Future Electrification Schemes

[lancastrian]

Did any one notice the list in issue 672 of Rail. It lists the following future electrification schemes:

• Midland Main Line: Bedford to Sheffield via Derby.
• Sheffield to Doncaster & Moorthorpe (for Leeds).
• Manchester to Leeds & Colton Junction (for York) and Hull.
• including Manchester Victoria & Guide Bridge to Stalybridge.
• Northallerton to Middlesbrough
• Windermere Branch.

If this is actually planned and not just a wish list, then it is showing that at last someone is actually thinking about a proper electrified network for Great Britain. The sad thing is a number of simple links that would improve the electrified network have been missed.

• Ely to Peterborough.
• Crewe to Holyhead & Llandudno.
• Warrington Bank Quay to Chester.
• Carnforth to Barrow.
• Wolverhampton to Shrewsbury.
• Midland main line to Nottingham and the Erwash Valley line.

What lines do others think should be electrified?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The Caldervale Line from Manchester to Bradford, via Hebden Bridge.

(Manchester Victoria & Guide Bridge to Stalybridge....who dreamed up that long way round?):roll:

 

[lancastrian]

The Caldervale Line from Manchester to Bradford, via Hebden Bridge.

(Manchester Victoria & Guide Bridge to Stalybridge....who dreamed up that long way round?):roll:

Well that is how it is stated in Rail. I think that they just wanted to be able to use either Piccadilly or Victoria on electrified Trans Pennine services.

 

[YorkshireBear]

i would presume nottingham will be included in MML electrification.

On top of Pauls i would add in all the connecting lines (brighouse and wakefield -mirfield)
Plus hallam line from leeds to sheffield via barnsley.

 

[tbtc]

Did any one notice the list in issue 672 of Rail. It lists the following future electrification schemes:

• Midland Main Line: Bedford to Sheffield via Derby.
• Sheffield to Doncaster & Moorthorpe (for Leeds).

Good to see these mentioned (they really need doing together to get proper benefit, in my opinion)

What lines do others think should be electrified?

Quite simply, those which release the most DMUs (per mile of electrification). This means routes like the Cardiff Valleys and the Snow Hill lines. You then either replace Pacers directly (Cardiff Valleys) or release other DMUs to replace Pacers elsewhere (Snow Hill 172s).

The secondary thing is to wire those daft little gaps (Marshlink, Coventry - Nuneaton, Walsall - Rugeley, Shotts line etc), which then makes things operationally easier.

Third priority is to do the "gaps" in the XC "cross" (e.g. Coventry - Oxford, Reading - Basingstoke)

(note, I'm not suggesting my local routes are one of the biggest priorities under these criteria, I'm trying to be objective)

 

[YorkshireBear]

(note, I'm not suggesting my local routes are one of the biggest priorities under these criteria, I'm trying to be objective)

I should of taken that method

I do think gaps on XC network are of great importance though. My problem is what do about penzance

 

[tbtc]

I should of taken that method

I do think gaps on XC network are of great importance though. My problem is what do about penzance

Everyone's entitled to their method; I'd started typing mine before you posted yours, so my comment wasn't intended as a criticism of yours or anything.

I think that we have to accept XC either means some bi-mode trains or it means considering abandoning "extremities" (like Newquay). It's a long way to run a DMU under the wires for the sake of a short stretch at the end which hasn't been wired. Tough decision, of course. However, I could see more services being cut like this (e.g. London - Holyhead cut at Chester, London - Weston cut at Bristol)...

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Everyone's entitled to their method; I'd started typing mine before you posted yours, so my comment wasn't intended as a criticism of yours or anything.

I think that we have to accept XC either means some bi-mode trains or it means considering abandoning "extremities" (like Newquay). It's a long way to run a DMU under the wires for the sake of a short stretch at the end which hasn't been wired. Tough decision, of course. However, I could see more services being cut like this (e.g. London - Holyhead cut at Chester, London - Weston cut at Bristol)...

