Great Western Electrification Progress

[Mikey C]

The government (Labour) considered electrifying many routes by the turn of the century (XC route, GWML etc.) but when Mrs T took over, the proposals were not implemented. Oh well, Cornwall's gonna have another 30 years or so before the wires come...

Is that really the case? Why would BR have spent all that money on new IC125s in the late 70s if the GWML was going to be electrified in the 80s?

And as Labour got in in 1997, they could easily have started planning electrification beginning at the turn of the century if they wanted to

 

[bramling]

The government (Labour) considered electrifying many routes by the turn of the century (XC route, GWML etc.) but when Mrs T took over, the proposals were not implemented. Oh well, Cornwall's gonna have another 30 years or so before the wires come...

If we're comparing Labour and the Conservatives, between 1979 and 1997 we saw quite a few electrification schemes planned and implemented - ECML from Hitchin to Carstairs / Leeds, Leeds to Bradford, Skipton and Ilkley, West Anglia from Bishops Stortford to Cambridge and eventually Cambridge to Kings Lynn, Royston to Cambridge, Colchester to Norwick and Harwick, Wickford to Southminster, Witham to Braintree, Watford to St. Albans Abbey, South Croydon to East Grinstead, Tonbridge to Hastings, Solent Link, Bournemouth to Weymouth, Paisley to Ayr, Ardrossen Harbour and Largs, Drem to North Berwick, Heathrow Express, Redhill to Tonbridge, West London Line, Cross City Line from Redditch to Lichfield Trent Valley, Stockport to Hazel Grove, Thameslink, St. Pancras to Bedford (the latter I think started planning pre-79).

By contrast, since 1997 we have seen basically two very small schemes: Crewe to Kidsgrove and Shields to Paisley Canal, and not a lot else until the recent schemes around Manchester, of which so far only a small section has actually come on stream. In fairness we have seen quite a lot of renewals and upgrades particularly on the Southern Region and also the bottom section of the WCML.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

You could add HS1 and Airdrie-Edinburgh to the post-1997 list.

Also a factor was that the first franchises were let (by the Tories) with few route upgrades, and the structure of the railway meant that nobody was empowered to commit to electrification.
Railtrack and even early Network Rail were against electrification ("one more interface to go wrong", John Armitt once said).
The DfT and advisor Rod Eddington were also against, believing the mantra that new cheap power sources would soon render expensive wiring redundant.
This attitude only changed in 2008 when Andrew Adonis joined the DfT, because diesel trains were becoming unaffordable.
By then the industry (Network Rail and the passenger TOCs) were also lobbying for electrification.
The recession also helped.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

The government (Labour) considered electrifying many routes by the turn of the century (XC route, GWML etc.) but when Mrs T took over, the proposals were not implemented. Oh well, Cornwall's gonna have another 30 years or so before the wires come...

IC125s started running heavily in the mid 70s when Labour was in power. Under Mrs T loads of electrification took place and a Channel Tunnel got built. By the way a Conservative government under Heath started a Channel Tunnel - but an incoming Labour Government cancelled it - eventually - under Mrs T it got built.

 

[edwin_m]

The Hammersmith and City electric stock was jointly owned by the GWR and Metropolitan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Railway_electric_multiple_units (see section "Early Units").

The Underground stock serving Watford DC lines was jointly owned with the LNWR, and the LNER owned some of the 1938 tube stock due to their involvement in the Northern Line.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Is that really the case? Why would BR have spent all that money on new IC125s in the late 70s if the GWML was going to be electrified in the 80s?

Rather ironically, given that they are set to become one of the longest lasting bits of rolling stock ever, the HSTs were originally intended to be only a short term measure with a 10 year life*, so that does seem to fit that indicated timescale.


*Presumably this meant "in that form" and the carriages would have been re-deployed with other traction elsewhere in due course?

 

[bluenoxid]

Is that really the case? Why would BR have spent all that money on new IC125s in the late 70s if the GWML was going to be electrified in the 80s?

And as Labour got in in 1997, they could easily have started planning electrification beginning at the turn of the century if they wanted to

The Advanced Passenger Train was also in development, which was hoped to replace the HST.

 

[76020]

Last Friday I went from London to Cardiff and I was thinking, there is an enormous amount of work to be done if electric trains are to run in three years time to Bristol and four years to Cardiff.


Electrification will only be able to start in certain sections at present I guess, there are plenty of old signal gantries between Airport Junction and Reading and west of Swindon which have to be cut down before they can start in these areas and mayby a few others elsewhere, bearing in mind that the HOPS train does the whole lot in one go including the wiring. I recon they can start only between Reading and Swindon in the new year.

