Great Western Electrification Progress

[Tumbleweed]

If the South Wales section could only be completed by cancelling the proposed appalling M4 additional southern bypass of Newport, I would have a big smile. The prof's report (see another thread) made clear this could be achieved just as effectively and much cheaper by upgrading the existing southern bypass with GSJs and extending it eastwards past the redundant steelworks site. The valleys electrification could be included to boot.

Agreed. We still live in country whose government still believes building expensive roads is the solution to everything. They wouldn't even consider spending a billion on public transport.

 

[Olaf]

There's an article on this by Roger Ford in September's Modern Railways: "Electrification Shocker", p28.

Basically:
- installation costs of new design Series 1 (GW) and Series 2 (elsewhere) are higher than BR Mk3b, instead of being lower as expected
- NR did not include upgrading the wiring from Paddington to Airport Jn for 125mph running (nor St Pancras to Bedford in the MML costs)
- there are doubts as to the capability of the HOPS system and its suitability over some of the GW route
- much of the GW scheme has not reached GRIP 3 and the design and costs are still uncertain
- grid connections (down to the power companies) are coming in much more costly than expected

ORR is reviewing each tranche of NR spend as it firms up.
The belief is that the overrun (believed to be from £1b to £1.5b) is such that descoping or delay is likely (on all CP5 schemes).
The CP5 plans and progress updates do have a warning that all electrification milestones are subject to confirmation.

Roger observes that Basingstoke-Southampton DC-AC conversion might be an early casualty.

Thanks. So at the moment, there is no official confirmation of either the delays, their causes, nor of possible outcomes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That's a shame. Surely NR could've gone for a more tried and tested OHLE system rather than come up with a new system that's hardly had any pantographs touch it at present?

As for the DC-AC conversion, that's still going to be needed in the future, with the oldest substations needing replacement and the cost of AC conversion being cheaper than renewing DC equipment altogether. If the plans get eliminated, we're going to end up with polluting diesels continuing on the route and the Electric Spine becoming meaningless.

If anything, based on the current NR documents, the project for DC-AC conversion for the electric spine has progressed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Agreed. We still live in country whose government still believes building expensive roads is the solution to everything. They wouldn't even consider spending a billion on public transport.

Current capital investment in rail is about £2B per annum; a slight increase over CP4.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
A little off topic, but a key milestone has been achieved at Reading:

Reading viaduct ready for tracklaying:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...ew/reading-viaduct-ready-for-tracklaying.html

 

[deltic08]

Agreed. Maybe the gov't'll see sense sooner or later and shove it up the priority list...

Schemes that release the most DMUs per track mile of electrification should be given priority and "shoved" up the list. Valley lines will do this, routes in he North/Northeast would, the Electric Spine will not.

 

[jimm]

I doubt if the problems are anything to do with the design of Series 1 or 2, though the autotransformer system is additional to what BR would have installed.
It's more likely to be the deployment and productivity of the construction teams and kit.
An unbelievable number of orange suits has been needed on the NW scheme, which included specialist concrete foundations over Chat Moss and approaching Manchester Victoria.
The channel tunnel project, and more recently Crossrail, published frequent progress reports (positions of the TBMs) so that everybody could see what progress was being made during the project's lifetime.
It would be good if Network Rail did the same for its electrification programme.
It's that important to the future of the railway.
Currently it is all just too quiet on the GW front!

Too quiet for you is it?

Well here's some news from Network Rail's media centre from, er, yesterday.

The bridge over the railway at Fulscot Road has reopened to the public today, Friday 29 August, after work to prepare it for electrification was completed.

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.c...ad-bridge-is-reopened-to-the-public-213e.aspx

First bridge over the line east of Didcot. Meanwhile, a mile down the line at South Moreton, there are lots of masts planted ready to support the wires and others at various points along the way to Reading, plus piling etc, etc.

What on earth do you want them to do, have a live map with a pin in for each mast they plant or hole they dig? This isn't some nice neat operation where they work in a straight line from point a to point b. A rather different matter from tracking where the odd TBM has got to.

