3rd Rail Infill suggestions

[Llandudno]

Promising to hear that 3rd Rail Infill is going to be actively considered according to the Shapps/Williams report to reduce diesel islands, which sections of the existing network are likely to be electrified first?

Is there any point in extending Merseyrail electrification as the the new units can potentially run on battery power over short sections?

Moderators please feel free to move to the Speculative thread if this is deemed more appropriate!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Oxted-Uckfield definitely needs doing.

I think it's worth doing Merseyrail to Headbolt Lane and Skem, yes.

 

[Llandudno]

Oxted-Uckfield definitely needs doing.

I think it's worth doing Merseyrail to Headbolt Lane and Skem, yes.

I guess Headbolt Lane may happen when the new station is built, but Skelmersdale is not an ‘existing’ line.

 

[Fincra5]

Promising to hear that 3rd Rail Infill is going to be actively considered according to the Shapps/Williams report to reduce diesel islands, which sections of the existing network are likely to be electrified first?

Is there any point in extending Merseyrail electrification as the the new units can potentially run on battery power over short sections?

Moderators please feel free to move to the Speculative thread if this is deemed more appropriate!

Oxted to Uckfield... Is the major one.

Followed by, for me, The Marshlink (That has been suggested for HS1 units to reach Hastings) and then North Downs Line.

 

[Aictos]

Oxted-Uckfield definitely needs doing.

If Oxted to Uckfield is being done then Ore to Ashford International would also have to be considered as otherwise the operator would have a small fleet of DMUs in what is a majority EMU operation.

It be far better for the operator to go to a purely EMU operation as they could at the same time look replacing the Classes 171, 455 and 313 fleets with a pure EMU platform.

Also the North Downs should be done as it's got existing 3rd rail at either end of the line so is a no brainer, with infrastructure improvements the operator could use dual voltage traction that operates off both AC OHLE and DC 3rd Rail.

Continuing the discussion of NSE operators, I think that 3rd rail extension should be considered for Basingstoke/Redbridge to Salisbury and Eastleigh to Romsey via Chandler's Ford which should reduce the amount of DMU operations which would decrease even more if a 3rd Rail/Diesel Bi Mode replacement would replace the Classes 158/159 fleets when it's time to replace them

 

[adrock1976]

Ones I suggest would be:

The missing sections between Wokingham - Reigate
Kirkby - Wigan Wallgate
Ormskirk - Farrington Curve Junction (unsure if the 777s are designed for dual voltage or not) - perhaps post HS2 when Preston station is rebuilt and with dedicated tracks on the left hand side Farrington Curve Jct - Preston?

 

[HST43257]

Oxted to Uckfield
Ore to Ashford
Wokingham to Reigate (anything remaining)

Ellesmere Port to Helsby
Ormskirk to Southport via new curve
Kirkby to Skelmersdale and Wigan Wallgate
Bidston to Wrexham Central

 

[Snow1964]

Uckfield line
Ashford-Ore
Wokingham - Ash and Guildford (Shalford) - Redhill
Totton - Hythe (if reopened to passengers)

Brentford / Kew bridge - Acton (I think this had 4th rail until 1940s, certainly to Kew Bridge station, possibly even Gunnersbury spur until closure)

Reading (East) spurs (with short dual electrification for changeovers)

Possibly Romsey (from both Eastleigh and Redbridge), especially if Romsey northwards gets 25kv eventually

 

[AM9]

So this 'active considering' is mentioned in the Williams report. Who will give the authority to ignore the safety considerations that have led to the current ban on new 3rd rail?

 

[S&CLER]

Ones I suggest would be:

The missing sections between Wokingham - Reigate
Kirkby - Wigan Wallgate
Ormskirk - Farrington Curve Junction (unsure if the 777s are designed for dual voltage or not) - perhaps post HS2 when Preston station is rebuilt and with dedicated tracks on the left hand side Farrington Curve Jct - Preston?

Given the housing to the west of the cutting in this part of Penwortham, it would be difficult to widen the short section from Farington Curve to Skew Bridge Jn from 4 tracks to 6. From Skew Bridge there are 6 tracks, 2 being goods lines on a separate steel bridge that perhaps could be upgraded, at a cost of course. Would it be worth it?

The 777s have roof wells with passive provision for pantographs, according to the latest Modern Railways. So 25kV into Preston from Ormskirk seems more sensible. I don't expect to see it happen, though. There are many far more deserving routes.

 

[mmh]

So this 'active considering' is mentioned in the Williams report. Who will give the authority to ignore the safety considerations that have led to the current ban on new 3rd rail?

