• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Chiltern Railways Electrification

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
9 Dec 2023
Messages
584
Location
High Wycombe
in the latest RAIL:
A Strategic Business Case for partial electrification of the Chiltern Main Line has been compiled.
Discontinuous electrification of the route and new battery-electric trains from part of phase three of Chiltern Railways' 2030 Vision.
This will follow the refurbishment of Class 168
diesel multiple units and the introduction of Mk 5A carriages on services between London Marylebone and Birmingham. Marylebone is the only London terminus to not be electrified.
Speaking at the Mk 5A launch event, Chiltern Managing Director Richard Allan said precise locations had not been finalised, but noted: "We think Marylebone station, north of High Wycombe, and then wiring potentially towards Oxford or Banbury, and then look at new trains, infrastructure and power supply.
"We've done the Strategic Business Case. We now need to move to the Outline Business Case. As part of that, we want to go and talk to train manufacturers and say: 'can you provide a price for a package for power supply, infrastructure and trains to achieve an outcome that we will specify'." Electrification south from Snow Hill is also a possibility.
Reiterating that final locations are yet to be decided, Allan added that "relatively small" amounts of electrification would be enough to bring in battery-electric trains. Chiltern, Network Rail and the Department for Transport have agreed on discontinuous electrification, with work to understand what the market can provide, and the cost and benefits analysis still needing to be done.
Explaining why electrifying the entire 120-mile route was unlikely, Allan said: "You imagine putting wires through the tunnels at Marylebone. Very expensive, very disruptive."

He said the outcomes from that consultation will inform the final business case, which will include assessments of the cost, noise benefits, revenue benefit, and emissions.
While no specific timescale has been put in place, Allan said he'd like it to happen

"as soon as we can".
He added: "The trains we want to replace are the 165' diesels. They are 34 years old. The work may take five years from start to finish, from business case, conclusion and introduction into traffic." Allan said the Class 165s are still reliable, but maintain 3+2 seating and are showing their age.
"It's getting more challenging to find parts. We have people who have worked all their lives on the '165s', and know them inside and out. But they will get to 40 years and beyond. We have to be urgently looking now at their replacement. "And the replacement cannot be diesel. It cannot be like-for-like. It has to be a new technology and something that allows Chiltern trains to go from being an old diesel to being greener and quieter." Speaking about the Mk 5As, Allan said CR spent 18 months on the business case and had been talking to owners of various options to replace its Mk 3s. He told RAIL the operator had made the case for phase two of the 2030 Vision so it could increase services.
The Mk 5As will be used for the majority of Birmingham services, allowing Class 168s to be primarily used on Chiltern's Oxford route and the older '165s' to be primarily used on shorter routes to places such as Aylesbury and High Wycombe. At present '168s' are still used regularly on the Birmingham route, with Class 165s required to run to Oxford at times.
"We run around 350 services a weekday. We will take that to around 375-380 from December 2026. That's principally filling in the gaps, said Allan.
Examples of gaps include periods of the day when the Birmingham service is hourly instead of half-hourly.
Mk 5As will also be used for relief services in peak hours, mainly between Banbury and Marylebone.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

frankmoh

On Moderation
Joined
7 May 2025
Messages
821
Location
London
So have they given up on electrifying the bits that follow the Tube? It doesn't say where they will put the wires up.
 

Farigiraf

Member
Joined
23 Jul 2023
Messages
1,165
Location
Bridge on the River Cam
Is it possible to make a tri-mode Battery/OHLE/4th rail train to utilise tube electrification on the Aylesbury route? Or would it be too expensive to be worth it, considering the 4th rail collector shoe would only be used on one route?
 

stevieinselby

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2013
Messages
1,670
Location
Selby
So have they given up on electrifying the bits that follow the Tube? It doesn't say where they will put the wires up.
With the range we're seeing on batteries now, it's likely that the Aylesbury line could be run with fast chargers at Marylebone and Aylesbury, so no need for any wires on that route at all, let alone on complicating things with double-electrifying the sections of LU track or switching dual-voltage trains.
 
Joined
9 Dec 2023
Messages
584
Location
High Wycombe
Is it possible to make a tri-mode Battery/OHLE/4th rail train to utilise tube electrification on the Aylesbury route? Or would it be too expensive to be worth it, considering it'd only be used on one route?
Slightly pedantic, but surely it would only need to be 3rd rail? That seems to work when Overground and Underground share
 

Farigiraf

Member
Joined
23 Jul 2023
Messages
1,165
Location
Bridge on the River Cam
Slightly pedantic, but surely it would only need to be 3rd rail? That seems to work when Overground and Underground share
Would that require conversion to 3rd rail from 4th rail of the route from Harrow-on-the-Hill to Amersham? My idea was that Chiltern could utilise the existing electrification which may be cheaper than wiring sections at each end. If it's possible (and cheaper than wiring at each end) then the same tri-modes that will work on the North Downs line in the future could work on the Aylesbury line.
 

frankmoh

On Moderation
Joined
7 May 2025
Messages
821
Location
London
Slightly pedantic, but surely it would only need to be 3rd rail? That seems to work when Overground and Underground share
I seem to recall that the shared 3rd/4th rail there by Richmond is special. Something about one of the rails being bonded somewhere?
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
11,076
Location
West Wiltshire
Is it possible to make a tri-mode Battery/OHLE/4th rail train to utilise tube electrification on the Aylesbury route? Or would it be too expensive to be worth it, considering the 4th rail collector shoe would only be used on one route?
These days with ac drive, the 25kv is normally fed through a transformer to lower voltage (which could be nominally 750v), rectified to dc. The dc can be used to top up batteries or then power electronic inverters drive the ac motors. When braking the inverters 'run in reverse' converting ac from motors to dc to top up the battery, or convert surplus back to ac as regeneration.

