Electrifying from Doncaster and Moorthorpe to Sheffield or even Derby

[deltic08]

Would the business case be better to electrify from the north southward?

This would allow Leeds-Wakefield Westgate-Sheffield and Sheffield-Adwick to become pure electric EMUs.

Leeds-Sheffield-Lincoln, Leeds-Barnsley-Sheffield, Hudderfield-Penistone-Sheffield, Sheffield-Hope Valley-Manchester, York-Sheffield and any other odds and sods to become BEMUs, and - if XC received surplus GWR 800/0s - some bimodes on NE/SW trains from Edinburgh to Derby to use electric instead of diesel.

810s could use electric from London to Sheffield, except between Leicester and Derby.

I have read on here that GWR could give up as many as 15 5-car units. These could be used on Edinburgh to Bristol trains where electric can be used as far south as Derby, then Birmingham to Bromsgrove, if the mainlines are completely wired. Westerleigh to Temple Meads, if Filton Bank is wired, as is likely with Bristol Metro and Severn Tunnel Junction and Cardiff on Edinburgh to Cardiff on the Cardiff portion.

This would allow XC to operate more services or strengthened services with Voyagers between Derby and Penzance and Nottingham and Cardiff.

Can anybody think of other benefits?

The diesel used annually in this country is enough to fill Kielder Water. 50 billion litres in 2018.

 

[WAO]

Leeds, like Manchester and B'ham is a favoured regional city with a growing network of electric railways. It seems initially sensible to add poor Sheffield to this but for an hourly stopping service, with the extra 18 miles of wiring costing perhaps about >£200M..... Admittedly you would convert double that mileage to electric traction but intuition says that greater use of the wires would be needed for justification, otherwise, the 36 mile round trip,off the wires, would suit a BEMU nicely.

The present service sectors are inherited from the TOC's and it may be with GBR that those boundaries will soften or services intensify. It is possible to imagine, with Leeds - York wired, a partial cross country electric service, say Edinburgh - Sheffield. That would mean breaking many, but not all, cross country direct services. I don't think Sheffield would be an optimum point for that. Leeds - Edinburgh, all electric, would fit, rather like Manchester - Scotland.

Sheffield's two services south may be a bit thin for immediate wiring and perhaps it would have been better just to try to get the wires to the East Midlands, where their use would be greater. At any rate they should have reached Leicester. The economics of bi-modes improve as engine use declines and starting Diesels just for a few miles before stopping is silly. It's also better to do the accelerating and climbing (and regen) under the wires, whether you have Diesels or batteries.

Sheffield could always choose to spend some of its tram money on heavy rail.

WAO

 

[Dr Hoo]

Wouldn’t it be a rather inefficient idea to electrify Sheffield (only) from the north before the long-overdue comprehensive re-modelling and, probably, a completely new ‘depot’ to replace the current facility that is really only suitable for 2-car trains and even that requiring loads of shunting and reversals?

 

[Grimsby town]

Wouldn’t it be a rather inefficient idea to electrify Sheffield (only) from the north before the long-overdue comprehensive re-modelling and, probably, a completely new ‘depot’ to replace the current facility that is really only suitable for 2-car trains and even that requiring loads of shunting and reversals?

I'd go further and say that Dore - Leeds/Doncaster should receive a North Transpennine style route upgrade with full electrification, increased capacity through additonal tracks, platforms and grade separation.

The eastern leg for HS2 appears well and truly dead so the only alternative seems to be an extensive upgrade to improve CrossCountry journey times and reliability, and also achieve some of the aims for what was Northern Powerhouse Rail. That includes getting the Leeds to Sheffield journey time closer to 30 minutes at frequency of 3 or 4 trains per hour. It'd also help facilitate additonal Manchester to Sheffield services and allow most local services out of Sheffield to switch to EMUs or battery EMUs.

This isn't going to happen during this parliament but I'd hope plans could be made so that as TRU resources are reduced, they're transfered on to a Dore - Leeds/Doncaster upgrade.

 

[HSTEd]

Wouldn’t it be a rather inefficient idea to electrify Sheffield (only) from the north before the long-overdue comprehensive re-modelling and, probably, a completely new ‘depot’ to replace the current facility that is really only suitable for 2-car trains and even that requiring loads of shunting and reversals?

Well that depends on whether you believe the comprehensive rebuild that is often proposed is ever coming, I guess.

 

[The exile]

If XC received surplus GWR 800/0s,
I have read on here that GWR could give up as many as 15 5-car units.

Wasn’t aware that there was the possibility of GWR offloading IETs. Displacing them internally yes, but given the number of short formations I very much doubt they could spare 15!