This comes up every time third rail infill is mentioned. Where is it banned, and by whom? New use may be currently unlikely to be approved, but that is far from being banned by regulation or legislation. The reality is that new third rail is laid, else all track (and depot) layouts would be set in stone and Thameslink 2000 and London Overground East London line wouldn't have happened.

 

[Starmill]

Does an "infill" in the context here mean more like a whole long section of route such as Ore to Ashford International, or does it mean a small section of track to permit an improvement in electrically powered train km, such as Aldershot South Jn to North Camp.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ones I suggest would be:

The missing sections between Wokingham - Reigate
Kirkby - Wigan Wallgate

Interesting option, presumably this would be so it can get under the bridge which 25kV can't?

Ormskirk - Farrington Curve Junction (unsure if the 777s are designed for dual voltage or not) - perhaps post HS2 when Preston station is rebuilt and with dedicated tracks on the left hand side Farrington Curve Jct - Preston?

Third rail and battery. A transformer can be fitted but only if batteries aren't.

If I was electrifying to Ormskirk I suspect it could be done by bringing 25kV down strung off the mainline like Windermere.

 

[XAM2175]

So this 'active considering' is mentioned in the Williams report. Who will give the authority to ignore the safety considerations that have led to the current ban on new 3rd rail?

This comes up every time third rail infill is mentioned. Where is it banned, and by whom? New use may be currently unlikely to be approved, but that is far from being banned by regulation or legislation.

Yes, there is no formal "ban" - but there is a fairly steep set of hurdles.

The Office of Rail and Road have a policy document on third-rail electrification available at the following link. It's dated to March 2015, but as far as I'm aware it remains current.

Our strategic risk chapters | Office of Rail and Road

To help prioritise ours and the industry’s strategic focus we issue chapters, which we update as part of a rolling process, focused on the key risks from across the sector and based on incident data, risk trend analysis and the findings from our inspections, investigations and audits.

www.orr.gov.uk

The summary is:

1. The relevant duty holder must be able to demonstrate that any proposed new-build or extended third rail proposal will comply with all applicable health and safety legislation.
2. There is a presumption against the reasonable practicability of new-build or extended DC third rail in view of the safety requirements duty holders must satisfy in order to justify the use of third rail.
3. Where existing third rail needs to continue to be operated, maintained and renewed for the purpose of the railway, the relevant duty holder must ensure it continually reviews such third rail and seek improvements in the design, operation and maintenance of the third rail systems.

The RSSB were doing a consultation last year on revising this policy as part of the wider decarbonisation drive, which was discussed on these boards. I don't believe they've published any of the results yet.

RSSB looking at possible extension of 3rd rail electrification

The Rail Safety and Standards Board is looking for consultancy support for a project that aims to: "• Support the decarbonisation of traction in regions with a predominant 750V DC top contact third rail system by identifying the potential to remove diesel services by either enabling extensions...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[swt_passenger]

This comes up every time third rail infill is mentioned. Where is it banned, and by whom? New use may be currently unlikely to be approved, but that is far from being banned by regulation or legislation. The reality is that new third rail is laid, else all track (and depot) layouts would be set in stone and Thameslink 2000 and London Overground East London line wouldn't have happened.

These aren’t particularly good examples, Thameslink itself didn’t really change the third rail network extent, and the extended ELL was authorised, built and completed (in 2010), significantly before the ORR’s changed views were publicised (2015).

 

[cle]

Seems like the obvious candidates on the SE and Mersey networks. Helsby especially has a much better service than it did a few years back, and only due to improve with more Halton expansion.

Kew Bridge/Loop to South Acton is interesting. I am assuming this is for the West London Orbital plans (I'd suggest Bollo Lane needs serious thought) - presumably then it might be dual voltage AC units, with a little Dudding wiring, given the AC end-ups on the MML and wired NLL section (through OOC).

 

[adrock1976]

Interesting option, presumably this would be so it can get under the bridge which 25kV can't?



Third rail and battery. A transformer can be fitted but only if batteries aren't.

If I was electrifying to Ormskirk I suspect it could be done by bringing 25kV down strung off the mainline like Windermere.

If it is the bridge at Wigan Wallgate that is being referred to, that would be an option to have an overrun up the hill.

I was more of anticipating Kirkby - Wigan Wallgate to transfer to Merseyrail, likewise Ormskirk - Preston (30 minutes to each of Burscough Bridge/Southport and Preston, with Midge Hall station reopened).

Given the housing to the west of the cutting in this part of Penwortham, it would be difficult to widen the short section from Farington Curve to Skew Bridge Jn from 4 tracks to 6. From Skew Bridge there are 6 tracks, 2 being goods lines on a separate steel bridge that perhaps could be upgraded, at a cost of course. Would it be worth it?

