Great Western Electrification Progress

[Philip Phlopp]

Indeed, basically it goes in the pot for CP6 and will have to compete with everything else when the time comes.
Actually I don't like the position on Bristol-Cardiff staying diesel.
A frequent inter-urban (Bath-) Bristol-Cardiff-Swansea EMU service is just what the region needs and the railway can deliver.
But we seem wedded to through DMU workings from Cardiff which relatively few people use as such at the Bristol end.
Part of this is the turf war between GW and W&B franchises, and DfT/WG control.

The relief line speed/capacity upgrade will need done, whether it needs wired though, is a different question.

The main reason to wire it (if it's much of a reason) is to use Class 387 stock in 12 car formation on rugby/event specials to Cardiff. Mark Hopwood was discussing that quite recently. The Wales RUS assumes the reliefs will be wired too.

 

[Envoy]

Severn Tunnel Junction to Cardiff relief line upgrades are in the Welsh RUS for funders, the preferred output is to match the relief lines to the main lines in terms of capability, so that's 95mph for HST and 75mph for all other stock.

The signalling delivers 100mph capability on all four tracks but the track itself isn't capable and upgrading to that doesn't provide a significant financial benefit.

The partial electrification of the route into Cardiff would be annoying but no worse than the partial electrification of the route into Birmingham on the Cross City Line, with Kings Norton as a prime example.

There's really very little electric stock which would use the relief lines, given you're mainly looking at services such as Cardiff to Manchester, Cardiff to Portsmouth Harbour and Cardiff to Penzance services, which will all be in the hands of diesel stock for the foreseeable future (as you've said, I've just noticed).

Why would only HST’s be allowed to travel at up to 95mph with all other passenger trains limited to 75mph? The 175’s on the Manchester/Holyhead runs plus the 170’s on the Nottingham’s can all do 100mph. Even the 158’s on the Portsmouth’s can do 90mph.

Surely, to get the most out of the electrification project, it would be a good idea to have an electric service linking Swansea > Cardiff > Newport > STJ > Bristol TM > Bath and perhaps continue to Oxford? Furthermore, we have the long Severn Tunnel where passengers can be subjected to diesel fumes getting into the carriages.

It seems to me that the Welsh Government and the Department for Transport should get their act together and sort out what is going to happen in south Wales regarding electrification of the valleys and associated local services that will use the mainline.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Surely, to get the most out of the electrification project, it would be a good idea to have an electric service linking Swansea > Cardiff > Newport > STJ > Bristol TM > Bath and perhaps continue to Oxford? Furthermore, we have the long Severn Tunnel where passengers can be subjected to diesel fumes getting into the carriages.

If the Cardiff-Portsmouth route also calls at Bristol TM, what about using bi-modes for Swansea-Cardiff. At Bristol going eastbound the train could divide, one portion going to Weymouth and the other portion going to Portsmouth Harbour

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Why would only HST’s be allowed to travel at up to 95mph with all other passenger trains limited to 75mph? The 175’s on the Manchester/Holyhead runs plus the 170’s on the Nottingham’s can all do 100mph. Even the 158’s on the Portsmouth’s can do 90mph.

In the context of signs for differential speed restrictions, the term "HST" covers (from the Sectional Appendix):

HST
Class 91 locomotive with mark 4 vehicles and DVT,
classes 158, 159, 168, 170, 171, 172, 175, 180, 220, 221, 222, 253, 254 and 373

Note the list excludes classes 185 and 390.
I expect we'll find class 80x added to the list next year, unless it has its own category.

 

[Envoy]

In the context of signs for differential speed restrictions, the term "HST" covers (from the Sectional Appendix):


Note the list excludes classes 185 and 390.
I expect we'll find class 80x added to the list next year, unless it has its own category.

Many thanks for the clarification.

 

[The Planner]

Relief lines were meant to be sped up as part of Newport resig but got canned.

 

[jimm]

One thing in Modern Railways that doesn't seem to have got a mention is that in an article by GWR managing director Mark Hopwood, based on a speech he gave to the railway Study Association, he raises the possibility of wiring Newton Abbot to Plymouth, ahead of any other electrification towards the West Country, to allow the 802s (and presumably 800s, with the removal of the diesel power constraints) to use 25kv up the Devon banks. Also says that with the delay in wiring to Oxford "an extra order for Hitachi AT300 bi-modes could be a more sensible option".

