Would electrifying the WEML, Marshlink, North Downs and Uckfield lines with third rail be possible under the ORR's current policy?

[AM9]

Even then I’d expect any reduced running times to get banked as yet more padding and yet more dwell time. The whole industry is shot-scared of trying to accelerate anything.

Might not be so risk averse when GBR is running fully.

 

[SynthD]

Could units be charged at Uckfield off of a short third rail section (as opposed to a charge device like at West Ealing), that is only live when a train makes contact with it? While such an arrangement would be difficult on a long route like the WEML, I think it would work very well at a terminus like Uckfield.

Unless I've missed it, you're asking for something to be invented. You'd reach implementation quicker with already permitted technology (DLR upside down contact) or nearly permitted (West Ealing charging device at more than one station per route). But that might look poor, having new live rail following modern standards near old live rail grandfathered in.

The safe minimum length of third rail needed to power a battery via the shoes is deceptive, as all the shoes are connected. A foot long live third rail still makes the whole train length unsafe. Of course, that could be revisited.

 

[Bald Rick]

Could units be charged at Uckfield off of a short third rail section (as opposed to a charge device like at West Ealing), that is only live when a train makes contact with it? While such an arrangement would be difficult on a long route like the WEML, I think it would work very well at a terminus like Uckfield.

Yes.

Even then I’d expect any reduced running times to get banked as yet more padding and yet more dwell time. The whole industry is shot-scared of trying to accelerate anything.

Is it? GEML to Norwich? ECML ? plenty of other examples!

 

[Harpo]

Is it? GEML to Norwich?

1h46 to 1h51 is around the same as it was nearly 35 years ago in 86/DBSO days with one fewer stop.

 

[Bald Rick]

1h46 to 1h51 is around the same as it was nearly 35 years ago in 86/DBSO days with one fewer stop.

But it’s 1h44 to 1h51, and that is less than what it was 3 years ago.

And that stop is worth 4 minutes.

 

[MatthewHutton]

1h46 to 1h51 is around the same as it was nearly 35 years ago in 86/DBSO days with one fewer stop.

The Norwich line is actually the same as it was in the late 1930s but with a half hourly service and not two fast trains a day. And also more stops. I saw an old timetable.

 

[weeklycommuter]

If battery trains are the solution for these and some other unelectrified lines the Government and the railway industry should build and run new battery trains with an adequate number of seats replacing the diesel trains currently used. So far there is only the Greenford battery train trial on that very short line. There will be scepticism about battery trains unless and until they are used to provide a regular and reliable train service with an adequate number of seats on lines such as Uckfield, Marshlink, North Downs, Henley, Marlow and Slough to Windsor. Romsey to Salisbury via Southampton is another train service for which battery trains would be useful.

 

[Bald Rick]

If battery trains are the solution for these and some other unelectrified lines the Government and the railway industry should build and run new battery trains with an adequate number of seats replacing the diesel trains currently used. So far there is only the Greenford battery train trial on that very short line. There will be scepticism about battery trains unless and until they are used to provide a regular and reliable train service with an adequate number of seats on lines such as Uckfield, Marshlink, North Downs, Henley, Marlow and Slough to Windsor. Romsey to Salisbury via Southampton is another train service for which battery trains would be useful.

Why would they not have enough seats?

 

[MatthewHutton]

If battery trains are the solution for these and some other unelectrified lines the Government and the railway industry should build and run new battery trains with an adequate number of seats replacing the diesel trains currently used. So far there is only the Greenford battery train trial on that very short line. There will be scepticism about battery trains unless and until they are used to provide a regular and reliable train service with an adequate number of seats on lines such as Uckfield, Marshlink, North Downs, Henley, Marlow and Slough to Windsor. Romsey to Salisbury via Southampton is another train service for which battery trains would be useful.

The big issues are going to be charging cycles, weight (electric trains are lighter than battery trains so less track wear and tear), potentially reliability and the fact that everyone else has already moved to overhead electrification for trains.