 

[YorkshireBear]

Well that depends on whether you believe the comprehensive rebuild that is often proposed is ever coming, I guess.

I'd bet I'll be retired (currently estimated for 2060) before Sheffield is rebuilt!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

In combination with remodelling I would love to see simultaneously modernising/electrifying

1. Start simultaneously heading north from Wigston South to Chesterfield grid feeder location then
2. Sheffield to Doncaster
3. Sheffield to Chesterfield and Grid feeder
4. Sheffield to Leeds
5. Sheffield to York
6. Grid Feeder to Nottingham
7. Derby- Birmingham

 

[Grumpy]

Given that some recent electrifications in former mining areas have had cost and time issues, might Moorthorpe/Doncaster -Sheffield be a bit risky if you wanted to show you could deliver an electrification project on time and budget?
And as stated the only immediate beneficiaries are the stopping services to Leeds and Doncaster. These are basically only hourly services operated by 2 car DMU's.
By contrast the Harrogate loop is approximately the same track mileage, low risk of mining issues, power supplies at both ends, and major terminals already wired. All trains would be EMU immediately from opening. Significantly more users e.g. 5 departures from Harrogate to Leeds in the hour from 0717, including 1 to Kings Cross.
Surprised you haven't been advocating this

 

[geordieblue]

Given that some recent electrifications in former mining areas have had cost and time issues, might Moorthorpe/Doncaster -Sheffield be a bit risky if you wanted to show you could deliver an electrification project on time and budget?
And as stated the only immediate beneficiaries are the stopping services to Leeds and Doncaster. These are basically only hourly services operated by 2 car DMU's.
By contrast the Harrogate loop is approximately the same track mileage, low risk of mining issues, power supplies at both ends, and major terminals already wired. All trains would be EMU immediately from opening. Significantly more users e.g. 5 departures from Harrogate to Leeds in the hour from 0717, including 1 to Kings Cross.
Surprised you haven't been advocating this

You’d probably also be able to save a unit if Harrogate was wired with the improved acceleration of an EMU (there’s a ~25min layover at York) - or by interworking with other Leeds electric services (can’t remember the turnarounds for these). Opportunities for efficiencies either way. Downside is Horsforth to Knaresborough would be a complete pain to wire with various viaducts, tunnels, and wealthy locals.

 

[Grimsby town]

Given that some recent electrifications in former mining areas have had cost and time issues, might Moorthorpe/Doncaster -Sheffield be a bit risky if you wanted to show you could deliver an electrification project on time and budget?
And as stated the only immediate beneficiaries are the stopping services to Leeds and Doncaster. These are basically only hourly services operated by 2 car DMU's.
By contrast the Harrogate loop is approximately the same track mileage, low risk of mining issues, power supplies at both ends, and major terminals already wired. All trains would be EMU immediately from opening. Significantly more users e.g. 5 departures from Harrogate to Leeds in the hour from 0717, including 1 to Kings Cross.
Surprised you haven't been advocating this

And the new hourly fast service from Leeds to Sheffield which starts in December. Electric trains would provide pretty significant benefits over 3 car 170s which aren't the quickest accelerating units. It's not as if Northern is awash with diesel capacity either.

Edit: 10 years ago I'd have said Harrogate was one of the biggest priorities for electrification. Now I think its ideal for battery trains and at most only electrification to Harrogate can be justified. It probably won't be electrified at all though. By contrast Sheffield to Leeds/Doncaster is higher speed, has intercity and freight trains, and is of far greater importance to the national economy.

 

[WAO]

I think that the mining subsidence problems are probably now ironed out with the swopping back and forth of the Midland (Cudworth) and S&K (Moorthorpe) routes in previous decades.

The original EM franchise bid included regular trains from St Pancras to Leeds but DfT squashed the idea, concentrating on XC. Electrification should be split into manageable, justifiable bites, i.e first to Leicester, then secondly to Notts/Derbys, then, thirdly, for both XC and EM to be electrically hauled, on to Sheffield and Leeds via Moorthorpe. I imagine that the 100mph Moorthorpe line is also well enough aligned for speed to be raised from Masborough northwards to 125mph, excepting the 85mph Wath curve (which could be straightened).

Batteries are a red herring for high speed, high capacity lines.