On the positive side there are new AWS magnets installed up to Maidenhead but no new signals as yet.
Nearly all the bridges east of Didcot now look ok for overhead wiring apart from a couple in the in the Slough area and one just east of Iver Station which is Thorney Lane which I believe will be rebuilt on a new alignment.
Further west there are loads of new foundations for signalling locations between Swindon and Bristol Parkway and also on this section a few bridges are being rebuilt.
Around Reading area there are a number of overhead masts installed and half of the new train depot is wired.

The question is will they make it?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

bearing in mind that the HOPS train does the whole lot in one go including the wiring. I recon they can start only between Reading and Swindon in the new year.
The question is will they make it?

As I understand it the HOPS setup doesn't have to do it "all in one".
In fact I would expect them to get organised with the piling first, then the steelwork, and finally the wiring, maybe several weeks apart.
The route also doesn't have to be "complete" (signalling etc) for them to start.
There will also be two lots of contractors at work with different resources, Balfour Beatty working Airport Jn-Maidenhead and Amey from Maidenhead westwards.

It will be fascinating watching how they work compared to the NW scheme.
Up here you never quite know where along the route a run of foundations will appear.
There is a tendency to leave difficult locations to specialist teams, so there were awkward gaps quite late in the programme (eg over Castlefield Viaduct and Chat Moss).
Open line is easy enough, but there are the viaducts, station sites and tunnels to complicate progress.
Most of the NW foundations are concrete, while GW will be mostly piled I believe.
I agree with you about 3 years being a very short time to reach Bristol.
Even starting now it's an average of about a route mile a week to finish by Sept 2016!

 

[33Hz]

Is that really the case? Why would BR have spent all that money on new IC125s in the late 70s if the GWML was going to be electrified in the 80s?

In the mid-80s we were told to keep metalic structures away from the edge of the line for a planned electrification. It still hasn't happened

And as Labour got in in 1997, they could easily have started planning electrification beginning at the turn of the century if they wanted to

We have to thank John Prescott for driving through HS1, but once he went Labour just procrastianted.

There were studies done into what became HS2 in 2003 showing a great BCR, but subsequent transport ministers - particularly Alistair Darling - did their best to bury it.

Labour love to initiate study after study. The Tories seem to actually be getting on with it.

 

[swt_passenger]

As I understand it the HOPS setup doesn't have to do it "all in one".
In fact I would expect them to get organised with the piling first, then the steelwork, and finally the wiring, maybe several weeks apart.

Absolutely. The entire HOPS 'train' consists of at least three or four independent sections that can go their different ways within the overall worksite. I get the impression from the various articles on the subject that it will only run as a whole train when going from and back to the operating base.

 

[TheWalrus]

Has Newbury-Bedwyn been added to GW electrification? I've seen articles round here that suggest it's going ahead but no concrete evidence from anywhere official. Apparently it has a BCR of about 3.63 which I can't see how they got that figure. I'm not convinced of economic benefit of just going to Bedwyn.

 

[swt_passenger]

Has Newbury-Bedwyn been added to GW electrification?

I don't think so. As you say there have been a number of studies, reports and recommendations, but as yet it hasn't been announced. In the recent Modern Railways interview with FGW's top man, [Jan 14 page 39 RH column] it is still in the 'to be decided' phase, with FGW having persuaded DfT to ask NR to cost 'beyond Newbury, possibly to Westbury'...

 

[TheWalrus]

Apparently Westbury was looked at as an option but scored very low about 0.31. However this was based on current service levels which hardly any would benefit. I'm not sure why they did the study really. I think it'd only be worth it if they went to Plymouth and also did from Birmingham and Bristol.

 

[Eagle]

I'm not convinced of economic benefit of just going to Bedwyn.

Being where the stopping services terminate, it would allow pretty much all the non-Intercity services from Paddington to become electric (rather than retaining a small group of suburban/regional DMUs for London to Bedwyn services).

Of course you could then ask the question of why they terminate at Bedwyn, which has always seemed a little random as a terminus.

 

[fgwrich]

Being where the stopping services terminate, it would allow pretty much all the non-Intercity services from Paddington to become electric (rather than retaining a small group of suburban/regional DMUs for London to Bedwyn services).

Of course you could then ask the question of why they terminate at Bedwyn, which has always seemed a little random as a terminus.

I wonder if Bedwyn was chosen as the place to terminate as it's not that far distance wise from Malborough. But, given the possible idea of electrifying the line onwards to Westbury could then give Pewsey a decent service into Paddington and possibly allow the Bedwyns to terminate at Westbury. It wouldn't then be too allow the Westbury - Bristol route to be used as a diversionary route for IEP as well. Certainly electrifying the line onwards from Newbury would remove further need for Reading Depot to hold a small fleet of Turbos, although it would still leave two undecided diesel islands on the Great Western - the Greenford Branch and the Reading to Redhill and Gatwick route.

 

[Eagle]

The Greenford branch may yet end up going to the Crossrail franchise (along with Romford to Upminster); that still seems to be a bit up in the air.

