Great Western Electrification Progress

[TheKnightWho]

Oh yes....

Although you're not allowed to have that opinion on here as you're wrong....

I used to try on this original thread, and the split-off thread below, but gave up as it was like trying to have a pie and a pint with jihadists....

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=123126

But despite NR's delaying tactics and procrastination, things are progressing very successfully for those of us who dare to share your opinion....

http://www.savegoringgap.org.uk/

You're allowed to have whatever opinion you want. On the other hand, expecting no-one to object to it is another matter entirely...

That rhetoric doesn't fly here, I'm afraid.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Oh yes....

Although you're not allowed to have that opinion on here as you're wrong....

I used to try on this original thread, and the split-off thread below, but gave up as it was like trying to have a pie and a pint with jihadists....

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=123126

But despite NR's delaying tactics and procrastination, things are progressing very successfully for those of us who dare to share your opinion....

http://www.savegoringgap.org.uk/

Ah, just the person I've been looking for.

Could you please update your website to reflect the fact our engineers are out on the ground replacing headspans between Paddington and Heathrow.

The following statement is completely untrue, out of date, inaccurate or what have you.

1) If this ‘older system’ is less reliable than the new design, why doesn’t NR have any plans to replace the existing Heathrow to Paddington electrification system used by the Heathrow Express service, which has a stated 98% reliability.

You can even embed this video, to show we're replacing the headspans we're claiming are unreliable.

https://vimeo.com/150907486

Thank you kindly.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Ah, just the person I've been looking for.

Could you please update your website to reflect the fact our engineers are out on the ground replacing headspans between Paddington and Heathrow.

The following statement is completely untrue, out of date, inaccurate or what have you.

You can even embed this video, to show we're replacing the headspans we're claiming are unreliable.

https://vimeo.com/150907486

Thank you kindly.

What's the cost and timescale of headspan replacement? Just to get an idea of how quickly this can happen on the MML and ECML.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

What's the cost and timescale of headspan replacement? Just to get an idea of how quickly this can happen on the MML and ECML.

Timescales vary because it depends on a number of factors, access, number of tracks, tensioning etc - probably best to plan for one headspan to portal conversion per night (over a typical possession length).

The Christmas replacements shown in the video have 3 headspans being converted in 20 hours.

Cost is commercially sensitive* - but it will pay for itself within a short number of years (5-15ish), based on current de-wirement rates and typical compensation payments per incident.

* It's also difficult to calculate in any case, as it depends on what electrification system is installed underneath (UK Series 1, Series 2, BR Mark 1, BR Mark 3b, Siemens etc) and what other upgrades are included (new tensioning, heavier contact wire, ATF installation).

 

[jimm]

Ah, just the person I've been looking for.

Could you please update your website to reflect the fact our engineers are out on the ground replacing headspans between Paddington and Heathrow.

The following statement is completely untrue, out of date, inaccurate or what have you.

You can even embed this video, to show we're replacing the headspans we're claiming are unreliable.

https://vimeo.com/150907486

Thank you kindly.

And while they're at it, what about the caption on the pictures alongside the line at Lower Basildon talking about 'destruction of wooded corridor'?

Their own picture clearly shows the plastic sheaths around newly-planted trees placed back from the railway line to avoid the risk of branches getting snagged on 25,000-volt power lines - which was why the existing trees had to be felled. And which would have had to be felled whether the Series 1 overhead was being used, headspan electrification or 'prettier' portals...

In what way that section of line east of Lower Basildon is supposed to be ruining the landscape anyway, I have no idea, since it is set in a cutting at the foot of a hill, with trees shielding it from all other directions.

And I look forward to the campaigners' calls for the demolition of all those red brick and whitewashed houses at South Stoke, which also besmirch the natural beauty of the Goring Gap as does the less than natural feature known as the village of Goring http://www.goring-twinning.co.uk/assets/images/Goring_from_Streatley_-SC21-10-_mr.jpg

 

[Who Cares]

You're allowed to have whatever opinion you want. On the other hand, expecting no-one to object to it is another matter entirely...

