Electrification: Which line would you do next?

[Halifaxlad]

We all know that electrification hasn't been ruled out of the question, with the MML and TRU to include sections of electrification. What we clearly need is a line to demonstrate that it can be done cheaply and efficiently within budget. Question is which line should be used to demonstrate this ?

Preferably a line that doesn't include any other major upgrades, so please don't suggest the Transpennine route through Huddersfield!

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Lostock Junction to Wigan North Western.

 

[a_c_skinner]

Leeds to Colton and Hambleton Jns. Even Selby.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Im thinking of end to end lines NOT infilling schemes. A line that could be promoted as a successful electrification scheme.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Preston to Colne with it being a view to doing the whole Calder Valley line eventually but doing it this way won’t interfere too much with TRU diversionary routes.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Preston to Colne with it being a view to doing the whole Calder Valley line eventually but doing it this way won’t interfere too much with TRU diversionary routes.

That's a really good suggestion but since the line is (hopefully) to be extended it might just complicate things by adding to the overall cost of the extension. Im looking for the most ideal line that could be promoted for electrification by rail groups, politicians ect.

 

[Bamford]

CLC is often mentioned for the North West - and would be useful (especially if you could use it to get freights out of the Castlefield corridor) but for my money a Hazel Grove - Buxton would be good as a sort of North West equivalent of Paisley Canal. Both schemes are sort of infil, but thats what were likely to be able to promote at the moment.

 

[adrock1976]

How about Ashburys and Guide Bridge to New Mills Central/Rose Hill Marple/Chinley*?

These routes are mainly local all station stopping services, and seems a straightforward and simple route to wire (depending if Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive wants to convert to tram operation or not).

* Local trains beyond Chinley to and from Sheffield could be bi-mode until Dore Tunnel is wired in conjunction with Hope Valley Upgrade Scheme.

 

[Whistler40145]

Nuneaton to Birmingham New Street

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Nuneaton to Birmingham New Street

Love this one. Then on to Leicester etc

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Newark Northgate to Lincoln.

Hardly any overhead structures compared to most other lines, more or less straight as well; already electric at one end... relatively short extension to the wires... would allow bi-mode versions of the IETs to be deployed elsewhere on the ECML with full electrics used on the Lincoln services. In addition, allows the Newark - Lincoln local service to switch to EMUs, and there's a lot of spare EMUs available shortly.

Cost would be minimal compared to some other schemes and being off the actual main line would provide a good test as to whether or not Network Rail could do the scheme on time and within budget without causing major disruption if it goes pear shaped again.

 

[Whistler40145]

Love this one. Then on to Leicester etc

Would be quite useful for freight, but only beneficial if electrified through to Ipswich

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Would be quite useful for freight, but only beneficial if electrified through to Ipswich

Don’t you mean Felixstowe ?

 

[Whistler40145]

Don’t you mean Felixstowe ?

My apologies, yes I meant Felixstowe

 

[td97]

Question is which line should be used to demonstrate this ?

Tiny Scale: King Edward Bridge South Jn - Metrocentre (~3 miles). Getting 75mph 156 stoppers off the ECML. Then carry on to Hexham if all goes to plan.

Small Scale: Lostock - Wigan NW (7 miles); dealing with same issues as previous NWEP schemes.

New technology pathway: Windermere using https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...cation-and-where-could-it-be-trialled.172931/

 

[Bertie the bus]

This thread is in the wrong section – it should be in the My Idea / Fantasy part of the forum – but the question was answered 6 minutes after the thread was created.

Lostock Junction to Wigan North Western would be the only sensible scheme to establish the mistakes that have occurred won’t be repeated. It’s short, it has already been proposed and so presumably some planning work has already taken place, and it is a useful diversionary route for Manchester – Preston when there are problems. Not a diversionary route in the same way as some of the fantasy reopenings are claimed to be but a real one which is used for diversions and will be lost assuming Manchester – Preston goes over to full EMU service tomorrow, meaning Lancashire passengers will end up with a worse and less robust service after electrification of the Bolton line than before.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Lostock to Wigan is of course in a mining area so could experience some of the same geology problems of Preston to Manchester

 

[Bertie the bus]

Which is one of the reasons it would show whether the mistakes of the past would be repeated or not. Carefully selecting a route which couldn't possibly have any issues would prove nothing.