WAO

 

[YorksLad12]

Given that some recent electrifications in former mining areas have had cost and time issues, might Moorthorpe/Doncaster -Sheffield be a bit risky if you wanted to show you could deliver an electrification project on time and budget?
And as stated the only immediate beneficiaries are the stopping services to Leeds and Doncaster. These are basically only hourly services operated by 2 car DMU's.
By contrast the Harrogate loop is approximately the same track mileage, low risk of mining issues, power supplies at both ends, and major terminals already wired. All trains would be EMU immediately from opening. Significantly more users e.g. 5 departures from Harrogate to Leeds in the hour from 0717, including 1 to Kings Cross.
Surprised you haven't been advocating this

You’d probably also be able to save a unit if Harrogate was wired with the improved acceleration of an EMU (there’s a ~25min layover at York) - or by interworking with other Leeds electric services (can’t remember the turnarounds for these). Opportunities for efficiencies either way. Downside is Horsforth to Knaresborough would be a complete pain to wire with various viaducts, tunnels, and wealthy locals.

And the new hourly fast service from Leeds to Sheffield which starts in December. Electric trains would provide pretty significant benefits over 3 car 170s which aren't the quickest accelerating units. It's not as if Northern is awash with diesel capacity either.

Edit: 10 years ago I'd have said Harrogate was one of the biggest priorities for electrification. Now I think its ideal for battery trains and at most only electrification to Harrogate can be justified. It probably won't be electrified at all though. By contrast Sheffield to Leeds/Doncaster is higher speed, has intercity and freight trains, and is of far greater importance to the national economy.

Leeds - Harrogate would get my vote as a follow-on from TRU (if the teams can be kept together), with Northern's new trains running on batteries to Knaresborough and Poppleton which is close to ECML wires. Partly that's because I've got the windows open in this heat, and the sounds of the 150s and 170s starting up is a bit irksome!

I'd rather see Midland wiring finished first, but then someone needs to come up with a plan for Sheffield Station.

Ironically, close to P8 at the northern end is a sign on the wall saying to be aware of overhead cabling... that would be on Granville Street, so the wires would be at least two storeys higher than where you're standing.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Downside is Horsforth to Knaresborough would be a complete pain to wire with various viaducts, tunnels, and wealthy locals.

The only significantly long tunnel is Bramhope.

I can't see the majority of the line being that much of a problem except Knaresborough. NR wanted to install a handrail on the famous viaduct but I believe it was refused. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[deltic08]

Given that some recent electrifications in former mining areas have had cost and time issues, might Moorthorpe/Doncaster -Sheffield be a bit risky if you wanted to show you could deliver an electrification project on time and budget?
And as stated the only immediate beneficiaries are the stopping services to Leeds and Doncaster. These are basically only hourly services operated by 2 car DMU's.
By contrast the Harrogate loop is approximately the same track mileage, low risk of mining issues, power supplies at both ends, and major terminals already wired. All trains would be EMU immediately from opening. Significantly more users e.g. 5 departures from Harrogate to Leeds in the hour from 0717, including 1 to Kings Cross.
Surprised you haven't been advocating this

I have been advocating this since the 1990s. Electrification of the Harrogate Loop was part of the Leeds North Western scheme announced in the 1980s. Horsforth to York was cancelled to save money and Leeds to Horsforth was then cancelled before the scheme commenced.

I have written to umpteen Transport Ministers, WYCA, local MPs, NYCC, on this site and others about electrifying the Loop. Most ignored me and didn't respond.
It was the subject of a study in 2017 paid for by WYCA, NYCC, York and Harrogate Councils. The result was positive and costed at £99M for 81 stk. It was cheap because York and Leeds are already wired, feeder stations at both ends, and simple track work. An example of cheap infill electrification as we electrify more miles of mainline.

Resignalling between Leeds and Harrogate in 2013 allowed for increase in linespeed from 60 to 75 mph, although not implemented yet, and increase in capacity to 6 tph.

9 units are required to carry out the timetable. Usually 7 170s, 2 158s and a 150. 9 is the exact number of 323s not taken from the West Midlands by Northern.
170s are not the ideal unit for this line as they are slow to accelerate from the 12 stations on the loop and uphill out of Leeds. Because the line limit is mostly 60mph the 170s stay in first gear which overheats the gearbox oil and wears the gears. Use of electric trains such as 323s, and now possible 350s, would be able to accelerate faster and use the increase in linespeed to decrease journey time by 25% of all stations stoppers. More seats available too. It would mean a reduction in quality unless the 'new' trains are refreshed and reseated.

I still think that electrification from Doncaster/Moorthorpe to Sheffield is more important as it would allow more services to benefit from it for such a short distance.

 

[Halifaxlad]

I still think that electrification from Doncaster/Moorthorpe to Sheffield is more important as it would allow more services to benefit from it for such a short distance.

How many services would be able to switch to pure electrics ?

