Crewe to Chester. How can electrification be utilised?

[Gareth Marston]

Back to thread -

I think the electrification to Chester could happen.

However, I remain to be convinced that Network Rail will deliver any of the planned electrification programmes to budget - their management of the WCML upgrade hardly inspires confidence.

I think Chester is a "nice to do", but I stick to the line that Europe could provide cash to upgrade Crewe - Chester - AND Holyhead, if certain ministers and their staff lobby in the right places, with support from Eire.

The route to Holyhead is actually designated by the EU as a key international one I forget the name for now something like T-Ten.

 

[jones_bangor]

The route to Holyhead is actually designated by the EU as a key international one I forget the name for now something like T-Ten.

I know....the right political will and "drive" could see through trains to Paris from Holyhead. All that's required is vision.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Sorry to see the personal insults here Gareth... I explained before (e.g. on post five of this thread) that the ScotRail electrification will displace almost fifty 158s, which are perfect for lines like the North Wales coast. They'd allow more services from Manchester to the coast via Chester (Manchester to Chester being a very busy section already), or even links from Liverpool to North Wales (something which is sadly lacking, but used to run before).

A 158 seems ideal for the line speeds of the North Wales coast (a 125mph Voyager is clearly wasted here!), plus the kind of unit suited to journeys of up to an hour or two elsewhere in the UK where there's no 100mph running.

I hope you've verified with ScotRail/Scottish parliament that there happy to release all their 158's south of the border. Given the Scottish parliaments policy's so far I would imagine they would opt to add some of them to bolster other routes and maybe replace their 156 fleet. You might get some 158's spare but not that many and of course Northern/TPE/EMT/London Midland/FGW will be interested in them not just Wales.

Withdrawing InterCity West Coast from N Wales will of course be politically opposed by WG and the issue of who pays for the extra rolling stock to the Wales and Border franchise comes into play.

156's are of course not a unit that ATW actually use at the moment so they will not want a handful of non standard units operating in N Wales without any maintenance facility's that's of course if Northern/EMT & Anglia haven't got there first.

Today's railway is not an single integrated and unified entity where a single fat controller can move things around with impunity.

A DfT sponsored pantograph car build for all 220/221/222 fleets would be a way forward for capacity and heavy oil burning under the wires.

 

[tbtc]

Given the Scottish parliaments policy's so far I would imagine they would opt to add some of them to bolster other routes and maybe replace their 156 fleet

158s can't run on routes like the West Highland or the South Western - 156s can. Hence suggesting 158s. I'd also suggest that 158s aren't really appropriate on the Far North lines, but I may then be accused of somehow being "anti Scottish"...

156's are of course not a unit that ATW actually use at the moment so they will not want a handful of non standard units operating in N Wales

Thats why I didn't suggest any 156s moving to ATW.

The Central Belt electrification will eliminate the need for dozens of units, I'm suggesting that there's a good case for a number of these going to Wales (to work alongside identical DMUs), partly for journeys between North Wales Coast/ Chester and Manchester/Liverpool.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I know....the right political will and "drive" could see through trains to Paris from Holyhead. All that's required is vision.

Maybe a decade ago, when the EU was still flush with money to throw at schemes on its "fringes"...

 

[jones_bangor]

Maybe a decade ago, when the EU was still flush with money to throw at schemes on its "fringes"...

The EU is still pretty "flush"!! As I said, this would require political drive.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

158s can't run on routes like the West Highland or the South Western - 156s can. Hence suggesting 158s. I'd also suggest that 158s aren't really appropriate on the Far North lines, but I may then be accused of somehow being "anti Scottish"...

The 158's do have a big plus - the advantage that they can truly work in multiple. I'm sure a few passengers on Llandudno - Manchester services would prefer a 4-car multiple 158 to a crowded 2 or 3 car 175.

 

[tbtc]

The 158's do have a big plus - the advantage that they can truly work in multiple. I'm sure a few passengers on Llandudno - Manchester services would prefer a 4-car multiple 158 to a crowded 2 or 3 car 175.