Also there are Worcester line services that would still be diesel, as well as Banbury if those remain through services to London (if Banbury to Oxford becomes selfcontained then it would probably be better off in the hands of Chiltern).

 

[Hartington]

If you went just a little beyond Westbury it would be possible to electrically haul the stone traffic up to Acton. I wonder what difference that would make to the case.

 

[fgwrich]

The Greenford branch may yet end up going to the Crossrail franchise (along with Romford to Upminster); that still seems to be a bit up in the air.

Also there are Worcester line services that would still be diesel, as well as Banbury if those remain through services to London (if Banbury to Oxford becomes selfcontained then it would probably be better off in the hands of Chiltern).

Thinking about it for a moment, wasn't there at one point also talk of transferring the former Thames Trains London to Stratford Upon Avon services back to the hands of the Greater Western franchise from Chiltern?

 

[Eagle]

That would make absolutely no sense though, because when Thames operated the services they were Paddington to Stratford via Oxford, and now they are Marylebone to Stratford via Wycombe, which is much quicker. (So either you'd have FGW operating on the Chiltern mainline way out of their territory, which would be silly, or Stratford would effectively lose its direct London services because they'd be back to going the really long way round.)

I could see benefit in having some more Stratford to Oxford services though. If Banbury to Oxford goes to Chiltern then this becomes quite likely.

 

[jimm]

Thinking about it for a moment, wasn't there at one point also talk of transferring the former Thames Trains London to Stratford Upon Avon services back to the hands of the Greater Western franchise from Chiltern?

No, there wasn't. What there was, in the context of the aborted Great Western franchise, was a request from First (and perhaps other bidders) to operate from Oxford to Stratford, with an eye on tourists visiting both places. This would have been in addition to the Chiltern service, not instead of it. DfT said it would look at the proposal when bids came in. So far as I'm aware, FGW is still keen on the idea but it's a medium-term prospect, which would need bi-mode traction, presumably a five-car IEP.

As for Stratford via Oxford being a "long way round" the London-Stratford service was deliberately designed by NSE when the Turbos arrived to reflect the fact that a lot of tourists travel from London to both Oxford and Stratford, rather than, say, High Wycombe and Stratford... so there was logic to operating from Paddington - and FGW clearly think that remains the case.

In reality, the journey times don't compare unfavourably. Chiltern's current best Stratford timing is just inside two hours, while NSE was doing it via Oxford in 1994-5 in 2hrs 20mins, a couple of minutes more than Chiltern's slowest current services, while in 1996-7, the late-night Stratford theatre train reached Paddington in 2hrs 12 mins.

Get some of the padding out of London-Oxford, run at 100mph north of Aynho, thanks to recent improvements, and there probably wouldn't be a lot in it from Paddington with an IEP.

 

[TheWalrus]

In regards to Bedwyn terminators they should go to Westbury as there are onward connections available there. It would mean you would need one less turbo but as it stands you still have Greenford, Banbury and Worcester still needing DMUs.

In regards to Stratford I believe the Paddington route was to serve Oxford. It would be good to see Oxford-Stratford return either with a FGW turbo or Chiltern, maybe as an extension of their upcoming Marylebone-Oxford?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Being where the stopping services terminate, it would allow pretty much all the non-Intercity services from Paddington to become electric (rather than retaining a small group of suburban/regional DMUs for London to Bedwyn services).

Of course you could then ask the question of why they terminate at Bedwyn, which has always seemed a little random as a terminus.

I wonder if Bedwyn was chosen as the place to terminate as it's not that far distance wise from Malborough. But, given the possible idea of electrifying the line onwards to Westbury could then give Pewsey a decent service into Paddington and possibly allow the Bedwyns to terminate at Westbury. It wouldn't then be too allow the Westbury - Bristol route to be used as a diversionary route for IEP as well. Certainly electrifying the line onwards from Newbury would remove further need for Reading Depot to hold a small fleet of Turbos, although it would still leave two undecided diesel islands on the Great Western - the Greenford Branch and the Reading to Redhill and Gatwick route.

Don't forget Pewsey is closer to Marlborough than Bedwyn! I'm still not sure why Bedwyn was chosen it remains a conundrum to me!

 

[jimm]

In regards to Bedwyn terminators they should go to Westbury as there are onward connections available there. It would mean you would need one less turbo but as it stands you still have Greenford, Banbury and Worcester still needing DMUs.