Cornwall has a number of branch lines, some long. some small.

How many of these do you propose to close down?

 

[tbtc]

Cornwall has a number of branch lines, some long. some small.

How many of these do you propose to close down?

?

I didn't suggest closing any down.

I was making the point that if the main XC routes are wired then that makes a direct XC service to places like Newquay awkward. Do you run a diesel train 500 miles from Edinburgh to Plymouth, entirely under the wires, so that it can serve the section of route in Cornwall? Or do you run an EMU from Edinburgh to Plymouth, with a separate DMU running to Newquay?

This is the problem with electrification, what do you do about direct services to the places that don't get wired up? This is why I'm in favour of self contained electrifications (like York - Harrogate - Leeds), and not fussed about some others (e.g. no point in wiring York - Garforth - Leeds unless you are also doing Leeds - Manchester and various other lines)

 

[YorkshireBear]

Everyone's entitled to their method; I'd started typing mine before you posted yours, so my comment wasn't intended as a criticism of yours or anything.

I think that we have to accept XC either means some bi-mode trains or it means considering abandoning "extremities" (like Newquay). It's a long way to run a DMU under the wires for the sake of a short stretch at the end which hasn't been wired. Tough decision, of course. However, I could see more services being cut like this (e.g. London - Holyhead cut at Chester, London - Weston cut at Bristol)...

didnt think it was criticism dont worry.

Yeah exactly, i am not a fan of the bi mode IEP, i share modern railways veiw that it is a waste of space. But an 6-8 car bi mode for cross country would be fantasic! It would be perfect that is the kind of route that it would be perfect. So wire to swansea and dont bother with bi mode for GW! Just buy all electric and bi mode for XC.

 

[Nym]

But a 6 - 8 car bi mode can be acceived for XC without the need for the japs to build one, they can build extra coaches for the 22x series in Derby and insert them into the current sets for XC. Done...

Any new IC stock should be electric only, and the bi-modes if needed can be sourced by conversion of 22x units.

6 and 7 car units from 4 and 5 car units.

and 9 car units from 7 car MML units.

 

[lancastrian]

didnt think it was criticism dont worry.

Yeah exactly, i am not a fan of the bi mode IEP, i share modern railways veiw that it is a waste of space. But an 6-8 car bi mode for cross country would be fantasic! It would be perfect that is the kind of route that it would be perfect. So wire to swansea and dont bother with bi mode for GW! Just buy all electric and bi mode for XC.

Whats wrong with putting a desiel on the front of an electric train for the final stretch of the route? It worked well enough before the Weymouth line was electrified. It the obsession with having self contained train sets that mean that the people at DaFT, cannot see beyond bi-modal.

I forgot to include the Middlesbrough to Newcastle via Sunderland line.

 

[Zoe]

Whats wrong with putting a desiel on the front of an electric train for the final stretch of the route?

This was discussed at length in the IEP Annoucement thread but in short there were three reasons suggested: Hitachi didn't want to build a locomotive, the logistics of using locomotive haulage and the CO2 emissions associated with a diesel locomotive.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think that we have to accept XC either means some bi-mode trains or it means considering abandoning "extremities" (like Newquay)

Sorry, if I misread what you meant...it was the final "abandoning extremeties" in your thread part-quoted above that worried me.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Whats wrong with putting a desiel on the front of an electric train for the final stretch of the route? It worked well enough before the Weymouth line was electrified. It the obsession with having self contained train sets that mean that the people at DaFT, cannot see beyond bi-modal.

For the XC route that would be a bit tedious.

