amount off journey times using a bi-mode MU.
This EMR service would be a good candidate for BEMU stock if it's ever ordered: both ends of the route are electrified so can recharge well, with multiple OHLE islands in the middle to keep topped up.
If BEMUs can do 100 miles off charge in ten years and we electrify the Hope Valley/associated lines by then, then yes I agree.
Wasn't the since-abandoned "electric spine" the first (or at least an earlier) major electrification project freight was interested in (or at least the coalition government thought freight was interested in)? It involved converting the SWML from Southampton-Basingstoke from third rail to OHLE, then electrifying all the way to Sheffield along a continuous route that included EWR.
That's not necessary to get to the stage where BEMU'S could operate the service. What's needed is a range greater than the longest non electrified section which in the future post MML is likely to end up about 65-75 miles so within range of existing BEMU's deployed in Germany, Austria and on order for France.
Yeah, but that was quite involved and expensive. So the freight industry has been focusing on that ~60 route miles that they say would allow many more paths to be electric. Freightliner have appeared at least on a channel 4 and BBC show taking reporters into the cab and discussing this.
Although you also have to think about diversionary abilities when it comes to bi-modes, and it's more like 85 miles Peterborough to Norwich (unless you are including the short stretch around Ely where you could possibly pan up for a minute or two).
How is that a diversion - Peterborough to Norwich via Ely is the normal route?
Sorry for the confusion.
Definitely, my point was more that we shouldn't order new MUs that don't permit the "old road" diversion as you call it.
How feasible is battery power on a freight train beyond last mile operations? The best I can see for them is full electrification of all the core freight routes, then for battery power beyond last mile operations either multiple locos will be needed, and/or shorter trains/lighter loads. For example, I can't see a 2000+ tonne aggregate train from the Mendip quarries being able to run on battery beyond the yards, so would need electrification up to the start of the branch from Newbury (the current earliest point for trains going towards London).
Well a freight locomotive could easily have several tens of tonnes of batteries. Indeed some locomotives have historically been ballasted to make them heavier.
The Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport repot identified Hare Park jnc to Leeds Stourton as a high importance early infill scheme.
Interesting to know. There maybe value in sticking some wires in the Woodborough loops, loops at Westbury and other places where the quarry trains are often held, as this would provide some effective recharge, to improve resilience and ease pressure on the main supply at Newbury. I think though electrification should at least carry onto Bedwyn, so that the option of 387s being allocated to a reinstated direct London service is there, while IETs and future freight with battery/tri-mode capability can improve the business case.
I didn't understand that as surely the freight going there goes round via Lincoln rather than up the electrified ECML??
It was poorly worded! Bit of both really. Concentrate on the freight, and on the passenger side only on enough extensions to make BEMUs work.
I dont know how they came to their conclusions, but it might have to do with the idea that electric freight would have far better acceleration/deceleration so that it could keep up with passenger services on ECML. In addition, they have wiring the Lincoln route as a medium term objective. But you're right, maybe they should be considered part of the same project.