If you already have a 25kv train, and dc batteries, and inverters, then the marginal cost of adding collection shoes to the train is tiny fraction of the cost of the train.

For decades Underground worked on 600v, with third rail at +400v and centre fourth rail at -200v. Where line is shared (eg to Richmond and Wimbledon, and Bakerloo towards Harrow/Watford) there is a short unelectrified gap where voltages change. and the fourth rail is bonded to running rails (at zero volts) with third rail at full voltage. In recent years both Metropolitan and District lines have increased voltage from 600 to 750v. But I cannot remember the split between third and forth rails now nominal extra 150v exists.
 

The Pelican

Member
Joined
3 Oct 2025
Messages
398
Location
London
I've always presumed the Aylesbury line would use batteries, possibly with some 25kv electrification from Marylebone to Wembley and beyond the end of the Metropolitan. It could also use batteries if the Watford Junction rail link ever goes ahead and Chiltern operate a service in the Amersham direction - the Watford Metropolitan branch as a whole is 100 today- Diamond Geezer had a good post on Croxley Green station.

It will be interesting if Modern Railways can get a look at the technical tradeoffs involved in discontinuous electrification of a busy mainline route.
 

Elecman

Established Member
Joined
31 Dec 2013
Messages
3,571
Location
Lancashire
These days with ac drive, the 25kv is normally fed through a transformer to lower voltage (which could be nominally 750v), rectified to dc. The dc can be used to top up batteries or then power electronic inverters drive the ac motors. When braking the inverters 'run in reverse' converting ac from motors to dc to top up the battery, or convert surplus back to ac as regeneration.

If you already have a 25kv train, and dc batteries, and inverters, then the marginal cost of adding collection shoes to the train is tiny fraction of the cost of the train.

For decades Underground worked on 600v, with third rail at +400v and centre fourth rail at -200v. Where line is shared (eg to Richmond and Wimbledon, and Bakerloo towards Harrow/Watford) there is a short unelectrified gap where voltages change. and the fourth rail is bonded to running rails (at zero volts) with third rail at full voltage. In recent years both Metropolitan and District lines have increased voltage from 600 to 750v. But I cannot remember the split between third and forth rails now nominal extra 150v exists.
+500/-250 volt
 

YamYamDave

Member
Joined
22 May 2021
Messages
15
Location
Black Country
Find it odd that there is insufficient space through the Marylebone tunnels given the London extension was built to a more generous loading gauge vs the rest of the non HS1/2 network.
 

SynthD

Established Member
Joined
4 Apr 2020
Messages
2,019
Location
UK
Find it odd that there is insufficient space through the Marylebone tunnels given the London extension was built to a more generous loading gauge vs the rest of the non HS1/2 network.
What gauge is it? The Victorian idea of generous may not be the 21stC idea of generous.
 

Zomboid

Established Member
Joined
2 Apr 2025
Messages
2,248
Location
Oxford
What shape are they? As I understand it, arches aren't generally too bad to get wires through because they're taller in the middle where the wires need to go, but the square girder type bridges can be much harder.

If it's a track lowering job then it would be hugely disruptive.
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,859
Find it odd that there is insufficient space through the Marylebone tunnels given the London extension was built to a more generous loading gauge vs the rest of the non HS1/2 network.
It was built to the prevailing board of trade loading gauge which was very slightly more generous than some earlier railways, but not much, and unlikely to make a difference.
 

Mikey C

Established Member
Joined
11 Feb 2013
Messages
8,244
While this sounds like a sensible proposal, it's slightly curious that this is being led by Chiltern Railways when they won't exist as a separate entity in 2 years time. Strategic decision over how much to electrify, and platform charging are surely decisions to be made by GBR?
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,286
The cheapest way to deal with Aylesbury would likely be to install fourth rail capability on the trains (or a subset thereof). It would avoid any infrastructure spend at all because the trains would be able to charge on the shared section.
 

Trainbike46

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2021
Messages
4,370
Location
belfast
While this sounds like a sensible proposal, it's slightly curious that this is being led by Chiltern Railways when they won't exist as a separate entity in 2 years time. Strategic decision over how much to electrify, and platform charging are surely decisions to be made by GBR?
Chiltern railways has way more knowledge of the relevant line, so in my eyes it makes sense for them to be leading this

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

The cheapest way to deal with Aylesbury would likely be to install fourth rail capability on the trains (or a subset thereof). It would avoid any infrastructure spend at all because the trains would be able to charge on the shared section.
This is the way I would do it too - it's unlikely to be costly to make the trains capable of taking power from the LU 4th rail anyway.

