Great Western Electrification Progress

[Chris125]

A little easier to watch than downloading it off the NR website:

[youtube]pvBKLGiW5AY[/youtube]

 

[AM9]

A little easier to watch than downloading it off the NR website:

Thanks for the video. The Series 1 kit certainly seems to be stable with two pantographs. Compare the lift and oscillation with the MKI on the WCML which flaps around for 20-30 seconds after the train has passed.

 

[steevp]

I live about a mile away from the test section in Oxfordshire and last night (or early morning) was aware of a different sound to the usual ones of passing trains - my OH heard it too and I was able to smugly identify it as the new trains. A more worrying experience was the smell of burning, but that could have been someone's bonfire....

 

[quantinghome]

I live about a mile away from the test section in Oxfordshire and last night (or early morning) was aware of a different sound to the usual ones of passing trains - my OH heard it too and I was able to smugly identify it as the new trains. A more worrying experience was the smell of burning, but that could have been someone's bonfire....

Could have been a model of series 1 OLE made out of wicker...

 

[steverailer]

I live about a mile away from the test section in Oxfordshire and last night (or early morning) was aware of a different sound to the usual ones of passing trains - my OH heard it too and I was able to smugly identify it as the new trains. A more worrying experience was the smell of burning, but that could have been someone's bonfire....

If this was Monday night/Tuesday Morning there were no electric trains running last night. And if it was Didcot side off Pangbourne that was someones bonfire and nothing to do with the railway

 

[steevp]

Could have been a model of series 1 OLE made out of wicker...

Excellent!

 

[AM9]

Could have been a model of series 1 OLE made out of wicker...

That would be the part through Goring Gap.

 

[duesselmartin]

Deleted

 

[snowball]

Modern Railways August, p. 7:

"We fear that ... it is unlikely that Cardiff-Swansea will be wired in CP6. As for the Cardiff Valleys, the loss of EU funding, estimated to be worth up to £150 million, could be terminal. In England, the MML electrification is being questioned ... the aim must be to keep Bedford-Corby as a live project."

Also has articles on HOPS (pp. 64-68) and the Severn Tunnel (pp. 70-75).

 

[Mordac]

^^^

It would help to tell us who's being quoted.

 

[snowball]

It's an editorial by the magazine.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Modern Railways August, p. 7:
"We fear that ... it is unlikely that Cardiff-Swansea will be wired in CP6. As for the Cardiff Valleys, the loss of EU funding, estimated to be worth up to £150 million, could be terminal. In England, the MML electrification is being questioned ... the aim must be to keep Bedford-Corby as a live project."
Also has articles on HOPS (pp. 64-68) and the Severn Tunnel (pp. 70-75).

If the person quoted is a Welsh politician, it's just tub-thumping to demand that the loss of EU funding is made up by Westminster.

Local Wales Today last night had a piece on the Severn Tunnel fixed-bar OHLE installation, for which NR has set up a training facility in Nantgarw.
It included footage of the first installation in the tunnel.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-36837623

 

[swt_passenger]

It's an editorial by the magazine.

Which will have gone to print a week ago based on much conflicting opinion, back when no-one even knew which politician would be doing what. Couldn't have chosen a worse time to try and find some facts, I'd have thought...

 

[snowball]

It's not solely because of Brexit that they're saying it. It's because of the extent to which CP6 spending has already been committed for over-running and overspending CP5 projects, and the redesignation of NR as a government body, subject to Treasury spending limits.

The article begins: "At a meeting in early June, the Treasury was warning that money would be tight in CP6, especially the first two years ... the DfT was told that any publications must not give the impression that the Government intended to spend more money."

It says £9.5 billion of spending on enhancements and at least £2.5 billion on renewals has already been deferred to CP6. The £9.5 Bn is three-quarters of the originally planned total spend on enhancements for CP5.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

It's not solely because of Brexit that they're saying it. It's because of the extent to which CP6 spending has already been committed for over-running and overspending CP5 projects, and the redesignation of NR as a govrnment body, subject to Treasury spending limits.

The works that Modern Railways are suggesting will be cancelled are the CP5 works which have been pushed into CP6.

The indications coming from the Treasury, and indeed financial data from IMF, Bank of England etc, is that we're unlikely to see a recession, there's unlikely to be a large drop in tax revenue, and there's unlikely to be a pressing need for further austerity in the near to medium term, removing the need to achieve a budget surplus (but maybe not a balanced budget) frees up around £10bn to play with, record low borrowing costs will allow more borrowing with less to pay back.

CP6 electrification will remain limited by available plant and personnel, not money from the Treasury - though this can all change.

I'm getting steadily less impressed with Modern Railways with each passing month - not what it was under Ian Allan, won't be worth buying when the likes of Roger and Ian hang up their quills (and I think the modern railway is drifting away from Roger's area of expertise anyway).