The 777s have roof wells with passive provision for pantographs, according to the latest Modern Railways. So 25kV into Preston from Ormskirk seems more sensible. I don't expect to see it happen, though. There are many far more deserving routes.

I believe there are plans for Midge Hall station to reopen at some point in the future, so a doubling of frequency from every 60 minutes to every 30 minutes may be worthwhile, plus it is the shortest route between Preston and Liverpool. Also, introduce a Sunday service too.

 

[RobShipway]

Uckfield line
Ashford-Ore
Wokingham - Ash and Guildford (Shalford) - Redhill
Totton - Hythe (if reopened to passengers)

Brentford / Kew bridge - Acton (I think this had 4th rail until 1940s, certainly to Kew Bridge station, possibly even Gunnersbury spur until closure)

Reading (East) spurs (with short dual electrification for changeovers)

Possibly Romsey (from both Eastleigh and Redbridge), especially if Romsey northwards gets 25kv eventually

This is the options that I would choose.

 

[zwk500]

Uckfield line

Yes

Ashford-Ore

Not really worth it for the traffic on offer, batteries are a better option (and they're pretty much there on the technical front)

Wokingham - Ash and Guildford (Shalford) - Redhill
Totton - Hythe (if reopened to passengers)

Both Yes. Big if on Totton-Hythe though (but a positive one, at the moment).

Brentford / Kew bridge - Acton (I think this had 4th rail until 1940s, certainly to Kew Bridge station, possibly even Gunnersbury spur until closure)

I'd actually do Acton South to Kew Jns as OLE and Only extend the 3rd rail far enough for the changeover on the spur.

Reading (East) spurs (with short dual electrification for changeovers).

No point unless XC get dual voltage bi-modes.

Possibly Romsey (from both Eastleigh and Redbridge), especially if Romsey northwards gets 25kv eventually

Reading-Basingstoke, Worting-Salisbury-Romsey-Redbridge and Romsey-Eastleigh I'd do as all OLE, with if manageable Basing-Worting as dual voltage.

 

[DelW]

Also the North Downs should be done as it's got existing 3rd rail at either end of the line so is a no brainer, with infrastructure improvements the operator could use dual voltage traction that operates off both AC OHLE and DC 3rd Rail.

Dual voltage stock would only be needed if operation stayed with GWR (AC needed to get access to Reading depot, also needing the dive under or link to be electrified).

But if the line is otherwise third rail, it would surely be logical to transfer operation to a TOC with a DC fleet and DC experience, either SWR, Southern or even (bearing in mind the line's origins) Southeastern .

 

[zwk500]

Dual voltage stock would only be needed if operation stayed with GWR (AC needed to get access to Reading depot, also needing the dive under or link to be electrified).

But if the line is otherwise third rail, it would surely be logical to transfer operation to a TOC with a DC fleet and DC experience, either SWR, Southern or even (bearing in mind the line's origins) Southeastern .

Even if electrification for the North Downs were approved tomorrow, by the time it's been planned and built GBR would have come in and who knows how services will be structured/allocated under them.

 

[RobShipway]

No point unless XC get dual voltage bi-modes.

XC does not operate in Reading (East), unless there is still the once a week service still from Guildford to Manchester first thing on a Saturday morning.

I think you would still need changeovers for use with Class 769 units though to changeover from Overheard to 3rd rail dc, as to me it seems silly for a unit to be using OLE, then diesel for a short distance, to then be able to use 3rd rail in either coming from the depot or perhaps working an Oxford - Gatwick service.

Dual voltage stock would only be needed if operation stayed with GWR (AC needed to get access to Reading depot, also needing the dive under or link to be electrified).

But if the line is otherwise third rail, it would surely be logical to transfer operation to a TOC with a DC fleet and DC experience, either SWR, Southern or even (bearing in mind the line's origins) Southeastern .

As per my comment above.

 

[zwk500]

XC does not operate in Reading (East), unless there is still the once a week service still from Guildford to Manchester first thing on a Saturday morning.

It's booked, but no idea if it runs due to COVID. AFAIK there's no intent to withdraw it completely. The route knowledge comes in handy when problems happen at Eastleigh or Basingstoke.

I think you would still need changeovers for use with Class 769 units though to changeover from Overheard to 3rd rail dc, as to me it seems silly for a unit to be using OLE, then diesel for a short distance, to then be able to use 3rd rail in either coming from the depot or perhaps working an Oxford - Gatwick service.