In regards to Stratford I believe the Paddington route was to serve Oxford. It would be good to see Oxford-Stratford return either with a FGW turbo or Chiltern, maybe as an extension of their upcoming Marylebone-Oxford?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Re Stratford, from my understanding of FGW's intentions, it it not to provide a dmu shuttle between Oxford and Stratford, rather to run to and from London with a high-quality fast service aimed squarely at the tourist market, which suggests something other than a Turbo, and most likely operating off-peak, when tourists are more likely to be travelling and you could get your hands on an IEP or two. And if you were to have a 17.30 IEP back from Stratford (something which NSE/Thames Trains ran for many years), and get down to a two-hour timing, it would still be back at Paddington to cover a late-peak job out of London.

Further to my earlier post, thanks to the Network South East Railway Society's page of old Thames Trains publicity material and timetables, I have now found a 1994-95 timing, from Paddington to Stratford, via Oxford, using 90mph Turbos, of 2hrs 7mins, Which makes you wonder why Chiltern can't get there a lot faster in 2013, on a more direct route with 100mph stock. Current best looks to be 1hr 58mins.

Chiltern simply won't have enough rolling stock to operate the strange dog-leg you suggest. They are going to need every Mk3 and loco they can lay their hands on to free enough 168s to operate the Oxford service, and even then very tight turnrounds will be required at Oxford.

There is rather more logic in Chiltern taking over the Greenford-Ealing shuttle as it will soon become the last diesel operator in London north of the Thames. As for the Cotswold Line, no-one knows if dmus will still be required post-2017, and if they are, it's hard to see how they would get further east than Oxford, Didcot or Reading, to keep them out of the way of much faster emus and IEPs. And the need for Oxford-Banbury dmus will only be short-lived, thanks to the Electric Spine wiring scheme.

 

[steevp]

Bedwyn used to be the extent of the old Network SouthEast area, which may still have an influence on the current service. However, I don't know why the NSE area went as far as Bedwyn (or not as far as Westbury) either

 

[TheWalrus]

Let's not forget NSE went as far as Exeter on the West of England so why couldn't they have done that on the B&H?

 

[HowardGWR]

Let's not forget NSE went as far as Exeter on the West of England so why couldn't they have done that on the B&H?

Thinking about the points made, how does one envisage such a service as this

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/P70093/2014/01/09/advanced

operating, as it starts from Frome and is clearly a luxury commuter train. Should electrification schemes be based on the one or two commuter services per day that are laid on for a few office managers who want to live away from what they regard as the riff raff? What about the rest of the day?

 

[jimm]

Let's not forget NSE went as far as Exeter on the West of England so why couldn't they have done that on the B&H?

You could try the obvious reason that the GW route was and remains an Intercity route, while the LSW route is slower and most trains call at most stations. Also with everything else running out of Waterloo coming under NSE, it was logical to make the Salisbury and Exeter service part of it as well - where the route ended was a minor consideration.

Thinking about the points made, how does one envisage such a service as this

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/P70093/2014/01/09/advanced

operating, as it starts from Frome and is clearly a luxury commuter train. Should electrification schemes be based on the one or two commuter services per day that are laid on for a few office managers who want to live away from what they regard as the riff raff? What about the rest of the day?

It is a luxury commuter train because the only stock available west of Bedwyn is HSTs - but a more important consideration than luxury is capacity, due to the demand at that time of day from the stations along the Vale of Pewsey and at Newbury towards Reading and London - which adds up to rather more than "a few" and using an HST allows Turbos that would otherwise be required to shift those people to operate in the Thames Valley - the same as bringing back the five 180s for the Cotswold Line (and an early Newbury-London turn) freed Turbos to boost capacity closer to London.

That it starts from Frome probably reflects that FGW spotted an opportunity (a fair number of people regularly driving from Frome to catch trains at Westbury?), and the recent experiment has proved worthwhile continuing. It is in any case only a short extension of trains which ran out empty from the depot at Bristol and went into passenger service at Westbury.

Dmus have been turning round at Bedwyn for a very long time. The 1965 Western Region timetable here http://www.timetableworld.com/book_viewer.php?id=12&section_id=15 shows a succession of trains doing just that, with just a handful of Newbury-Westbury trains serving the stations further west, presumably based on traffic back then, with perhaps the extra time needed to get to Pewsey and back also a factor, as it would presumably add up to more trains being needed in service to maintain frequencies.

That low cost-benefit ratio of going all the way to Westbury tends to suggest that fall-off in traffic west of Bedwyn is still there. I seem to recall the ratio for wiring just Newbury to Bedwyn was much better.

 

[HowardGWR]

All fair points but I still wonder about what I termed 'rest of the day'. To justify electrification, one normally needs a heavy 'shopping. business and other' traffic (and both directions) to justify about four trains an hour. Is it likely that such traffic is possible west of Newbury?

 

[33Hz]

Any recent pictures of masts going up?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Any recent pictures of masts going up?

They haven't started yet, except for those around Reading linked to the station rebuild and new depot.
There are some trial foundations around Pangbourne.
The arrival of the "big machines" is eagerly awaited.
Nobody seems to know where they will start work.