If you are reffering to me putting the wires to swansea, i have no problem with attatching a loco as that is what i would do for aberdeen/inverness and a few other places on ECML and holyhead
but for swansea i would continue electrification and add valley lines in.

the locos would also be thunderbird locos so that a large order could be created.

and also Yes i agree they could be bi mode voyager/meridians. was trying to point how i thought that was the only use for bimode

 

[tbtc]

Whats wrong with putting a desiel on the front of an electric train for the final stretch of the route? It worked well enough before the Weymouth line was electrified. It the obsession with having self contained train sets that mean that the people at DaFT, cannot see beyond bi-modal

I can see the argument both ways, I think that the current mood is against complication and "wasted" resources. BR had so many "spare" diesels that it could afford to have one sitting around for a branch like Newquay (with a handful of trains a day).

I forgot to include the Middlesbrough to Newcastle via Sunderland line.

The Metro complicates things here, otherwise I'd definitely agree. I'm not sure whether the line can be wired for both "normal" EMUs and the Metro units?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Sorry, if I misread what you meant...it was the final "abandoning extremeties" in your thread part-quoted above that worried me.

Yes, I only meant "abandoning the extremities" in terms of a direct XC service. Any branches would keep the existing "local" services, maybe with some additional branchline trips to compensate for the lack of longer distance trains. However wiring lines up and then running diesels hundreds of miles seems a waste.

 

[Zoe]

the locos would also be thunderbird locos so that a large order could be created.

No need for thunderbird locomotives though with the IEP emergency diesel generator if this is still included.

 

[YorkshireBear]

No need for thunderbird locomotives though with the IEP emergency diesel generator if this is still included.

of course! my brain may have mushed a little i might just stop posting now :/

Interesting point, what happens if a bimode fails while in diesel mode? surely we cant have more diesel enegines in there

 

[43106]

It's been mentioned before, but before any major projects are built, there should be a lot of linking-up done. Including DEFINATE plans, I'd like to see...

1) Manchester Pic - Salford Cresc - Bolton - Euxton Junc,
2) Liverpool Lime St - St Helens - Wigan.
With these two in place, you could have Scotland - Liverpool/Manchester services made up of a pair of (say) 350's that split/join at Preston and Carstairs, as was done about 40-odd years ago.
3) Leeds - York.
Then the major projects should be...
4) Bedford - Leicester - Trent Junc - Sheffield (via Derby AND Toton AND Nottingham) - Leeds,
5) Sheffield - Doncaster,
6) York - Pontefract - Sheffield?
7) Ratho Junc - Falkirk High - Glasgow Q. St
8) Kirknewton - Shotts - Uddingston
9) Lancaster - Morecambe & Oxenholme - Windermere, but NOT Carnforth - Barrow; I don't think it's viable.

 

[bluenoxid]

3) Leeds - York.

Why? What would run on it?

 

[WatcherZero]

I would have to go check to make sure but im guessing this list in RAIL is from the schemes considered for the Electrification RUS and thus why it doesnt take account of the schemes approved over last couple of years.

 

[CNX]

I should of taken that method

I do think gaps on XC network are of great importance though. My problem is what do about penzance

Remove a couple of rails at the West end of Plymouth station. Problem solved!

 

[Anvil1984]

Why? What would run on it?

Nothing is booked to run that way I agree that it isnt high priority unless done as major works. I think Leeds to Hambleton Jn does need to be done though for diversionary purposes (usually due to engineering works or a failed Northern 321) and it does seem a shame not to link Micklefield to Colton Jn at the same time. Perhaps it would be best waiting for TPE electrification project. Could also terminate the York to Blackpool services at Leeds (15 min turnaround based on current timetable, more if you divert that via Brighouse) so it was an EMU from York to Leeds (or to Bradford Int if you wire there and divert the Blackpools)

I know you are now going to mention cost and that it'll never happen but this isnt a prediction thread more of a wish and hope, its how I would I would do it. I'd have a large Cross-Pennine project starting at each end,

Phase 1

Convert Man Vic / Guide Bridge - Stalybridge / Rochdale and East Leeds Parkway (if ever built) /York / Leeds to Huddersfield / Bradford Interchange to EMU
Divert York - Blackpool via Brighouse and split it from Leeds except in peaks and in each direction I would have
South Milford off peak stops to be put onto TPE Hull services