That rhetoric doesn't fly here, I'm afraid.

I didn't say Phil Beard's opinion is wrong - that was PP's statement in post #2212....

And coming back to PHILIP.....Hello, once more....Sorry, I can't personally add/do/delete anything to or from the website as I'm not directly involved with the it....On the other hand, I think that you ought to contact the webmasters whose contact details are on there, I think, as if there are factual inaccuracies stated or included, either from the start or as a result of developments subsequent to the site being launched, of course these need to be pointed out and corrected by the Action Group....

By the way,I owe you a reply and apology about the FOI status we discussed on the other thread....I was incorrect in stating that there was an outstanding FOI request, and I apologise....There were, however, two FOI requests which were rejected by NR as being 'vexatious' and then the same two (slightly reworded) FOI requests from the PCs were later rejected as 'too complicated'....Oh, and the Consultation exercise promised by NR to start in January 2016 has now been postponed yet again - quel surprise !

And to JIMM....Not too sure about the inclusion of tree clearance in Basildon on the site, but I'm not involved in its content / editorial / maintenance....However, I think you're perhaps right that it's not 'wholly and exclusively' related to this Project, although the lineside vegetation having now been cut down then the impact of the new masts and portals are now fairly evident from the directly adjacent and only road into the Goring Gap from Pangbourne, no ?

But your comment about demolishing houses in South Stoke, etc....Stupid, absolutely stupid comment !

OK guys, I'm off again....Maybe on the other thread with another update if or when the Consultation ever happens....

 

[jimm]

And to JIMM....Not too sure about the inclusion of tree clearance in Basildon on the site, but I'm not involved in its content / editorial / maintenance....However, I think you're perhaps right that it's not 'wholly and exclusively' related to this Project, although the lineside vegetation having now been cut down then the impact of the new masts and portals are now fairly evident from the directly adjacent and only road into the Goring Gap from Pangbourne, no ?

a. The existing trees had to go
b. A new line of trees has been planted
c. Someone at RAG has flagrantly ignored the presence of those new trees - even though they can be seen in their own pictures - in order to try to make a point about nasty uncaring Network Rail, in the same way they still have all those lovely pictures of Hanwell online, although they presumably are well aware by now that Network Rail is systematically replacing the headspans through west London.

But your comment about demolishing houses in South Stoke, etc....Stupid, absolutely stupid comment !

What's stupid about it? The campaign is supposed to be about saving an area of outstanding natural beauty from being despoiled, isn't it? So why are the houses of South Stoke, Goring and Streatley exempt from this stricture, as there's nothing natural about them either. It's no secret RAG's members live in those villages, as the website makes this clear.

And why can't you get in touch with RAG and get them to do something about their website? You clearly know who they are. Whereas we're all jihadists apparently, so why would they pay any attention to any request from this direction, however politely put?

 

[phil beard]

I have to admit that I am not a technical expert, but they ARE ugly. I don't understand why HS1's catenary is relatively unobtrusive while the GWML's looks as if it had been designed by Lego and, to quote Ian Walmsley, has been built to withstand the winds of Jupiter. Also, is piling 15 metres would suggest it was required because of the overhead bulk.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I have to admit that I am not a technical expert, but they ARE ugly. I don't understand why HS1's catenary is relatively unobtrusive while the GWML's looks as if it had been designed by Lego and, to quote Ian Walmsley, has been built to withstand the winds of Jupiter. Also, is piling 15 metres would suggest it was required because of the overhead bulk.

Four-tracking requires portals, whereas two-tracking generally does not. If you look at Stratford International and other places on HS1 with more than two tracks parallel, you'll see portals too.

 

[edwin_m]

With the GWML probably having pretty adequate ten-foots, was electrification using simple cantilevers instead of portals ever seriously considered? To my non-expert brain having a shorter and thinner support each side and one in the middle seems more economical than providing a really heavy one each side and beams that don't always join in the middle. Though I do agree there would be more piles and the ten-foot isn't always the easiest place to work. Probably not many cables there though! Not trying to get at anybody here, just curious...