 

[geoffk]

Windermere, to try out wooden poles for overhead catenary. Some countries on the continent use these and I've a feeling that the Lancaster - Morecambe line had them originally. If third rail is not ruled out, then Uckfield, to release diesel units for use elsewhere.

 

[geoffk]

Windermere already mentioned. If third rail still an option, then Uckfield, to release diesel units.

 

[Whistler40145]

If Uckfield was electrified, why not do Ore to Ashford International too

 

[smsm1]

Re Uckfield it could also improve running time of the service. I remember those trains would run on the slow lines past Anerley.

 

[themiller]

Why not Didcot to oxford as all track work has been done?

 

[Andyjs247]

Oxford to Bicester should be relatively easy to do, but ideally you would extend as far as Bletchley; provided that Didcot - Oxford is done. Track signalling and gauge clearance to Bicester has already been done. If it was planned along with HS2 it might be possible to get some synergy in terms of grid supply, added to the fact that Bicester to Bletchley is OOU which should also enable cost to be kept down.

 

[td97]

Carefully selecting a route which couldn't possibly have any issues would prove nothing.

Which is why I 'carefully selected' the 3 miles to Metrocentre. Dunston and Teams (in Gateshead) are littered with ex-collieries. The Metrocentre itself is partly built on the old mineral railway sidings! Same story all the way along the Tyne Valley across to Hexham.
The 3 miles to Metrocentre Includes a 110m tunnel (for the grade separated junction where the slow lines diverge from the ECML); for good measure a few overbridges for renewal or track lowering can be included too.
Arguably removing 75mph diesel stopping services from the 125mph ECML is a priority an order of magnitude higher than an infill scheme which will use bimodes on the busy electrified section anyway (Lostock-Wigan).

Lostock to Wigan is of course in a mining area so could experience some of the same geology problems of Preston to Manchester

Exactly, where lessons have been learnt and new solutions can be implemented from the get-go.
The bit between Hindley and Ince is practically as bad as it gets in terms of the sheer amount of ex-mining activity; worse than the Bolton line. Although NWEP 2b was through similar conditions near Wigan (around Ince Moss Junction). The Coal Authority even have one of their mine water purification systems not far from Hindley station.

 

[Whistler40145]

Carnforth to Skipton via Giggleswick

 

[Aictos]

Preston to Colne with it being a view to doing the whole Calder Valley line eventually but doing it this way won’t interfere too much with TRU diversionary routes.

Ideally they ought to work on Leeds to Accrington via Bradford Interchange at one end and Blackpool South to Colne via Preston at the other end which would result in:

Leeds to Blackpool North
Colne to Blackpool South

being operated fully by EMUs and being a diversionary route for other services.

Once these lines are electrified then schemes such as Blackburn to Manchester and Leeds to Huddersfield via Bradford Interchange become more cost effective.

 

[MatthewRead]

Re Uckfield it could also improve running time of the service. I remember those trains would run on the slow lines past Anerley.

Ukfield line may get battery powered trains.

 

[VT 390]

How about Ashburys and Guide Bridge to New Mills Central/Rose Hill Marple/Chinley*?

These routes are mainly local all station stopping services, and seems a straightforward and simple route to wire (depending if Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive wants to convert to tram operation or not).

* Local trains beyond Chinley to and from Sheffield could be bi-mode until Dore Tunnel is wired in conjunction with Hope Valley Upgrade Scheme.

Bi-modes would not have to be used as I think it is planned in the future that the local Hope Valley services will divert via Stockport (although bi-modes could be used on this route)

 

[43096]

Carnforth to Skipton via Giggleswick

Utterly dumb idea. At least pick a line that has a decent amount of rail traffic - something with somewhat more than 8 trains each way per day.