 

[Bald Rick]

The big issues are going to be charging cycles, weight (electric trains are lighter than battery trains so less track wear and tear), potentially reliability and the fact that everyone else has already moved to overhead electrification for trains.

None of those are a big issue.

 

[Chrisgr31]

Southern’s fleet are very much capable of making it to the 2050s so it will be a long time before a new fleet is even worth considering. And of course we are already seeing newer rolling stock 387s cascading out the oldest electrostars so you could imagine the DfT kicking the can down the road with the turbos as well.

Whilst the fleet should last another 25 years the separate question is should it - or at least should it in this location.

1. so should we continue to run diesels along routes where a large proportion of the track is electrified or should we be changing the trains to battery electric hybrids when technology allows

2. Following the DfTs decision to move most of the ex Scotrail units to EMR there is no spare capacity to put on additional services or increase the length of the trains. The peak hour trains are now often full and standing Tuesday- Thursday between Hurst Green and London Bridge. Ow will they cope with 25 years of passenger growth?

A solution would be to look at putting batteries in the electostars, well when technology allows, and cascading these to a line that’s 100%not electrified

 

[zwk500]

Whilst the fleet should last another 25 years the separate question is should it - or at least should it in this location.

1. so should we continue to run diesels along routes where a large proportion of the track is electrified or should we be changing the trains to battery electric hybrids when technology allows

The technology for BEMUs exists now.

2. Following the DfTs decision to move most of the ex Scotrail units to EMR there is no spare capacity to put on additional services or increase the length of the trains.

There was no track or platform capacity to put on additional or longer services on the Uckfield line anyway - they were running 10-Car Class 171s in the peak, and the single line can't take more than 1tph.

A solution would be to look at putting batteries in the electostars, well when technology allows, and cascading these to a line that’s 100%not electrified

Again, the technology allows now - an Electrostar was converted back in 2015! https://www.theguardian.com/environ...attery-powered-train-carries-first-passengers.
While I'm generally in support of all EMUs being converted to BEMUs with a minimum 'get me home' mode range, if you're looking for service BEMU fleets, why not order a current design such as a Desiro or FLIRT rather than try and convert 20-year-old trains?
If you order more than the bare minimum to operate the non-electric gaps you could cascade some Electrostars to replace older stock, or even (heaven forbid) electrify other lines with OLE (Chiltern comes to mind as a good home for them...)

 

[Chrisgr31]

There was no track or platform capacity to put on additional or longer services on the Uckfield line anyway - they were running 10-Car Class 171s in the peak, and the single line can't take more than 1tph

They were running 10 car class 171s in the peak they are now running 8 car 171s in the peak with no ability to lengthen them as rolling stock that was used to make them 10 is now in the East Midlands.

They clearly can run at 30 minute intervals as in the morning peak there is a service at 6.33, 7.03 and 7.33.

In addition in the evenings they used to run a service in the half hour slot from Oxted to Uckfield.

 

[Trainbike46]

They clearly can run at 30 minute intervals as in the morning peak there is a service at 6.33, 7.03 and 7.33.

Is this possible in both directions, or only in one direction?

Again, the technology allows now - an Electrostar was converted back in 2015! https://www.theguardian.com/environ...attery-powered-train-carries-first-passengers.
While I'm generally in support of all EMUs being converted to BEMUs with a minimum 'get me home' mode range, if you're looking for service BEMU fleets, why not order a current design such as a Desiro or FLIRT rather than try and convert 20-year-old trains?
If you order more than the bare minimum to operate the non-electric gaps you could cascade some Electrostars to replace older stock, or even (heaven forbid) electrify other lines with OLE (Chiltern comes to mind as a good home for them...)

Agreed there should be an order for new BEMUs for all the southern diesel islands, with the 171s cascaded to operators that already have 170s to enable passenger growth or replace older/worse DMUs.