Agreed. The 158s could even be used in three coach formation like FGW do - depending on demand, or doing "portion working" (on a four car unit) to give a two coach unit to Llandudno with the other two working to Holyhead.

 

[merlodlliw]

Agreed. The 158s could even be used in three coach formation like FGW do - depending on demand, or doing "portion working" (on a four car unit) to give a two coach unit to Llandudno with the other two working to Holyhead.

Many of the Manchester's used to split at Llandudno Junction (Steam/Diesel) with the front porting going to Holyhead & the rear to Llandudno, I recall the 11.55 ex Exchange then Vic as one example.

There used to be what was known as the "Liverpool Club" ex lime street 16.25
the front portion went to Afonwen via Caernafon & the rear to Llandudno,

Whatever happens the commuter/Traveller belt West/East needs urgent attention, the overcrowding between Chester/Manchester is chronic,I have
friends who commute Wrexham to Manchester & tell of horror stories out of Oxford Rd. As the main thread is Crewe to Chester fine give it wires,which will occur, but lets not forget the route to Manchester,which will not see wires.

Bob

 

[Gareth Marston]

Agreed. The 158s could even be used in three coach formation like FGW do - depending on demand, or doing "portion working" (on a four car unit) to give a two coach unit to Llandudno with the other two working to Holyhead.

Has anyone got a firm cascade plan from ScotRail electrification? If not we are all speculating.

 

[IanXC]

Has anyone got a firm cascade plan from ScotRail electrification? If not we are all speculating.

Also have ScotRail actually placed an order for more EMU stock to use their electrification?

 

[Rhydgaled]

The route to Holyhead is actually designated by the EU as a key international one I forget the name for now something like T-Ten.

Other way around, TEN-T. TEN being Trans-European Network, not sure what the final T is though. It is rather expansive, including the lines from England to Aberystwyth, Fishguard, Milford Haven and Pembroke Dock. Certain lines are designated high speed on the TEN map I have, including Paddington - Cardiff but nowhere else in Wales.

The 158's do have a big plus - the advantage that they can truly work in multiple. I'm sure a few passengers on Llandudno - Manchester services would prefer a 4-car multiple 158 to a crowded 2 or 3 car 175.

Even swapping all our 175s for an equal number of 3 and 2-car 158s would help, why oh why couldn't the 175s have been built with corridor connections for multiple working.

Agreed. The 158s could even be used in three coach formation like FGW do - depending on demand, or doing "portion working" (on a four car unit) to give a two coach unit to Llandudno with the other two working to Holyhead.

Yep, portion working is a great thing about 158s. My opinion is that if enough 158s become available they should be allocated to making the Cardiff - Portsmouth 4-car, with a 2-car portion continuing into west Wales (alternating between Carmarthen and Fishguard each hour) via the Swansea District Line. Your idea for Liverpool & Manchester to Holyhead services with a Llandudno portion are good too though. I don't think there's much chance of enough 158s being released though sadly. As for ScotRail, I think 158s and 156s are probablly better suited than 170s for most of what would be left if Edinbourgh - Glasgow is electrified, meaning it would be 170s that are sent south (and the best place for 170s then would probablly be replacing Northern's Pacers).

 

[Gareth Marston]

from ScotRails website http://www.scotrail.co.uk/newtrains

What are the rolling stock plans for the range of services that will be delivered by 2014?

The introduction of this new fleet of trains to Scotland will increase the overall fleet size. ScotRail is working with Transport Scotland to develop detailed deployment plans for the Borders railway and other key rail enhancement projects – as well as looking at how to best use the existing fleet to meet passenger demand across the Scottish network over the remainder of the ScotRail franchise.

"increase the overall fleet size" doesn't sound like there sending any 158's south in a hurry.

 

[northwichcat]

"increase the overall fleet size" doesn't sound like there sending any 158's south in a hurry.