 

[Philip Phlopp]

One thing in Modern Railways that doesn't seem to have got a mention is that in an article by GWR managing director Mark Hopwood, based on a speech he gave to the railway Study Association, he raises the possibility of wiring Newton Abbot to Plymouth, ahead of any other electrification towards the West Country, to allow the 802s (and presumably 800s, with the removal of the diesel power constraints) to use 25kv up the Devon banks. Also says that with the delay in wiring to Oxford "an extra order for Hitachi AT300 bi-modes could be a more sensible option".

We're expecting extra AT300 bi-mode units to be ordered as part of the re-shuffle of commuter EMU stock for the GWML, whether Mark's thinking of extra stock over and above that is unclear.

There's plenty of options for further electrification in the Western region, the bi-mode stock opens up plenty of options, whether the industry will embrace the options afforded is less certain, but it's good to see Mark starting that discussion.

There's certainly nothing wrong with Newton Abbot to Plymouth, it's a fine stand alone scheme, but the focus should be on electrification of all lines to Exeter - Basingstoke via Salisbury and the two GWR routes, the Newbury and the Bristol route.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

One thing in Modern Railways that doesn't seem to have got a mention is that in an article by GWR managing director Mark Hopwood, based on a speech he gave to the railway Study Association, he raises the possibility of wiring Newton Abbot to Plymouth, ahead of any other electrification towards the West Country, to allow the 802s (and presumably 800s, with the removal of the diesel power constraints) to use 25kv up the Devon banks. Also says that with the delay in wiring to Oxford "an extra order for Hitachi AT300 bi-modes could be a more sensible option".

I read all Modern Railways and the supplement and I saw this information. So I assume you mean it has not been mentioned on this thread so far?

There's certainly nothing wrong with Newton Abbot to Plymouth, it's a fine stand alone scheme, but the focus should be on electrification of all lines to Exeter - Basingstoke via Salisbury and the two GWR routes, the Newbury and the Bristol route.

Agreed - and of course, Derby-Birmingham-Exeter would be higher priority IMHO

 

[jimm]

We're expecting extra AT300 bi-mode units to be ordered as part of the re-shuffle of commuter EMU stock for the GWML, whether Mark's thinking of extra stock over and above that is unclear.

The context he made the remark in was part of a section where he was talking about stock for the Thames Valley services, so it seems reasonable to assume the reference is to the expected AT300 top-up order for Oxford/Cotswolds, rather than anything over and above them.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I read all Modern Railways and the supplement and I saw this information. So I assume you mean it has not been mentioned on this thread so far?

Yes. It's a bit more relevant to this thread than whether or not people feel inclined to renew their Modern Railways subscriptions...

Agreed - and of course, Derby-Birmingham-Exeter would be higher priority IMHO

But to be fair to Mark Hopwood, he was talking there in the context of ways to get a standard three-hour London-Plymouth timing, not delivery of an overall national electrification strategy.

And bi-mode does offer the option of tackling particular areas like the Devon banks, where electric traction would deliver clear performance benefits, ahead of a broader wiring programme reaching the South West, which will clearly be well behind Derby-Birmingham-Bristol in any schedule of work.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

But to be fair to Mark Hopwood, he was talking there in the context of ways to get a standard three-hour London-Plymouth timing, not delivery of an overall national electrification strategy.

And bi-mode does offer the option of tackling particular areas like the Devon banks, where electric traction would deliver clear performance benefits, ahead of a broader wiring programme reaching the South West, which will clearly be well behind Derby-Birmingham-Bristol in any schedule of work.

Electric traction to Exeter (I'd guess wiring somewhere out towards Starcross to enable acceleration out of Exeter on electric) would easily buy the same amount of time saved as a standalone scheme from Newton Abbot to Plymouth, but by doing Newton Abbot first, you gain around 105 stk of electrification that would be unlikely to be committed quite so early, so when the Newbury/Bristol/Basingstoke to Exeter schemes come along, you're only 45 to 60 stk away from a complete electrified route to Plymouth from London (the gap would be Exeter/Starcross or somewhere in between to Newton Abbot).

The elephant in the room is of course the actual route between Exeter and Newton Abbot, and how much whining from locals will accompany the completion of such a gap...