 

[Olaf]

If the South Wales section could only be completed by cancelling the proposed appalling M4 additional southern bypass of Newport, I would have a big smile. The prof's report (see another thread) made clear this could be achieved just as effectively and much cheaper by upgrading the existing southern bypass with GSJs and extending it eastwards past the redundant steelworks site. The valleys electrification could be included to boot.

Road users pay more than they get out of Government for the use of the roads, so it is hard to find reasons for NOT improving the roads on cost/benefits.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Status updates for the GWML are published here (under "Updates by area"):
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/

 

[edwin_m]

Road users pay more than they get out of Government for the use of the roads, so it is hard to find reasons for NOT improving the roads on cost/benefits.

Do they pay for the roads provided by local authorities, the health and produtivity consequences of accidents and pollution, or the costs of policing the road network?

 

[JamesRowden]

Road users pay more than they get out of Government for the use of the roads, so it is hard to find reasons for NOT improving the roads on cost/benefits.

Do they pay for the roads provided by local authorities, the health and produtivity consequences of accidents and pollution, or the costs of policing the road network?

Also, people driving rather than using public transport reduces the quality of public transport that can operate for a given budget.

 

[AM9]

Road users pay more than they get out of Government for the use of the roads, so it is hard to find reasons for NOT improving the roads on cost/benefits.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Status updates for the GWML are published here (under "Updates by area"):
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/

Road users pay towards the cost of the pollution that they create. The VED is scasled up to discourage the purchase of new grand polluters and the fuel duty provides a cost based on fuel burnt, i.e. CO2 created.
The roads are funded by general and local taxation which is paid by everybody including those who don't use the roads (unless they get paid less than the various tax thresholds.

 

[Nonsense]

Do they pay for the roads provided by local authorities, the health and produtivity consequences of accidents and pollution, or the costs of policing the road network?

Yes. As others have said. By means of road and fuel tax, but also vat paid on any product transported by road. Which is pretty much everything tangible. It's possible to be pro rail without being anti road. Both are essential.

 

[Olaf]

Do they pay for the roads provided by local authorities, the health and produtivity consequences of accidents and pollution, or the costs of policing the road network?

Pretty much, plus other Government services besides.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Road users pay towards the cost of the pollution that they create. The VED is scasled up to discourage the purchase of new grand polluters and the fuel duty provides a cost based on fuel burnt, i.e. CO2 created.
The roads are funded by general and local taxation which is paid by everybody including those who don't use the roads (unless they get paid less than the various tax thresholds.

Road tax and fuel duties contribute more to the exchequer than are spent on roads.

 

[Tumbleweed]

Thanks. So at the moment, there is no official confirmation of either the delays, their causes, nor of possible outcomes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


If anything, based on the current NR documents, the project for DC-AC conversion for the electric spine has progressed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Current capital investment in rail is about £2B per annum; a slight increase over CP4.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
A little off topic, but a key milestone has been achieved at Reading:

Reading viaduct ready for tracklaying:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...ew/reading-viaduct-ready-for-tracklaying.html

Thanks for that but in The welsh government things still haven't moved on from the 1960's unfortunately.

 

[HowardGWR]

The discussion was about what the Wales Government chooses to spend its capital allowance on, not the UK government. The discussion is not a general one about road vs rail.

 

[AM9]

Road tax and fuel duties contribute more to the exchequer than are spent on roads.

That may be but the cost to the nation of (fossil fuel powered) road users' activities goes way beyond the amount spent on new tarmac, concrete and repairs. It has major impacts on health, the natural environment, food and water supplies etc.. The road building and maintenance bit comes from general taxation and council tax collected from the population whether they use the roads for travel or not. That's why the roads are also provided for non-polluting modes of transport, (there has been no 'road tax' since 1937).
Of course, all consumers pay in respect of road delivered goods that they themselves use.

