Breckland Line Electrification

[jopsuk]

I'm pretty sure that if you put out an OJEU tender notice for two car EMUs, the usual suspects would respond with suitable designs from their standard range, with the equipment divided up and packaged suitably.

 

[Aictos]

Good point.

This is a problem with some of the electrification wishlists I've seen. No disrespect to the good people of East Anglia, but there are some branches run by 153s where a full sized EMU would be a bit of a waste.

Then again, if you think that the "main lines" in East Anglia have a good enough case for electrification then there's the question about what to do with the small number of DMUs left over. Could it be more economical to electrify the branches than to retain a handful of 153s? Especially as electrification allows through running. But I can't be sure.

Well considering when Anglia introduced the existing Norwich to Cambridge service they had to upgrade the service from 2 car DMUs to 3 car DMUs due to growth, surely that would make it a candidate for possible electrification as well act as a diversionary route for Norwich to Liverpool Street services by diverting them via Cambridge then down the West Anglia Main Line into London all under the wires.

If Ely West Curve was made bi-directional once more then it would help improve capacity at Ely, you could then convert the Cambridge to Norwich service to a Norwich - Cambridge - Peterborough and return, this would help resolve overcrowding between Peterborough and Cambridge on the Cross Country/East Midlands Trains services as the EMT services could avoid Ely.

 

[ainsworth74]

I'm pretty sure that if you put out an OJEU tender notice for two car EMUs, the usual suspects would respond with suitable designs from their standard range, with the equipment divided up and packaged suitably.

Surley it wouldn't even be that much work? You could just build a 380 or 379 in a DTSO + DMSO formation, the only work would be to stick a cab on one end of the existing TSO design as I would have thought everything else could stay the same.

 

[tbtc]

Single carriage EMUs exist in Europe, so I don't see any reason to believe they could not here

You could build them, sure, but the actual number of "small" EMUs would be pretty tiny, which would mean that they cost a lot (per coach) to build - some Norfolk branch lines couldn't justify that kind of investment. Look at how the order for eighty 350 carriages is costing quite a bit per coach compared to some "bulk" orders.

There's also the DDA issue that you mentioned - any modern train would need to have a "disabled" toilet, which would take up a lot of the space on a single coach unit (unless you build it toiletless) - this is something which will need to be addressed on lines which currently see single 153s - I'm not sure what the best solution to that would be.

 

[jopsuk]

Depends how compressors, rectifiers and control equipment are distributed through the unit (don't forget a loo, the pantograph and transformer- the designation on the carriage sticker is PTSOL (W)). It wouldn't be hard, but might take the design engineers more than five minutes. Certainly not a reason why electification would be a problem.

 

[cle]

Wouldn't the point of this be to run Norwich trains to Kings Cross, which has a much quicker journey time to Cambridge than Liverpool St?

 

[LE Greys]

Wouldn't the point of this be to run Norwich trains to Kings Cross, which has a much quicker journey time to Cambridge than Liverpool St?

Capacity through Welwyn would be the problem there, plus the fact that it's further from the City (although convenient for St Pancras). Upgrading the Hertford Loop might help, although the Lea Valley would be preferable, perhaps absorbing the King's Lynn trains and giving two more Welwyn paths.

 

[cle]

Only if line speeds are raised (it crawls from Liverpool St to Tottenham) and stops are omitted. Whittlesford and Audley End would need to go, as would Cheshunt and Broxbourne.

Even the faster trains on that line stop too much. It would need to be non-stop to Cambridge as the Cruiser to compete. Maybe Tottenham Hale as it gives the West End access - whereas an equivalent Finsbury Park call on the Cruiser is duplicating a lot.

 

[jopsuk]

Capacity through Welwyn would be the problem there, plus the fact that it's further from the City (although convenient for St Pancras). Upgrading the Hertford Loop might help, although the Lea Valley would be preferable, perhaps absorbing the King's Lynn trains and giving two more Welwyn paths.

could do Kings Cross without using any more paths, though it would need additional stock- simply extend the Cambridge Express/Cruiser/whatever it is called that terminates at Cambridge to Norwich, in the same way as the opposite half hour extends to Kings Lynn.

On the WA, I reckon if you could run the off peak "fast" as it does in the peak- Whittlesford, Audley End, Bishops Stortford, Tottenham Hale- that would give an acceptable journey time. You're not going to be able to a non-stop like on the Kings Cross line.

 

[LE Greys]

could do Kings Cross without using any more paths, though it would need additional stock- simply extend the Cambridge Express/Cruiser/whatever it is called that terminates at Cambridge to Norwich, in the same way as the opposite half hour extends to Kings Lynn.

On the WA, I reckon if you could run the off peak "fast" as it does in the peak- Whittlesford, Audley End, Bishops Stortford, Tottenham Hale- that would give an acceptable journey time. You're not going to be able to a non-stop like on the Kings Cross line.

Beer Train to the students (or at least is was once).