From what I read here most of the wiring already up is on four-track sections but before long it will be seriously spreading onto the two-tracks west of Didcot, when it will be possible to compare like-for-like (ish) with HS1 and other double tracks.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

With the GWML probably having pretty adequate ten-foots, was electrification using simple cantilevers instead of portals ever seriously considered? To my non-expert brain having a shorter and thinner support each side and one in the middle seems more economical than providing a really heavy one each side and beams that don't always join in the middle. Though I do agree there would be more piles and the ten-foot isn't always the easiest place to work. Probably not many cables there though! Not trying to get at anybody here, just curious...

From what I read here most of the wiring already up is on four-track sections but before long it will be seriously spreading onto the two-tracks west of Didcot, when it will be possible to compare like-for-like (ish) with HS1 and other double tracks.

The design specification for the route asked that wherever practical, OLE installation (and routine maintenance) leave one pair of lines operational, which instantly led to outside masts and nothing in the ten foot between the pair of lines.

The twin track cantilever design was also a result of that design brief, and it can be installed very quickly - 30 minutes or so on a good day, making it easy for pile then mast then cantilever then small part steel work to be installed by successive teams.

There's also a fair number of drains in the middle of the alignment in various areas, which would rule out anything going in there, even if we wanted to use the space.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I have to admit that I am not a technical expert, but they ARE ugly. I don't understand why HS1's catenary is relatively unobtrusive while the GWML's looks as if it had been designed by Lego and, to quote Ian Walmsley, has been built to withstand the winds of Jupiter. Also, is piling 15 metres would suggest it was required because of the overhead bulk.

Piles are typically 15 feet, not 15 metres. Ground conditions dependent, there are some longer ones out there and some are backfilled with concrete as necessary.

 

[McRhu]

Do people agree with me that the overhead masts and other equipment on the GWML are the ugliest and most over-engineered in the country? Previously described elsewhere as strong enough to stand the winds of Jupiter, I would add that aesthetically they are designed by Lego. What a way to ruin the look of Brunel's billiard table!

For what it's worth, and speaking as an impartial observer from a long way away, I agree that the Series 1 ole on the GW is hideously ugly. I don't doubt that it's strong and cleverly designed to keep the wires where they're supposed to be but (to me) it is a thing of military looking lineage: a throwback to the blacksmithery of yesteryear in its Victorian robustness. Could it have been done differently? Well the next design is purportedly underway (master series?) but how much aesthetic will be stirred into the mix I have no idea.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

For what it's worth, and speaking as an impartial observer from a long way away, I agree that the Series 1 ole on the GW is hideously ugly. I don't doubt that it's strong and cleverly designed to keep the wires where they're supposed to be but (to me) it is a thing of military looking lineage: a throwback to the blacksmithery of yesteryear in its Victorian robustness. Could it have been done differently? Well the next design is purportedly underway (master series?) but how much aesthetic will be stirred into the mix I have no idea.

UK Master Series Index is built around Series 1.

 

[McRhu]

Thanks Mr Phlopp. Has it reached the drawing board yet? Could you not throw a little smidgin of MK III for handsomeness' sake?

Seriously though, and without wishing to pry into matters as yet too commercially sensitive for man or beast, in what ways will it differ from Series 1 (cheaper?, different materials?)

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Thanks Mr Phlopp. Has it reached the drawing board yet? Could you not throw a little smidgin of MK III for handsomeness' sake?

Seriously though, and without wishing to pry into matters as yet too commercially sensitive for man or beast, in what ways will it differ from Series 1 (cheaper?, different materials?)

It brings together Series 1 and parts of Series 2, to provide a single electrification system that can be used on all routes with maximum parts commonality.

Series 1 is here to stay, it's a new design, Series 2 will eventually evolve into a sort of Series 1 light design suitable for lower speed (upto 100mph) routes, though so many routes are likely to need multiple pantograph operation at 110mph, Series 1 is going to be widely used in the next decade.

Mark 3 is utter crap and nothing of its design deserves to be used anywhere, the sooner it's removed from the GB network, the better. It's a pitiful design riddled, absolutely littered with design faults. The headspans have nice masts though.