East Side

1tph Man Vic to Leeds via Dewsbury DMU
1tph Man Vic to Leeds via Bradford DMU
1tph Bradford to Rochdale DMU
1tp2h Leeds to Blackpool North via Bradford Int DMU
1tp2h Leeds to Blackpool North via Dewsbury DMU

1tph East Leeds Parkway to Huddersfield EMU
1tph Bradford to Wakefield via Huddersfield DMU
1/2tph York to Bradford Interchange EMU
1tph Leeds to Bradford Interchange EMU

TPE services all remain DMU

West Side

2tph Man Vic to Rochdale EMU
2tph Man Vic to Stalybridge EMU
1tph Man Vic to Huddersfield via Stalybridge DMU
Man Vic to Leeds services as above


EDIT Actually wire up Man Pic - Liverpool LS via Warrington at this point and convert 2 services to DMU

Phase 2

Wires through Summit and Standedge Tunnels (take your pick to which one first)

Man Vic to Hudderfield via Stalybridge becomes EMU
Leeds - Bradford Interchange - Rochdale - Man Vic all reconnected as 2tph (or more) EMU instead of 1tph DMU and 1 split service DMU
Rochdale to retain 2 EMU shuttles to Man Vic unless I can secure funding for a full time turnback at Littleborough
Newcastle - MIA to become EMU

Phase 3

Extend Wires to Middlesborough from Northallerton, Micklefield Jn to Hull (fixed rail contact on Selby Swing Bridge, its been done on other bridges before) convert services to EMU
Scarborough to Liverpool becomes York to Liverpool, Leeds to Blackpool extended back to Scarborough

Phase 4

Connect Dewsbury / Huddersfield to Sowerby Bridge / Halifax to allow for diversions and current Man Vic to Leeds via Brighouse to go EMU, may consider the line from Leeds to Healey Mills to be done as a diversion too ** and would allow Bradford to Wakefield to go EMU, otherwise will have to split that at Huddersfield so EMU Bradford to Huddersfield, DMU onwards


I wouldnt do that just yet as I would rather start on the MML electrification project first and that has to take place after the current work but I might get it started by 2030, when I get MML started (Leeds / Doncaster to Sheffield first, then Bedford to Derby / Nottingham or at same time depending on workforce then the bits between the two, then diversions), I shall do this then I'll start on XC, wiring from Nottingham to Bristol via Cheltenham and Birmingham to Oxford, Reading to Basingstoke and then extend to Plymouth / Penzane when I've sussed out how otherwise it'll have to be bi-mode.

The reason I would do TPE electrification and the North part of MML first is that by the time I get this done I could probably get some knock off EMUs coming to the end of their life in the form of a load of cascaded 321s (superceded by something in the south) for 10 years otherwise we might have to get modern DMUs and we arent allowed them on Northern franchise services (being sarcastic), I could then fill in the gaps after the North West electrification

** becomes decent value if Leeds - Wakefield K is included in MML works




I APOLOGISE FOR GETTING CARRIED AWAY ITS 0405, I EXPECTED TO SLEEP HALF WAY THROUGH

 

[CNX]

Anvil1984. The remarks in your last paragraph are not sarcastic at all. After the Leeds NW lines were electrified, the passengers had to endure the delights of 2 seperate lots of ex GE knackers yard dodging cast offs for several years before finally getting a fleet of brand new units.

 

[TheWalrus]

As gwml phase 2 wire bristol-exeter/plymouth then cascade some bimodes from weston services (assuming this is how they will run) to xc for penzance and newquay services and those to aberdeen and dundee.