It's not worth it for the handful of daily moves on and off depot. That could easily be solved by handing the route over to Southern of SWR. It does seem rather silly for units to switch traction 2 times within such a short distance, but it would also seem rather silly to spend a vast amount of money electrifying the line. If it wasn't worth doing it while rebuilding Reading Station, what's changed?

 

[RobShipway]

It's booked, but no idea if it runs due to COVID. AFAIK there's no intent to withdraw it completely. The route knowledge comes in handy when problems happen at Eastleigh or Basingstoke.

It's not worth it for the handful of daily moves on and off depot. That could easily be solved by handing the route over to Southern of SWR. It does seem rather silly for units to switch traction 2 times within such a short distance, but it would also seem rather silly to spend a vast amount of money electrifying the line. If it wasn't worth doing it while rebuilding Reading Station, what's changed?

I think since the rebuild of Reading station, people have began to realise how much diesel units are run over electrified routes where they could be powered by that electricity, hence why GWR class 769 units are tri-mode, rather than the usual bi-mode for these trains. It means that where the class 769 units would otherwise be running on diesel power on the third rail lines between Reading and Redhill/Gatwick on the North Downs route.

For Southern or SWR, they would need units like the class 769 to be able to run the routes. If Southern or SWR where to run the routes, then that would actually in my book be more reason why you would need to fill in the gaps on the North Downs route to be 3rd Rail electrification, otherwise you have the same issue as GWR running class 165 units on the route.

 

[Gareth]

Oxted-Uckfield definitely needs doing.

I think it's worth doing Merseyrail to Headbolt Lane and Skem, yes.

And potentially any extensions onto the CLC, if the line was to be split; although that's a whole different debate.

 

[swt_passenger]

XC does not operate in Reading (East), unless there is still the once a week service still from Guildford to Manchester first thing on a Saturday morning.

It was a daily service pre-COVID. But a decision to electrify wouldn’t be based on XC’s limited needs on that route, it would have to be based on GWR use.

 

[DelW]

I think since the rebuild of Reading station, people have began to realise how much diesel units are run over electrified routes where they could be powered by that electricity, hence why GWR class 769 units are tri-mode, rather than the usual bi-mode for these trains. It means that where the class 769 units would otherwise be running on diesel power on the third rail lines between Reading and Redhill/Gatwick on the North Downs route.

For Southern or SWR, they would need units like the class 769 to be able to run the routes. If Southern or SWR where to run the routes, then that would actually in my book be more reason why you would need to fill in the gaps on the North Downs route to be 3rd Rail electrification, otherwise you have the same issue as GWR running class 165 units on the route.

It has been said on these forums before that there's no intention of extending North Downs trains beyond Reading to Didcot or Oxford, because of the likelihood of exporting delays from the Brighton or Pompey lines to the GWML, or vice versa.

If Wokingham to Ash and Shalford to Reigate were DC electrified, which I thought was the thrust of this discussion, then potentially Southern or SWR operated North Downs services to Reading platforms 4, 5, & 6 would be able to use any DC units.

 

[swt_passenger]

It's booked, but no idea if it runs due to COVID. AFAIK there's no intent to withdraw it completely. The route knowledge comes in handy when problems happen at Eastleigh or Basingstoke.

[XC]
I believe they do still run weekdays but only ECS at the moment, (which RTT shows for this morning, and last week), presumably for route retention as you note.

 

[RobShipway]

It was a daily service pre-COVID. But a decision to electrify wouldn’t be based on XC’s limited needs on that route, it would have to be based on GWR use.

I would have to agree, as XC would need a tri-mode train rather than a bi-mode train to be using it between Wokingham - Ash.

It has been said on these forums before that there's no intention of extending North Downs trains beyond Reading to Didcot or Oxford, because of the likelihood of exporting delays from the Brighton or Pompey lines to the GWML, or vice versa.

If Wokingham to Ash and Shalford to Reigate were DC electrified, which I thought was the thrust of this discussion, then potentially Southern or SWR operated North Downs services to Reading platforms 4, 5, & 6 would be able to use any DC units.

There is no intentions at the moment to be running the North Downs trains further than Reading. Presently with the level of flights from Gatwick, I would not be surprised if all trains start/end at Redhill only, with passengers having to change for Gatwick on to Southern services.

[XC]
I believe they do still run weekdays but only ECS at the moment, (which RTT shows for this morning, and last week), presumably for route retention as you note.

Are XC still using the Depot facilities at Three Bridges then?

 

[swt_passenger]

Are XC still using the Depot facilities at Three Bridges then?

No - they are running to/from Eastleigh but via Havant and Fareham, which has been going on for many years.