Depends how you look at it. A 4 car 380 replacing 2 and 3 car 158s will increase the fleet size if the 158s are sent away. However, I can't imagine Scotrail getting rid of the 158s when they have 48x156s and Scotrail is actually in the position to choose which stock it gets and loses.

 

[sprinterguy]

Depends how you look at it. A 4 car 380 replacing 2 and 3 car 158s will increase the fleet size if the 158s are sent away. However, I can't imagine Scotrail getting rid of the 158s when they have 48x156s and Scotrail is actually in the position to choose which stock it gets and loses.

I think it would be tidier if Scotrail were to send their 158s south following completion of the Central Belt electrification rather than the 156s, as it would avoid "divvying up" the former Scotrail 156 fleet in such a way that some operators that could best use additional Sprinters (FGW, ATW, EMT, Northern) would gain an additional class of trains in their fleets, whereas all of those operators already operate 158s.

However, of course in the real world it is all speculation as to how many trains Scotrail will actually decide to release, and what form those trains will take. We'll have to wait a few years to find out.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yep - don't see many new trains in the next 10 years, and don't forget those diesels are the workhorses of the WCML - most of the trains I see on the WCML north of Crewe seem to Voyagers!!

Though that's partly because the frequency of West Coast services north of Crewe, and more accurately, Weaver Junction (At Crewe the ratio is 60:40 in favour of Pendolino operated services, and between Crewe and Weaver Junction, after the Chester & Holyhead services have "turned off" the WCML the ratio is two thirds to one third in favour of Pendolinos) is much less than that on the Southern section of the WCML. That the 221s are "the workhorses of the WCML" is far from an accurate interpretation when the full scope of the services in the West Coast franchise is considered: Only two West Coast trains an hour out of ten along the length of the WCML are diesel services.

And already with the Birmingham to Scotland services there is no need for this to be the case, as that route is already entirely electrified. However only with electrification from Crewe to Chester, and the passing over of the London to Chester services to Pendolino operation, do you really begin to gain sufficient "critical mass" to order a further tranche of Pendolinos to operate those two routes, assuming that funds could be made available for such an order of new trains.

If demand for rail travel is to continue to rise then additional capacity will be required, and electrifying Crewe to Chester would ensure greater capacity for London to Chester (in the form of a new build of Pendos) and for the Crosscountry network through the cascade of 221s to the XC operation, while 158s operating in pairs on the North Wales Coast in the place of the current Voyager service beyond Chester, assuming that additional 158s could be gleaned from Scotrail, would be no worse in terms of capacity than the 221s (Though you would lose the first class element of the service). At the very least a build of pantograph coaches for XCs' and Virgins' Voyagers would go some way to helping these aims.

 

[jones_bangor]

At the very least a build of pantograph coaches for XCs' and Virgins' Voyagers would go some way to helping these aims.

Well it could happen, particularly if it secures the future of a certain plant near Derby.

 

[tbtc]

I can't imagine Scotrail getting rid of the 158s when they have 48x156s and Scotrail is actually in the position to choose which stock it gets and loses.

Problem is, as I mentioned earlier on this thread, the 158s can't do various routes (South Western, West Highland), whereas the 156s can basically go anywhere.

Plus there's the issue that, post electrification, with 170s replacing the 158s on middle distance services (e.g. Edinburgh - Dundee) as well as running all the long distance services which 158s have ever run (e.g. Central Belt - Inverness/ Aberdeen), the only routes left (apart from the Far North) are going to be short distance diesel routes which are more suited to 156s.

 

[sprinterguy]

Well it could happen, particularly if it secures the future of a certain plant near Derby.

Given that the Voyagers and Meridians weren't built at Derby in the first place, I don't hold out much hope for the construction of any additional pantograph cars being undertaken there either unfortunately. I've just got my fingers crossed that those additional carriages are built at all.