 

[AM9]

Thanks Mr Phlopp. Has it reached the drawing board yet? Could you not throw a little smidgin of MK III for handsomeness' sake?

Seriously though, and without wishing to pry into matters as yet too commercially sensitive for man or beast, in what ways will it differ from Series 1 (cheaper?, different materials?)

Calling it the UK Master Series Index suggests that it will be a standard set of components designed to meet the majority of new OLE requirements. By selecting a limited range of parts from the series 1 range, it will ensure designs will be fit for purpose, yet have lower installed costs and probably lower cost of ownership.
MKIII designs and components would fail to meet any of engineering criteria and represent poor value for the public purse.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Series 1 is here to stay, it's a new design, Series 2 will eventually evolve into a sort of Series 1 light design suitable for lower speed (upto 100mph) routes, though so many routes are likely to need multiple pantograph operation at 110mph, Series 1 is going to be widely used in the next decade.

For what it's worth, the OHLE just erected around Norton Bridge for the new flyover route appears to be neither Series 1 or 2 (nor Mk3).
This is a new high-density 100mph route (WCML slow lines), albeit only 2-3 miles long.
So there must be more than one design around for 100mph lines.
The next OHLE test will be the Bromsgrove-Barnt Green section of the Midland, up the Lickey.
The Chase line probably won't be better than 75mph, nor GOBLIN.

 

[jimm]

Working in Reading yesterday so kept an eye out for changes between Didcot and Tilehurst. About half of the overhead steelwork though each of the intermediate stations is now in place. There are still odd gaps in other places along the way but as I said previously, I'd expect a couple more Sunday closures to pretty much take care of them as well. Some are in what are presumably awkward to deal with spots like just north of Goring & Streatley station, where the metalwork has to be fixed to a retaining wall on one side of the track.

As I have stated elsewhere in the Class 800 thread, at an event I attended this week Network Rail said they now hope to have the wires complete between Airport Junction and Maidenhead by the end of this year. Tilehurst-Didcot is on track for completion around September.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

For what it's worth, the OHLE just erected around Norton Bridge for the new flyover route appears to be neither Series 1 or 2 (nor Mk3).
This is a new high-density 100mph route (WCML slow lines), albeit only 2-3 miles long.
So there must be more than one design around for 100mph lines.
The next OHLE test will be the Bromsgrove-Barnt Green section of the Midland, up the Lickey.
The Chase line probably won't be better than 75mph, nor GOBLIN.

It should be UK1, Railtrack's system developed for the WCRM.

Minor electrification projects, like Norton Bridge and some layout change related rewiring projects, such as Edinburgh Waverley make use of appropriate existing designs, so there's no maintenance issues in the event of a dewirement.

It's still possible to order up Mark 1 and 3 OLE, Railtrack's UK1 design, and Siemens do their SM1 equipment too, but it's used in Strathclyde and on Siemens depots only (unless I've missed a small project somewhere).

GOBLIN gets Series 2 but there's likely to be a small amount of other parts used to tie into the existing electrified routes. Chase Line also gets Series 2.

Bromsgrove I'm not sure on - I think the extension is also to be Series 2, and I did hear there could be a push to convert the headspans to portals from Barnt Green to New Street in future (it seems everybody with headspans on their patch now wants this following the success of Potters Bar and this Christmas's GWML conversions).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

IBromsgrove I'm not sure on - I think the extension is also to be Series 2, and I did hear there could be a push to convert the headspans to portals from Barnt Green to New Street in future (it seems everybody with headspans on their patch now wants this following the success of Potters Bar and this Christmas's GWML conversions).

Hopefully to wire the fast lines Barnt Green-Kings Norton for future main line use.
Sorry we're off topic here!

 

[33Hz]

Have to agree it's pretty utilitarian and ugly. When electrification of the GWR was mooted last time around, aesthetically pleasing OHLE was top of the priority list.

Dutch, Italian, German and Spanish designs are far nicer.

 

[Domh245]

Have to agree it's pretty utilitarian and ugly. When electrification of the GWR was mooted last time around, aesthetically pleasing OHLE was top of the priority list.