 

[HowardGWR]

I don't mind looking naive (or something less complimentary). Give the huge cost and (literal) upheaval of raising bridges for OHLE, why was not OHRE (good term?) considered for low bridges, as for low tunnels?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It's a bit more relevant to this thread than whether or not people feel inclined to renew their Modern Railways subscriptions...

But to be fair to Mark Hopwood, he was talking there in the context of ways to get a standard three-hour London-Plymouth timing, not delivery of an overall national electrification strategy.

Fair enough - I am sure I have read somewhere else - many many decades ago, wiring the Devon Banks was considered for similar benefits If I can find the article I will post.

 

[snowball]

I don't mind looking naive (or something less complimentary). Give the huge cost and (literal) upheaval of raising bridges for OHLE, why was not OHRE (good term?) considered for low bridges, as for low tunnels?

If you mean overhead rigid conductor, I'm not aware of any locations where low bridges have been raised but the raising could have been avoided by using conductor rail.

At low bridges the catenary and contact wires are brought close together so they occupy very little vertical space. They are held together by clips without dropper wires.

When a rigid conductor is used, it doesn't take away the need to maintain appropriate clearance between the top of the conductor and the underside of the bridge, or between the bottom of the conductor and the roof of a passing train.

Edit: However this does raise the question of whether you could have a different type of conductor rail, which would be separated from the roof above by a solid layer of insulating material instead of an air gap, and whether this would enable the clearance to be further reduced.

You'd have to use some sort of insulated fastenings to hold it in place - metal ones would be no good!

 

[59CosG95]

Any updates on the Reading-Didcot wiring? From what I've seen on Facebook, the reliefs (certainly through Tilehurst) are still devoid of wiring. Is that the only part which isn't wired now?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Edit: However this does raise the question of whether you could have a different type of conductor rail, which would be separated from the roof above by a solid layer of insulating material instead of an air gap, and whether this would enable the clearance to be further reduced.

You'd have to use some sort of insulated fastenings to hold it in place - metal ones would be no good!

You need an air gap to prevent the 25kV arcing to earth. This is at the heart of the 270mm to 370mm change in the group standard/Energy TSI, it's considered that 270mm is no longer a sufficient air gap.

There's also the pantograph shape versus bridge shape to consider, just because you can put the contact wire in contact with the underside of the bridge doesn't mean the pantograph will have sufficient clearance at the horns on either end.

The main point of an ROC system is to try and avoid dewirements within tunnels, it's almost purely a reliability measure. The removal of tensioning (springs or weights) and associated pulleys is a massive benefit, and the ROC system has all manner of waterproof covers and corrosion resistant components to increase life expectancy in a hostile environment.

 

[Hellzapoppin]

I don't mind looking naive (or something less complimentary). Give the huge cost and (literal) upheaval of raising bridges for OHLE, why was not OHRE (good term?) considered for low bridges, as for low tunnels?

Not all bridges are "raised" Howard, where possible the track is lowered under the bridge, Green lane bridge just east of Chippenham is an example of that process. In some places it's just not possible though. Track lowering also gives an opportunity to renew the track and sort out any drainage problems in the area if at all possible.

 

[snowball]

Two press releases

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.c...nd-as-work-to-electrify-the-railway-continues

Network Rail is reminding people in Cardiff that Beresford Road Bridge in Cardiff city centre will close to road traffic from tomorrow (Saturday, 23 July) until spring 2017 as essential work to upgrade the railway continues.

The ageing steel road bridge between Beresford Road and Moorland Road, which connects Adamsdown and Splott, will close so that it can be replaced with a new and improved structure to accommodate a brand new fleet of electric trains beneath and withstand the modern city centre traffic above.

...

Over the weekend of 17-19 September a large crane will be used to remove the main bridge span. The new bridge deck will then be lifted in by crane during October before engineers can start work to rebuild the road and pavements and install the utilities back into the new road in preparation for the reopening in spring 2017.

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.c...erpass-at-acton-reaches-structural-completion

A new dive-under at Acton, being constructed by Network Rail as part of the Crossrail programme, is now structurally complete and is on schedule to open early next year.

 

[jimm]

Fair enough - I am sure I have read somewhere else - many many decades ago, wiring the Devon Banks was considered for similar benefits If I can find the article I will post.