 

[LE Greys]

I certainly agree on the 158s, but I reckon they would be very useful for the sorts of 'bits 'n pieces' services operated throughout England, as indeed they were designed for. Are they permitted on Weymouth-Castle Cary? I know they could certainly work most of the lines in Cornwall, unless length is an issue. Therefore, I'd send one batch to Exeter and another to Neville Hill, allowing enough 150s to cascade to do a squeeze on Pacers and eliminate them from FGW altogether.

As for the North Wales Coast, Sprinterguy is right. Virgin are getting more Pendys anyway, so making use of the 57s to drag them to Holyhead, Bangor or Llandudno is a possibility. Electrification might come after this. The idea is to free a few more 221s for use by XC, releasing a few 170s and adding to the cascade.

 

[Holly]

... while 158s operating in pairs on the North Wales Coast in the place of the current Voyager service beyond Chester, assuming that additional 158s could be gleaned from Scotrail, would be no worse in terms of capacity than the 221s (Though you would lose the first class element of the service). At the very least a build of pantograph coaches for XCs' and Virgins' Voyagers would go some way to ...

Loss of First Class (and kitchen) would indeed be enough to kill the idea of using 158s for Chester-Holyhead main services.

There has to be another solution.

 

[Nym]

use a locomotive and coaches? *gets coat*

 

[jones_bangor]

As for the North Wales Coast, Sprinterguy is right. Virgin are getting more Pendys anyway, so making use of the 57s to drag them to Holyhead, Bangor or Llandudno is a possibility. Electrification might come after this. The idea is to free a few more 221s for use by XC, releasing a few 170s and adding to the cascade.

I think the 57s days are numbered...increasing unreliability. More like that 67s will be rolled out for Pendo drags, which is what North Wales will have without the Voyagers.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Loss of First Class (and kitchen) would indeed be enough to kill the idea of using 158s for Chester-Holyhead main services.

There has to be another solution.

Of course. This will not be acceptable to WG, local (Tory) MPs and most importantly, the local populance. Bear in mind that this IS an INTERNATIONAL (TRANS-EUROPEAN) route, despite what some posters would like to make people believe.

 

[tbtc]

Bear in mind that this IS an INTERNATIONAL (TRANS-EUROPEAN) route, despite what some posters would like to make people believe

I love this idea that Holyhead is the only way to get to Ireland...

Admittedly, without the diminishing ferry traffic, the line would have an even harder case justifying the level of London service that it gets.

 

[merlodlliw]

I think the 57s days are numbered...increasing unreliability. More like that 67s will be rolled out for Pendo drags, which is what North Wales will have without the Voyagers.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Of course. This will not be acceptable to WG, local (Tory) MPs and most importantly, the local populance. Bear in mind that this IS an INTERNATIONAL (TRANS-EUROPEAN) route, despite what some posters would like to make people believe.

67s can not be used for pendo drags,TDK a driver of 67s gave the reason earlier this year, I agree the 57s which never seem to shut down gulp heavy oil by the ton, when they work. 67s are high speed Bo Bos, whereas 57s are now known as Co Co the clown and hated by ATW drivers.

Bob
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Loss of First Class (and kitchen) would indeed be enough to kill the idea of using 158s for Chester-Holyhead main services.

There has to be another solution.

Indeed there is, I put this up yesterday. have a look 'WAG2': a traveller's tale in this weeks http://www.nwrail.org.uk/nwnews.htm. trolley Micro catering

Made me smile


Bob

 

[jones_bangor]

I love this idea that Holyhead is the only way to get to Ireland...

Admittedly, without the diminishing ferry traffic, the line would have an even harder case justifying the level of London service that it gets.

Well I agree that the ferry traffic secures North Wales' Inter City status.

 

[northwichcat]

I love this idea that Holyhead is the only way to get to Ireland...

I don't think anyone has said that anymore than St Pancras is the only way to get to France.

Admittedly, without the diminishing ferry traffic, the line would have an even harder case justifying the level of London service that it gets.