Dutch, Italian, German and Spanish designs are far nicer.

When electrification was mooted previously, was the technical specification as demanding as it currently is? Indeed, are the technical requirements of other country's OHLE systems as rigorous as that for the GWML? Some people need to remember that a railway is a means of transporting passengers and freight from place to place, and not an art gallery.

 

[jimm]

Have to agree it's pretty utilitarian and ugly. When electrification of the GWR was mooted last time around, aesthetically pleasing OHLE was top of the priority list.

Really? Top priority? Could you tell us where this list can be found?

Dutch, Italian, German and Spanish designs are far nicer.

Nicer? In what way? If you mean the assorted new-build high-speed lines in those countries, they all have two-track lines, where you can use something rather different to what is needed on quadruple track such as found on the GWML out to Didcot. What you will find above quad track in those countries doesn't rate highly on the niceness scale either, quite frankly.

And what will appear on the double track sections of GWML wiring will also look a bit different. As to its niceness, can't say I'm bothered, so long as the wires stay where they are supposed to be, up above the train, not entangled around it. Getting stuck once for more hours than I care to remember some years ago, as a result of a dewirement on the ECML, was one time too many for me.

 

[QueensCurve]

I have to admit that I am not a technical expert, but they ARE ugly. I don't understand why HS1's catenary is relatively unobtrusive while the GWML's looks as if it had been designed by Lego and, to quote Ian Walmsley, has been built to withstand the winds of Jupiter. Also, is piling 15 metres would suggest it was required because of the overhead bulk.

My sentiments exactly. There are plenty of high speed OHLEs in the wild which are much better looking.

 

[jimm]

My sentiments exactly. There are plenty of high speed OHLEs in the wild which are much better looking.

On quadruple track routes? Please point us in the direction of these beauties...

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Architects and artists keep doing these RIBA type competitions. It keeps me busy in an afternoon detailing why they can't be used in real life, but it's free publicity for RIBA and the architects taking part.

 

[AM9]

Architects and artists keep doing these RIBA type competitions. It keeps me busy in an afternoon detailing why they can't be used in real life, but it's free publicity for RIBA and the architects taking part.

If there really is a demand for a prettier OLE design, why don't RIBA or whoever is running these contests give a top level technical spec. for OLE, i.e., contact wire weight, tension, positional stability, clearances, basic terminating and feed rules etc.?
Any architech that claims to be competent in engineering architecture design would of course know that catenary supports are a bit more than lamp posts.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

If there really is a demand for a prettier OLE design, why don't RIBA or whoever is running these contests give a top level technical spec. for OLE, i.e., contact wire weight, tension, positional stability, clearances, basic terminating and feed rules etc.?
Any architech that claims to be competent in engineering architecture design would of course know that catenary supports are a bit more than lamp posts.

I've no idea. The latest designs, which DfT and HS2 were involved with, are online at http://www.ribacompetitions.com/ols/shortlisted.html.

There are shortlisted entries which lack insulators, registration arms, return wires, AT wires, and none demonstrate tensioning or anchoring arrangements, some appear to (or would need to) use tail wiring, further still, some would have serious (and dangerous) energy dissipation issues in the event of a dewirement.

I'm going to redesign the lot. My starting point is the New Haven Railroad's design of OLE.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Do people agree with me that the overhead masts and other equipment on the GWML are the ugliest and most over-engineered in the country? Previously described elsewhere as strong enough to stand the winds of Jupiter, I would add that aesthetically they are designed by Lego. What a way to ruin the look of Brunel's billiard table!

Are you having a laugh? Look at the West Coast Main Line.

 

[ianhr]

I've no idea. The latest designs, which DfT and HS2 were involved with, are online at http://www.ribacompetitions.com/ols/shortlisted.html.

I'm going to redesign the lot. My starting point is the New Haven Railroad's design of OLE.

That's good. I have always thought the NYNHHRR and PRR catenary is rather elegant, and also incidentally that of the LBSCR. I have no idea who designed the American installations but I assume Philip Dawson was responsible for the latter