The Aylesbury branch? Presumably it would just go over to 168 working for the time being.
While this is possible, why would you?
 

JamesT

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2015
Messages
4,839
While this sounds like a sensible proposal, it's slightly curious that this is being led by Chiltern Railways when they won't exist as a separate entity in 2 years time. Strategic decision over how much to electrify, and platform charging are surely decisions to be made by GBR?
Why delay by several years waiting for GBR to be set up? GBR is going formed largely of ex-TOC and NR staff TUPEd across, so it quite probably would be exactly those people who currently wear Chiltern shirts. I which case, why not get started now? Especially with the long lead times on many aspects of electrification.
 
Joined
5 Aug 2015
Messages
894
Location
Norfolk
The route between marylebone and the actual Chiltern Mainline (at neasden jnc?) is not shared with 4th rail so I don't think there'd be major issue in terms of dual voltage. (Bromley to Upminster has been like this since the 1960s seemingly without consequence).

Much more of a problem is rebuilding the overbridges shared with LUL. Negotiating line closures with jubilee and met lines sounds very expensive considering it's lots of disruption for no benefit for them.

So for a Aylesbury train, there is no charging available between the dwell time at Marylebone until some way beyond Chesham - i can see why charging from 4th rail might be useful. Otherwise Marylebone is one point of failure
 

stevieinselby

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2013
Messages
1,670
Location
Selby
This is the way I would do it too - it's unlikely to be costly to make the trains capable of taking power from the LU 4th rail anyway.
How much power is available from the LU metals? Bearing in mind that only about one-third of the route from Marylebone to Aylesbury Vale Parkway is electrified ... that would mean the train would need to effectively draw 3 times the power it needs to run in order to recharge the battery at twice the rate it will use it ... is that realistic? (I'm not an electrical engineer, so I don't know if it is or not!)
 

Trainbike46

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2021
Messages
4,370
Location
belfast
How much power is available from the LU metals? Bearing in mind that only about one-third of the route from Marylebone to Aylesbury Vale Parkway is electrified ... that would mean the train would need to effectively draw 3 times the power it needs to run in order to recharge the battery at twice the rate it will use it ... is that realistic? (I'm not an electrical engineer, so I don't know if it is or not!)
I'm not an electrical engineer either, but that obviously depends on what (if any) other charging facilities are in use.

If Marylebone platforms are also included, it should be okay I think.
 
Joined
9 Dec 2023
Messages
584
Location
High Wycombe
I'm not an electrical engineer either, but that obviously depends on what (if any) other charging facilities are in use.

If Marylebone platforms are also included, it should be okay I think.
Yeah if they’re planning on getting a 50 minute stopper to Wycombe from charging at Marylebone then the hour to Aylesbury should be just about fine, maybe with a fast charger at Harrow and/or Aylesbury
 

Zomboid

Established Member
Joined
2 Apr 2025
Messages
2,248
Location
Oxford
How much power is available from the LU metals? Bearing in mind that only about one-third of the route from Marylebone to Aylesbury Vale Parkway is electrified ... that would mean the train would need to effectively draw 3 times the power it needs to run in order to recharge the battery at twice the rate it will use it ... is that realistic? (I'm not an electrical engineer, so I don't know if it is or not!)
The met service beyond Harrow is pretty light by LU standards. Extra electrical capacity ought to be achievable out there without doing anything unheard of for the LU system.

NR/GBR may need to pay for an upgrade to the DC system if the Chiltern trains want to put shoes down, but that would be one of the simpler approaches that could be taken - technically at least. The contract might be interesting, but there's several places where LU take power from NR so even that has a template to start from.
 

stevieinselby

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2013
Messages
1,670
Location
Selby
Yeah if they’re planning on getting a 50 minute stopper to Wycombe from charging at Marylebone then the hour to Aylesbury should be just about fine, maybe with a fast charger at Harrow and/or Aylesbury
Fast charging from a specially installed charger is different from drawing power from existing infrastructure that is designed to power trains on the move – my question is more about whether the LU system can supply power fast enough to a train in motion rather than whether the train can take that power in.
 

Trainbike46

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2021
Messages
4,370
Location
belfast
Yeah if they’re planning on getting a 50 minute stopper to Wycombe from charging at Marylebone then the hour to Aylesbury should be just about fine, maybe with a fast charger at Harrow and/or Aylesbury
I meant both LU 4th rail and Marylebone platforms would be used to charge, not one or the other.
 
Joined
9 Dec 2023
Messages
584
Location
High Wycombe
I meant both LU 4th rail and Marylebone platforms would be used to charge, not one or the other.
Ah fair that makes sense.
Fast charging from a specially installed charger is different from drawing power from existing infrastructure that is designed to power trains on the move – my question is more about whether the LU system can supply power fast enough to a train in motion rather than whether the train can take that power in.
Yeah I see that. Maybe they could do a fast charge at Harrow and just leave the 4th rail to power the train to Amersham?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top