Chiltern line Electrification

[philthetube]

Another option might be to cut the Metropolitan back to Watford via the slow lines only from Harrow to Moor Park. That would give total segregation between the Chiltern and the Met, so they could have their own electrification systems and avoid most of the earthing problems of dual electrification.


Probably easier to run the MET to Aylesbury

 

[The Planner]

I just can't see where they would find the platforms at OOC for terminating services, especially longer "mainline" services. A Crossrail extension is the only thing that makes long-term sense to me. High Wycombe to West Ealing is suitable in the short term as a diesel Crossrail feeder service, but longer term an electric full-sized Crossrail extension to Aylesbury (or even Milton Keynes via EWR?) via High Wycombe would free up the most capacity at Marylebone.

Depends on if the Wycombe Single is cut off permanently or comes back. If it is permanent then the chances are it would be double tracked and a new station at the end. I can never see Crossrail going up the Chilterns, the plan is still to run them up to Tring via the WCML as the turnbacks at OOC are there as stubs for the lines to be extended up to Willesden on the WCML. Whether anyone (ie: Tfl) stumps up the cash for that is a different story.

 

[FordFocus]

how much work would it be to convert the 165/0s to 90mph specification like their Thames Valley /1 siblings?

Yaw Dampers fitting to the bogies which is an easy job as the mountings are already there.

Requires a 90mph gearbox which I'd hazard a guess to say would be hard to acquire for number of carriages. Probably would look towards the ZF 172 style gearboxes which are in production. Maybe uprated to 100mph but the main issue would be loss of acceleration. The engines can be sluggish when the air conditioning is at max output and occasionally struggle to hit 70mph. I'd like to say stick powerful engines on them but that's a whole different topic

New Speedo. New engine speed cut out. That's about it.

 

[Mikey C]

One important factor is the cost of electrification. GWML has worked out much more expensive than originally thought. Meanwhile, oil prices have gone down. If electrification remains anywhere near as expensive as it is currently, oil prices will have to rise substantially to make the business case for electrification a sound one again. Electrifying the route from Marylebone may be forced to wait until it can be justified as a large-scale infill project.

I imagine air quality issues will be more important.

Diesel engines in cities seem to be public enemy number one now, I can imagine wanting to remove diesel trains from all London termini being a London Mayor aspiration...

 

[Kettledrum]

I imagine air quality issues will be more important.

Diesel engines in cities seem to be public enemy number one now, I can imagine wanting to remove diesel trains from all London termini being a London Mayor aspiration...

Removing diesel trains from Birmingham New Street should also be a priority due to its enclosed nature. Of course the Chiltern trains go to Moor Street which is more open and diesel fumes are less of a problem there.

 

[The Planner]

Snow Hill is just as enclosed though.

 

[Harbornite]

I imagine air quality issues will be more important.

Diesel engines in cities seem to be public enemy number one now, I can imagine wanting to remove diesel trains from all London termini being a London Mayor aspiration...

Removing diesel trains from Birmingham New Street should also be a priority due to its enclosed nature. Of course the Chiltern trains go to Moor Street which is more open and diesel fumes are less of a problem there.

Removing diesels from these locations is very much a long term thing. With New Street, you've got London Midland's Shrewsbury and Hereford services, Cambrian and North Wales services, not to mention Crosscountry services to Derby, Leicester and Nottingham (which could be wired within the next 20 years) as well as longer distance services to Cornwall and Scotland. Hopefully the next XC franchisee will order bi mode stock.

 

[43074]

Removing diesels from these locations is very much a long term thing. With New Street, you've got London Midland's Shrewsbury and Hereford services, Cambrian and North Wales services, not to mention Crosscountry services to Derby, Leicester and Nottingham (which could be wired within the next 20 years) as well as longer distance services to Cornwall and Scotland. Hopefully the next XC franchisee will order bi mode stock.