Is that why Eurolines have just this week launched a new Birmingham-Dublin coach service utilising the Holyhead-Dublin ferry?

 

[Gareth]

I love this idea that Holyhead is the only way to get to Ireland...

Admittedly, without the diminishing ferry traffic, the line would have an even harder case justifying the level of London service that it gets.

Unless he's talking about the fact it crosses the England/Wales border, in which case, oh dear!

 

[Invincibles]

From what I can see electrifying Chester to London allows those shuttles to be operated by Pendolinos instead of the voyagers, which lengthens them and means the WCML franchise holder can look at tapping into markets in that area (I like Hooton and Birkenhead suggestions).

The current London to Holyhead/Bangor could continue to operate as a Voyager service. However, this leaves voyagers with the WCML fleet and, in a number that is not convenient for a micro fleet.

So... What to do? Well I would then consider introducing more through services using the extra length stock from North Wales - Chester (cross platform for the pendolino) and on to Manchester Victoria and Leeds*

Now, whether these would be formed by Voyagers or not, I do not know, maybe not actually as a better unit might be the adalantes currently dotted around the country. The thinking there being that electrification of the core GWML allows the use of some HST on Adelante duties and would allow the 180s to move to the North West (where presumably Newton Heath can look after them)

The voyagers move to cross country and all seems well.

Except North Wales lost its direct train to London, which is going to bring out the same problems again. I just feel a well timed cross platform connection at Chester and additional capacity through to the North of England is a better use of diesel stock than sending it to London.

One or two drags a day could be arranged I suppose.

As for the rest of Birkenhead (?) - Chester - Crewe then some additional stations and one or two 319s appear to make sense. No need to mess around with any other workings just provide better connectivity through the area and to the Wirral pennisula

 

[Erniescooper]

The new Vossloh Eurolights being ordered by DRS would seem to be the ideal loco for dragging Pendolino. They're lighter than a 67 and have and have a more fuel efficient Cat common rail diesel engine and plenty of power.
DRS are supposed to be ordering 20 which seems a lot considering how little passenger work they have, maybe whoever wins the west coast franchise could contract DRS to do there diesel haulage and Gresty Bridge would be pretty close base for the loco's.

 

[Rhydgaled]

One or two drags a day could be arranged I suppose.

Once you have the locos around to do drags you may as well keep them busy and run a more frequent service, unless you wouldn't get enough passengers off-peak to justify it. With the current timetable and wired network, I think 5 locos would be needed daily to drag Pendos beyond Crewe and release the Voyagers for XC and the Cotswolds line. Off these, I think one would have only 1 trip each way. I think wiring to Chester results in one less loco being needed, although two only do one trip each day. Increasing the minimum spacing between services to Holyhead but introducing a broadly 2-hourly London service throughout the day I think gets you down to three locos which have at least 5 one-way trips a day.

I'm going to round off this post with a question, how many train heating equiped 57s and 67s are currently depolyed daily, doing what, and how many more 67s are expected to go to Chiltern?

 

[jones_bangor]

67s can not be used for pendo drags,TDK a driver of 67s gave the reason earlier this year, I agree the 57s which never seem to shut down gulp heavy oil by the ton, when they work. 67s are high speed Bo Bos, whereas 57s are now known as Co Co the clown and hated by ATW drivers.

I suppose if Alstom make dragging Pendo's a bit easier - autocoupling maybe? - they could be in with a shout for orders for GWML and ECML?

 

[Holly]

... Except North Wales lost its direct train to London, which is going to bring out the same problems again. I just feel a well timed cross platform connection at Chester and additional capacity through to the North of England is a better use of diesel stock than sending it to London ...

A well-timed cross-platform connection is not enough, it would need to be a guaranteed connection. A late incoming train would hold the departing connection, unless it was so late as to connect with a later departure.

Running those connecting Voyagers onward to somewhere East of the Pennines makes a lot of sense.