 

[PGAT]

Surely there are enough 171s to permit extending the 0733 from 6 to 9 cars while still having enough spares?

I’m not sure there is enough peak-time growth on the horizon to warrant an urgent order for more trains, and off-peak utilisation is quite bare bones

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Aug 2025 ==

Is this possible in both directions, or only in one direction?

Pre-covid they ran 2tph in the morning and evening peaks

 

[London Trains]

And off-peak utilisation is quite bare bones

Which is precisely because of the poor service...

Its the same as how SWR and Southern have cut off peak services, then claim that the reason for not restoring them is because passenger numbers have not fully recovered... when the cuts are the exact reason why passenger numbers have not recovered

As they say, build it and they will come...its like they don't understand the concept of induced demand.

 

[PGAT]

Which is precisely because of the poor service...

Its the same as how SWR and Southern have cut off peak services, then claim that the reason for not restoring them is because passenger numbers have not fully recovered... when the cuts are the exact reason why passenger numbers have not recovered

As they say, build it and they will come...its like they don't understand the concept of induced demand.

Cuts and austerity is not relevant to my point, Uckfield has always been hourly off-peak using a single (4 car) unit and as a result the utilisation of the 171 fleet is very very low most times.

 

[Chrisgr31]

Cuts and austerity is not relevant to my point, Uckfield has always been hourly off-peak using a single (4 car) unit and as a result the utilisation of the 171 fleet is very very low most times.

Low off peak use is a combination of reasons. The alternative options of Tunbridge Wells and Haywards Heath only cost a couple of pounds more for which you get a greater choice of trains and a faster service.

The Uckfield Line is also seen as more unreliable than the other lines, even though the statistics don’t support this. Problem though is if you are affected by a cancellation it’s an hours delay. Local social media is constantly saying the service is extremely unreliable which just isn’t true.

For commuters the cost saving on the Uckfield line is a lot more significant although journey times and frequency put some off. Faster journeys and more frequent trains would attract even more to the peak hour service.

Southern proved when first taking on the franchise what happened if you improved the service. The outcome was the need to lengthen all the platforms.

 

[Bikeman78]

There was no track or platform capacity to put on additional or longer services on the Uckfield line anyway - they were running 10-Car Class 171s in the peak, and the single line can't take more than 1tph.

The loops are placed to allow a half hourly service. When the normal service was restored following the Cowden crash, they had a half hourly service for a weekend using DEMUs. I don't recall any problems with timekeeping.

 

[Chrisgr31]

Whoops I shouldn’t have said the service isn’t too bad as now the line is shut between Crowborough and Uckfield!

 

[weeklycommuter]

The Siemens Desiro Verve battery train which could be built at their factory in Goole is mention at around 11 minutes into the following Green Signals podcast this week. The stated guaranteed range is 50 miles.

The train is shown as operating with overhead electrification where this is available and battery where it is not. The Marshlink, North Downs and Uckfield line train services would require battery plus third rail trains while some other train services could require battery plus dual voltage overhead and third rail trains. This could include London Waterloo to Salisbury and Exeter train services on West of England Line if overhead electrification is applied to the freight route Basingstoke-Salisbury-Southampton and/or has to be used for discontinuous electrification Basingstoke-Salisbury-Exeter.

Inside Yorkshire’s £250m train factory: Goole Rail Village – Green Signals

www.greensignals.org

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Aug 2025 ==

Why would they not have enough seats?

Some diesel trains do not have enough seats. Cross Country trains are the worst example but many other diesel trains also do not have enough seats. I certainly would want and expect any battery trains that replace these diesel trains to have enough seats but the point needs to be made that more seats are needed when these diesel trains are replaced.

 

[Bald Rick]

Some diesel trains do not have enough seats. Cross Country trains are the worst example but many other diesel trains also do not have enough seats. I certainly would want and expect any battery trains that replace these diesel trains to have enough seats but the point needs to be made that more seats are needed when these diesel trains are replaced.