You would hope we won't be waiting for 20 years to electrify routes such as Birmingham - Leicester & Derby, which frankly should have been electrified decades ago. With the MML due for completion by 2023/2024, maybe sometime in CP7 (2024 - 2029) would be a better aspiration?

In terms of XC and bi-modes - the XC franchise is losing a significant amount of money, which in turn will make the investment case for new stock much harder to make. It makes sense from an operational perspective as a good proportion of their network is electrified, but do the finances stack up? The Voyagers aren't life expired, just too short for many of their services, and the 222s will soon be looking for a new home...

 

[158756]

I imagine air quality issues will be more important.

Diesel engines in cities seem to be public enemy number one now, I can imagine wanting to remove diesel trains from all London termini being a London Mayor aspiration...

I'm not convinced the government really are all that keen on the idea of removing diesel from city centres. It might happen, especially in London, as a side effect of financially viable electrification projects, but if we're saying that in 50+ years time, electrification will remove diesel from the city, is it really considered a priority?
If they're happy to put it off until most of us have gone? And if they're happy for diesel trains to run through our cities for the next 50+ years, why not the 50 after that? They could place a very large, very expensive order of bi-modes to get the job done in a fraction of the time, at a fraction of the cost. But it won't happen, because improved city centre air quality is not the main aim and there isn't a blank cheque for it.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Once the GWR and Mildland Mainline are both electrified will that leave just Marlybone and Waterloo as the only terminal stations in London to see diesel trains? I'd assume that by the time both them schemes are complete that the IEPs will be in squadron service on the ECML and the IEPs would be running in electric mode into Kings X

 

[Harbornite]

Once the GWR and Mildland Mainline are both electrified will that leave just Marlybone and Waterloo as the only terminal stations in London to see diesel trains? I'd assume that by the time both them schemes are complete that the IEPs will be in squadron service on the ECML and the IEPs would be running in electric mode into Kings X

Depends if the west coast franchisee are still using Super Voyagers on North wales, Shrewsbury and Blackpool services. There's also the sleeper services into Paddington which won't be going electric anytime soon.

 

[jopsuk]

Once the GWR and Mildland Mainline are both electrified will that leave just Marlybone and Waterloo as the only terminal stations in London to see diesel trains? I'd assume that by the time both them schemes are complete that the IEPs will be in squadron service on the ECML and the IEPs would be running in electric mode into Kings X

London Bridge as well, oddly

 

[D365]

There's also the sleeper services into Paddington which won't be going electric anytime soon.

Unless GWR consider leasing electric locomotives.

There's also the Class 180s for Great Central into Kings Cross.

 

[Mikey C]

I'm not convinced the government really are all that keen on the idea of removing diesel from city centres. It might happen, especially in London, as a side effect of financially viable electrification projects, but if we're saying that in 50+ years time, electrification will remove diesel from the city, is it really considered a priority?
If they're happy to put it off until most of us have gone? And if they're happy for diesel trains to run through our cities for the next 50+ years, why not the 50 after that? They could place a very large, very expensive order of bi-modes to get the job done in a fraction of the time, at a fraction of the cost. But it won't happen, because improved city centre air quality is not the main aim and there isn't a blank cheque for it.

If London demands it say, then Birmingham won't be far behind, that C4 documentary showing the terrible air quality at New Street really brought the issue to public attention

 

[43096]

Unless GWR consider leasing electric locomotives.

There's probably not much demand for a Paddington-Newbury or Paddington-Bristol sleeper service.....

 

[D365]

There's probably not much demand for a Paddington-Newbury or Paddington-Bristol sleeper service.....

... swapping to a 57 at Newbury.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Are Grand Central routes non-electrified sections short enough to a bi-mode IEP could be viable for them?

Would class 88s be suitable as a future replacement for GWR locos for their sleepers?

 

[jimm]

Would class 88s be suitable as a future replacement for GWR locos for their sleepers?