For the amount of services I would electrify Micklefield to Hull first.
Switch Leeds/York - Hull services to pure electric traction, enable TP to use pure electric post TRU from Liverpool - Hull. Allow Hull trains to run entirely on electric. Hopefully by which time Sheffield would be remodelled. Then I would electrify the lines to Moorthorpe and Doncaster before carrying it onto Gilberdyke via Goole.

 

[Brubulus]

How many services would be able to switch to pure electrics ?

For the amount of services I would electrify Micklefield to Hull first.
Switch Leeds/York - Hull services to pure electric traction, enable TP to use pure electric post TRU from Liverpool - Hull. Allow Hull trains to run entirely on electric. Hopefully by which time Sheffield would be remodelled. Then I would electrify the lines to Moorthorpe and Doncaster before carrying it onto Gilberdyke via Goole.

That would enable 3.5tph to run on electric, compared to 3tph for Sheffield, which would be a much smaller project, plus it would enable the removal of the diesel engines on the 810s and their replacement with batteries.

Secondly the needs of the railway in light of battery trains should be considered, and electrifying Sheffield better enables battery services. The same is true for Hull, but to a slightly lesser extent as static charging is more viable there as a terminus, which is less constrained by platform space.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Why is there this obsession with removing the diesel engines from the Class 810s and replacing them with batteries?

There is now no immediate prospect of wiring north of Wigston. The Midland Main Line has regular diversions via routes that have even vaguer ‘plans’ for electrification - via Corby/Manton/Syston; via Castle Donington; via the Erewash Valley; and via Barrow Hill. Diesels work well with this, rather that arriving at, say, Sheffield on a depleted battery and then finding that the return to St Pancras will have significant unexpected un-wired mileage.

 

[WAO]

Why is there this obsession with removing the diesel engines from the Class 810s and replacing them with batteries?

Because there is such effective pro-battery propaganda that people start to believe it.

Batteries only improve exponentially - i.e they approach an asymptote where gains become minimal, for thermodynamic reasons.

My impression is that manufacturers are starting to offer 50 mile range BEMU's, i.e in 3/5 years - the success of GWR/Vivirail will be/is met with apathy, as it's built in UK not Europe/Japan. You can't have BEMU's unless you have partial electrification, including the MML at least to the E Mids - and even to Leeds if the Yorks locals are to have batteries.

The excuse for continued Diesel use is that it small in proportion to total UK Carbon emissions but UK Carbon emissions are tiny as a proportion of world emissions - so the UK economic hair shirt is a pointless woke fantasy.

WAO

 

[HSTEd]

Why is there this obsession with removing the diesel engines from the Class 810s and replacing them with batteries?

Because a railway that burns significant tonnages diesel is going to have a hard time making the political case for a billion pounds a month in subsidies in 15 years when cars and buses will be overwhelmingly electric.

If you replace the four engines in the Class 810 with the already extant battery pack design from the TPE 802 trial, you could almost make Wigston-Sheffield and back with no further electrification. It's only ~110km or so each way.

Electrification in the Sheffield area would allow it to be achieved easily.
You could probably do it with three batteries and leave one engine in place for emergencies.

The railway is now on the clock, it much be decarbonised rapidly and comprehensively or its going to find itself without the environmental image that has provided it with the "happy time" of the last 30 years.

 

[WAO]

Electrification in the Sheffield area would allow it to be achieved easily.
You could probably do it with three batteries and leave one engine in place for emergencies.

The railway is now on the clock, it much be decarbonised rapidly and comprehensively or its going to find itself without the environmental image that has provided it with the "happy time" of the last 30 years.

But that leaves the Yorks locals high and dry, even if you could do 220km on 60% battery.

 

[Nottingham59]

Why is there this obsession with removing the diesel engines from the Class 810s and replacing them with batteries?

The experience with 802207 was that one battery pack and two diesel gensets resulted in 30-50% fuel savings in normal service compared to pure diesel operation with three gensets and no loss of performance.

Doing the same with 810s would presumably be as effective, but I expect it would not be cost effective because the space available for the Turntide batteries would not be standard.

 

[WAO]

As the battery pack (presumably) got its juice from the overhead, this shows how much is saved by electric traction over Diesel use. I think it was only doing 75MPH, though.

The battery powered motor bogies were probably working harder than the DE driven units, as well!

WAO

 

[Cowley]

I think we’re in danger of veering away from the original purpose of this thread if we’re not careful, which is:

Electrifying from Doncaster and Moorthorpe to Sheffield or even Derby​

So although this is a speculative thread, please keep it roughly on that topic going forward please.

Thanks!