I agree with the principle; I read you post as implying that battery trains would for some reason not have enough seats because they were battery trains. Sorry if I have that wrong.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

i havent checked, maybe I should, but I assume that is at the same site where they have been installing some huge great new transformers to boost the electricity supply to Uckfield - presumably to serve the significant residential development in the area.

That is Little Horsted 400/132kV Grid Supply point (GSP) which will have 2 x 240MVA transformers. Its has two drivers - Firstly to provide a replacement supply to Lewes GSP as the plan is to remove the existing Lewes to Polegate 132kV circuit across the South Downs due to condition and improvements to visual landscape (perhaps we should be replacing 25kV for 3rd rail in areas of outstanding natural beauty across the UK!!). Secondly to accept a number of proposed solar and battery storage developments. The new Battery Storage facility reference by @Bald Rick will be connected at 132kV to Little Horsted.

None of this changes the supply at Uckfield Primary S/Stn which is fed at 33kV from Lewes 132/33kV S/Stn and provides 11kV supplies to the towns secondary substations. The nearest Secondary S/stn is as Uckfield Station but is only rated at 750kVA so would be of no use. However the 33/11kV Uckfield S/Stn is less than 200m away from the station and has recently been uprated to 18/24MVA ONAN transformer and has ample headroom currently to support a dedicated 11kV supply so should be able to support 2MVA. Mind you plenty of housebuilding in the area going on so may have soaked up some of the spare capacity.

Moving up the line there is 33/6.6kV S/Stn at Jarvis Brook about 500m from Crowborough (&Jarvis Brook) Stn but they are only 5MVA primary transformers so would need reinforcing for a 2MVA supply and expensive cable works.

The alternative would be the West Ealing trickle charge battery substation but I'm surmising that if you've got 2x3 cars down or even an 8 car your going to want plenty of MVAs to recharge the batteries in quick time so even a local battery will need a reasonable sized connection to be able to store enough energy every hour

 

[Harlequinuk]

A question about power if i may!

How much `power` can the line from Lewes to Hastings provide on 3rd rail? I remember seeing a 700/1 at Lewes on a diversion, many years ago - but could they now run to Hastings?

 

[stadler]

A question about power if i may!

How much `power` can the line from Lewes to Hastings provide on 3rd rail? I remember seeing a 700/1 at Lewes on a diversion, many years ago - but could they now run to Hastings?

Southern regularly run 12 coach 377s and 12 coach 387s all the way to Hastings and Ore so i see no reason why the 12 coach 700s could not.

 

[Harlequinuk]

If they are drawing 5mw on 3rd rail - why isnt Class 92`s used on all of the network, as they draw less?

 

[JonathanH]

Southern regularly run 12 coach 377s and 12 coach 387s all the way to Hastings and Ore so i see no reason why the 12 coach 700s could not.

Do Southern really take 12 coach trains through to Hastings without leaving a unit or two behind at Eastbourne?

 

[stadler]

Do Southern really take 12 coach trains through to Hastings without leaving a unit or two behind at Eastbourne?

Yes it happens all the time. I have spotted full 12 coach Southern trains at Hastings and Ore on four separate occasions just within the last two months. In fact just at the end of last week i had a full 12 coach train on a Bexhill to Eastbourne journey i made. I am not sure whether it is booked or it only happens when they do not have staff to divide them at Eastbourne station. But it is certainly fairly common.

 

[The exile]

The big issues are going to be charging cycles, weight (electric trains are lighter than battery trains so less track wear and tear), potentially reliability and the fact that everyone else has already moved to overhead electrification for trains.

Although most other countries are much further down the electric line than we are, that doesn’t preclude them looking at discontinuous electrification for some of the bits that are left - the Germans and Dutch certainly are - which means development won’t be for us alone.

 

[BerkshireRails]

Even the fully electric Southeastern are looking at discontinuous electrification to improve safety and reduce maintenance cost.