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I'm getting steadily less impressed with Modern Railways with each passing month - not what it was under Ian Allan, won't be worth buying when the likes of Roger and Ian hang up their quills (and I think the modern railway is drifting away from Roger's area of expertise anyway).

I agree - I only buy it for Roger, Ian and BTW I still like Alan Williams. My electronic subscription runs out Feb 2017. I probably will not renew.

I still prefer it to RAIL.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

I agree - I only buy it for Roger, Ian and BTW I still like Alan Williams. My electronic subscription runs out Feb 2017. I probably will not renew.

And Alan, yes, knew there was someone else I meant to add.

 

[Harbornite]

A little easier to watch than downloading it off the NR website:

[youtube]pvBKLGiW5AY[/youtube]

Looking good. In case anyone gets misty-eyed about the butchering of the railway because of the OHLE, they should consider that the GWR were planning to do this in the 1920's.

 

[YorkshireBear]

And Alan, yes, knew there was someone else I meant to add.

I too have noticed a lowering in quality of the magazine recently... Bit of a shame. got a year left of a 2 year subscription, will see what happens when that runs out. Echo comments from others about the established writers.


There has certainly not been any signals i can tell from government about scaling back GW Electrification....

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Deleted

 

[HowardGWR]

Just on MR, I don't know where else i would go for informed articles, not RAIL. Just renewed for 2 years. On topic, this issue has a lot about GWR electrification!

All the other mags are spotters' stuff about kettles and chuggers.

 

[Domh245]

Just on MR, I don't know where else i would go for informed articles, not RAIL. Just renewed for 2 years. On topic, this issue has a lot about GWR electrification!

All the other mags are spotters' stuff about kettles and chuggers.

Depending on what you like, RailEngineer has some good stuff. They also have some sister magazines through Rail Media which are generally more people orientated.

The problem is that they are controlled distribution on the paper copies, although they are all freely available to read on the website

 

[Mordac]

Today's Railways has a pretty good balance of interests. I took couldn't care less about steam, so always have to skip half of The Railway Magazine, if not more.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Today's Railways has a pretty good balance of interests. I took couldn't care less about steam, so always have to skip half of Modern Railways, if not more.

Are you talking about the same MR I read?
There might be the odd picture of a steam excursion sometimes, but that's all.
MR is a journal of record that I am happy to keep as an archive. The rest, if I buy them, go in the bin when read.
Only Roger Ford has in-depth analysis of how the railway industry functions.
The production quality has however gone down since the change of ownership, but then all print-based journals are under pressure, not least from sites like this.

 

[Mordac]

Are you talking about the same MR I read?
There might be the odd picture of a steam excursion sometimes, but that's all.
MR is a journal of record that I am happy to keep as an archive. The rest, if I buy them, go in the bin when read.
Only Roger Ford has in-depth analysis of how the railway industry functions.
The production quality has however gone down since the change of ownership, but then all print-based journals are under pressure, not least from sites like this.

You're right, what I had meant to write was The Railway Magazine, but I must have seen MR in a post above which made me write that instead unconsciously.

I do like MR a lot, but some of the hackery which occasionally surfaces annoys me. I'll still buy it though.

 

[notlob.divad]

The works that Modern Railways are suggesting will be cancelled are the CP5 works which have been pushed into CP6.

Without trying to take this off topic, is this only the Great Western Electrification works or is it all works that have been pushed back into CP6?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Without trying to take this off topic, is this only the Great Western Electrification works or is it all works that have been pushed back into CP6?

That's an out of context quotation.

 

[snowball]

Without trying to take this off topic, is this only the Great Western Electrification works or is it all works that have been pushed back into CP6?

What the article is saying is basically what I summarised in #2829.

And Alan, yes, knew there was someone else I meant to add.

Last month he suggested user-worked crossings should be converted to AHBs. I thought that would be a bit difficult as at most of them, as the picture accompanying the article illustrated, the roadway is only one vehicle wide.

 

[HowardGWR]

Are you talking about the same MR I read?
There might be the odd picture of a steam excursion sometimes, but that's all.
MR is a journal of record that I am happy to keep as an archive. The rest, if I buy them, go in the bin when read.
Only Roger Ford has in-depth analysis of how the railway industry functions.
The production quality has however gone down since the change of ownership, but then all print-based journals are under pressure, not least from sites like this.

If you look back, you inexplicably changed Mordac's quote from 'Railway Magazine' to 'Modern Railways'. That was a strange thing to do and of course explains your mistaken reference to steam stuff, which of course is absent from MR.

I can't imagine how or why you did that. We are way off topic, sorry.

 

[snowball]

If you look back, you inexplicably changed Mordac's quote from 'Railway Magazine' to 'Modern Railways'. That was a strange thing to do and of course explains your mistaken reference to steam stuff, which of course is absent from MR.

I can't imagine how or why you did that. We are way off topic, sorry.

No, Mordac has since corrected his original post. LNW-GW's quote was accurate at the time, before Mordac's edit.