 

[Olaf]

That may be but the cost to the nation of (fossil fuel powered) road users' activities goes way beyond the amount spent on new tarmac, concrete and repairs. It has major impacts on health, the natural environment, food and water supplies etc.. The road building and maintenance bit comes from general taxation and council tax collected from the population whether they use the roads for travel or not. That's why the roads are also provided for non-polluting modes of transport, (there has been no 'road tax' since 1937).
Of course, all consumers pay in respect of road delivered goods that they themselves use.

I'm not bothered about pollution or the the environment; costs for roads are covered by the road user. Local taxes cover maintenance of local roads, but not new build.

 

[HSTEd]

These calculations about road transport are the kind of thing where you can obtain whatever result you want.
All we can say is a lot is spent on roads and road related externalities and a lot of income is raised by VED and fuel duty.

That is about it.

 

[edwin_m]

I'm not bothered about pollution or the the environment.

You don't have or plan to have any children then?

 

[The Ham]

I'm not bothered about pollution or the the environment; costs for roads are covered by the road user. Local taxes cover maintenance of local roads, but not new build.

...so you are looking forward to the permanent closure of the line at Dawlish.

 

[SamYeager]

This thread is supposed to be about Great Western Electrification. Please take your squabbling about non railway transport elsewhere.

 

[adrock1976]

This thread is supposed to be about Great Western Electrification. Please take your squabbling about non railway transport elsewhere.

Hear, Hear.

In peace

Adam

 

[Techniquest]

You don't have or plan to have any children then?

If that's the case for the member you replied to, they're not the only one!

 

[RichmondCommu]

If that's the case for the member you replied to, they're not the only one!

But what about everybody else who does want to have children / has a family? Or for that matter can get laid?

 

[455driver]

But what about everybody else who does want to have children / has a family? Or for that matter can get laid?

 

[59CosG95]

This thread is supposed to be about Great Western Electrification. Please take your squabbling about non railway transport elsewhere.

AGAIN.

 

[Techniquest]

But what about everybody else who does want to have children / has a family?

Far as I'm concerned, there's no need for children! But that is a whole different topic, so let's please go back to discussing the juicing up of the Western!

 

[59CosG95]

Far as I'm concerned, there's no need for children! But that is a whole different topic, so let's please go back to discussing the juicing up of the Western!

Indeed! Time we were back on topic! So... any news?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Indeed! Time we were back on topic! So... any news?

Yes surely by now the HOPS train must be doing about 1 mile per night?

 

[CAF397]

I went from Reading to Oxford on Friday. I must admit it made me laugh seeing miles and miles of trackside, then a dozen or so masts, then nothing for miles, then a few more masts and prep work. I'm sure there's method in the madness, but looked so silly.

 

[fgwrich]

More to do with the Reading Station area than GWML electrification as such, but track is now being laid over the Reading Viaduct with a pair of Colas's 70s sat up there this week - Work is starting on installing the masts shortly, although as we've seen with other new viaduct installations this shouldn't take as long as starting from new. The first beams over Cowley Bridge Road for the Festival Chord are also being put in place at the moment as well.

 

[ironstone11]

The first beams over Cowley Bridge Road for the Festival Chord are also being put in place at the moment as well.

I think you mean: The first beams over Cow Lane... for the Festival Line.

 

[swt_passenger]

The first beams over Cowley Bridge Road for the Festival Chord are also being put in place at the moment as well.

Suggested in Dave Creasy's flickr photo stream that those are actually the last beams over Cow Lane that have been placed within the last week:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/52834510@N00/14964097720/in/photostream/

...and many other 'adjacent' photos show nearly all the Festival line viaduct beam sections in place. The Festival viaduct only has 6 longitudinal spans, and of course is only single track width, so uses only 4 beams per span, compared to the main viaduct's 7 per span with 30 or so sections along the length. What's probably happened is that they've been able to install the whole lot for the Festival viaduct in one short period, once all the piers were ready, as relatively speaking it's a much smaller job.

Immediately west of Cow Lane the viaduct ends, it is a reinforced earth ramp between concrete side panels along that section as far as the Festival line box underpass.