No. The Class 88 only has a 950hp diesel in it.

 

[D365]

Remember that the Class 88 is not a 'true' bi-mode. It's an electric locomotive with a last-mile diesel.

 

[aylesbury]

People along the Chiltern Line Amersham to Aylesbury do not want the Met thank you .

 

[aylesbury]

Meridians are not suitable for Chiltern.

More Mk3 coaches and class 68s are needed as traffic expands.

 

[edwin_m]

... swapping to a 57 at Newbury.

Seems pretty pointless for GWR to maintain one electric loco (they'd probably need a second one as a spare), especially as the 57 that detached at Newbury would most likely run light at least as far as Reading for fuel/service anyway.

Running via Bristol might make slightly more sense, as the services could perhaps be timed to swap locos there, but still not a likely proposal.

 

[sprinterguy]

Are Grand Central routes non-electrified sections short enough to a bi-mode IEP could be viable for them?

East Coast's bi-modes are required to be able to work over the Northallerton - Stockton - Newcastle Durham coast route in diesel mode as needed, so it wouldn't be an issue for Grand Central; I don't believe that the Bradford route would place any greater demands on bi-mode sets with regards to mileage, gradients or maximum speed than the Sunderland route.

 

[The Planner]

Meridians are not suitable for Chiltern.

More Mk3 coaches and class 68s are needed as traffic expands.

Why? Or is it just a loco and mk3 thing?

 

[Mordac]

East Coast's bi-modes are required to be able to work over the Northallerton - Stockton - Newcastle Durham coast route in diesel mode as needed, so it wouldn't be an issue for Grand Central; I don't believe that the Bradford route would place any greater demands on bi-mode sets with regards to mileage, gradients or maximum speed than the Sunderland route.

If they can get to Inverness, I'm sure they'll manage Bradford...

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Would it be worth all TOCs who run sleepers getting together to get a bi-mode train designed with the engines under the none-sleeping coaches?

 

[43074]

Would it be worth all TOCs who run sleepers getting together to get a bi-mode train designed with the engines under the none-sleeping coaches?

No... Serco have 75 loco hauled sleeper coaches on order & GWR are investing heavily in a refurbishment for the Cornish Riviera so it would be a complete waste of money.

I don't see what this has to do with Chiltern electrification anyway.

 

[The Ham]

Why? Or is it just a loco and mk3 thing?

I would agree, why?

As 222's running as longer units (i.e. 8 coach units or longer) would be able to take more passengers that a comparable length loco, DVT and coaches, so it can't be a capacity issue.

It's not that a loco has faster top speeds or gets up to speed faster.

It can't be down to wear and tear on the tracks as a Loco is very punishing.

All in all I am really interested as to why.

 

[mr_jrt]

As for Rickmansworth...I suspect "North Curve" services are required here, but I don't know if that means a reinstated bay at Rickmansworth, (assuming the point is eventual AC electrification) a dual voltage service from Cheshem/Aylesbury to Watford, or a short one station stub of Met line terminating at Rickmansworth on an extended 4-track section.

Interestingly, I recently had another look at a FOI request that's a handy reference to platform lengths on TfL's network, and I was surprised to see that all the platforms Chiltern serve on the TfL section of the line are capable of 8x20m carriage operation...except Rickmansworth, which can only manage 6.5x20m carriages (or just shy of 7x23m and 5.5x23m stock, if you prefer).

Surely this makes the case for a rebuild of Rickmansworth to the east as planned even more compelling as it would enable Chiltern to move to standard 8x20m-car suburban trains as used on London Midland, Thameslink, & Southern's networks.

 

[FordFocus]

Meridians are not suitable for Chiltern.

More Mk3 coaches and class 68s are needed as traffic expands.

Why are Meridians not suitable? They are quicker accelerating trains, would fit in the loading gauge, have more seats for the platform space available as the DVT and 68 offer nothing for capacity.