 

[Class172]

A few of my ideas:

• MML: Bedford-Nottingham/Derby-Sheffield
• Sheffield-Doncaster
• Walsall-Rugeley Trent Valley: convert all Chase line services to EMU, allowing LM 170s to be cascaded elsewhere (whether in franchise or between franchises). This also provides a diversionary route for the WCML.
• Kings Norton-Birmingham Moor St/Grand Jct: provides a extra route for Cross-city line (south) and new services/stations on the Camp Hill Line (following new Bordesley chords)
• XC Network : Reading-Basingstoke; Oxford-Coventry/Birmingham; Bromsgrove-Bristol (incluing smaller diversionary routes) etc.
• Snow Hill Lines: releases a large amount of brand new 172s - fairly self-contained.
• Chiltern Main Line: following XC and Snow Hill schemes - allows cascade of many 168s.

 

[OxtedL]

I will take it that my usual response to these threads will be inferred from my Username ...

 

[Class172]

I will take it that my usual response to these threads will be inferred from my Username ...

Well no-one knows your real name!!

 

[sprinterguy]

The Metro complicates things here, otherwise I'd definitely agree. I'm not sure whether the line can be wired for both "normal" EMUs and the Metro units?

It wouldn't be worth it: There's only one train per hour between Middlesborough and Newcastle via the coast, and that also continues through to Hexham, so without electrification from Middlesborough to Carlisle via Newcastle to benefit the one train per hour beyond Hexham to the west, the electrification scheme would only be of use to the one Middlesborough to Hexham train per hour plus the Morpeth services & Metrocentre shuttles over a short section of the east end of the Tyne Valley line.

And that's even assuming that the wires went through to Hexham: Otherwise electrification terminating at Newcastle would lose the Durham coast it's one remaining link to the Metrocentre and the Tyne Valley. Not to mention the extra cost that would be incurred in dual-wiring the Sunderland to Pelaw section and the specially adapted rolling stock that would have to be ordered to run it, with no hope of any other application anywhere else in the country.

In short: Are the costs of wiring Middlesborough to Newcastle for one train an hour worth it in the slightest? Not at all.

The electrification projects I would like to see (Beyond those already announced as going ahead):

Midland Mainline: St. Pancras to Nottingham, Derby, Sheffield, Wakefield & Doncaster, plus the Erewash Valley as a diversionary route and Birmingham to Derby as an optional extra. I'd probably extend Thameslink up to Corby as well with potential for further future extension round to Leicester via Melton Mowbray.

Transpennine North: Victoria/Guide Bridge to Leeds via Huddersfield as the core section, plus York to Leeds as a top priority, Northallerton to Middlesborough and Leeds to Hull. Tbh, if you were going to do this properly then it'd be worth wiring a lot of the local Leeds lines, such as those through Kirkgate.

Central Scotland as far north as Perth as well as Perth/Kirkcaldy to Dundee and Aberdeen.

Oxted & Marshlink lines: Wouldn't even require new rolling stock; there's twenty three 377/5s heading Southerns' way in a few years that'd be more than sufficient.

Valley Lines: Building on the GWML electrification, this would cover all the Valley branches between Maesteg and Ebbw Vale. Electrification of the main line through to Swansea as part of this scheme would be a good idea too.

Additionally, one of Class 172s' good ideas: Walsall to Rugeley: With the addition of the proposed branch to Aldridge as well.

As a further phase I'd look at electrification of the Chiltern lines including Ayhno Junction to Oxford, as well as infill third rail electrification of any gaps south of Reading on the XC South Coast route. This would mean that all South Coast Crosscountry services from both Manchester and North East England/Scotland could be pure electric trains with AC/DC capability.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Any new IC stock should be electric only, and the bi-modes if needed can be sourced by conversion of 22x units.

I completely and absolutelty agree. It makes so much sense: Britain already has a fleet of over 100 potential bi-mode trains that could be converted to such a use much more cheaply than building a brand new fleet of five carriage units, and they'd have more carriages too. With electrification of the MML, Crewe to Chester and possibly Chiltern as outlined above, with corresponding replacement by all-electric units, then maybe two thirds of them would become available for use where they are needed as Bi-mode units.

IEP should be about pure-electric units.

 

[Class172]

Down with the bi-mode IEP!!!