The original GWR did consider the idea of electrification west of Taunton using 3,000V DC back in the late 1930s.

 

[Envoy]

I wonder if an inland route from Exeter to Newton Abbot has been surveyed and ‘protected’ from development? Would they still wire the coast route if an inland route was on the cards in the foreseeable future?

 

[jimm]

I wonder if an inland route from Exeter to Newton Abbot has been surveyed and ‘protected’ from development? Would they still wire the coast route if an inland route was on the cards in the foreseeable future?

1. No.

2. How do you expect anyone to answer that? No one has any idea what may or may not happen over an alternative route. There was lengthy discussion of the subject of a Dawlish avoiding route/reopening the route to Plymouth via Okehampton in the thread linked to below. Could we keep this one focused on electrification-related topics?

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=96306

 

[steverailer]

Any updates on the Reading-Didcot wiring? From what I've seen on Facebook, the reliefs (certainly through Tilehurst) are still devoid of wiring. Is that the only part which isn't wired now?

You should start seeing some changes on the reliefs soon, there's been a big focus on the mains to achieve the power on date and get some test trains running (Tonight is the first night test trains will run on the mains under electric whilst work is carried out on the reliefs)

There are still all the cross overs to wire too and a fair bit of SPS to go up on the reliefs. Still very much on target though as when wiring starts again there will be 3 machines on the go (HOPS, NWR wiring train, and Keltbray Zeck unit).

 

[snowball]

I wonder if an inland route from Exeter to Newton Abbot has been surveyed and ‘protected’ from development?

1. No.

I think a more correct answer would be "Not recently", as I think one came close to being built but was interrupted by WWII. Reportedly it reached the stage of pegs in the ground.

 

[jimm]

I think a more correct answer would be "Not recently", as I think one came close to being built but was interrupted by WWII. Reportedly it reached the stage of pegs in the ground.

If you want to get really pedantic, the GWR surveyed three possible routes during the course of the 1930s. The final one chosen (Exminster to just east of Bishopsteignton) was indeed fully marked out in the spring of 1939 but the war put an end to work, and BR sold off the land in the 1950s, with nothing at all being done to protect it from future development, then or since. I took the question to relate to rather more recent times, when, as we know, lots of studies seem to be going on but that's about it so far.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Any updates on the Reading-Didcot wiring? From what I've seen on Facebook, the reliefs (certainly through Tilehurst) are still devoid of wiring. Is that the only part which isn't wired now?

Gaps in relief line wires as of last Monday, from Didcot towards Reading, were:

Didcot Parkway station and from there to Moreton cutting, just south of the electrification depot on the former Moreton sidings - both relief lines.

Cholsey station - one line

Moulsford bridge - one line

North end of Goring village to just past Goring & Streatley station - one line

Purley-on-Thames to Tilehurst station - both lines

East end of Tilehurst ladder junction to Scours Lane, just west of Reading depot - one line.

Plus, as steverailer says, any crossings/junctions. The autotransformer wires are also far from complete. Various lengths are installed, particularly around Pangbourne, and there is some further north as well.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What classes of AC electric loco will likely be using the GW once electrified for freight? If it's know which, will them classes also be used to test the electrification?

 

[jopsuk]

there may be very little electric freight uses it, as connections through to the west coast mainline and north london line plus connections to where the freight wants to go won't (as far as I know?) be wired.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

What classes of AC electric loco will likely be using the GW once electrified for freight? If it's know which, will them classes also be used to test the electrification?

We're not expecting much in the way of electrified freight on the GWML, destinations and common routes for freight are largely beyond the electrified grid at the moment.

The GWML to WCML electrification (Acton to Willesden) has been re-planned into CP6 which is a major issue with electric freight, and Electric Spine is pushed firmly into CP6 with some delivery delayed until CP7 (it's a full Control Period back now) which keeps the route from Oxford to Coventry firmly under diesel operation until at least this time in CP7 (so 10 years away).

There's a reasonable chance of electric stock operating to Cardiff - Class 86, Class 87, Class 88 and Class 90 locomotives, perhaps also Class 91 in due course, on things like charter and relief stock for football and rugby matches.

NR, unsurprisingly, doesn't want things like Class 47s, Class 57s and Class 67s on relief stock and would prefer electric stock with much faster acceleration.

They'll all be tested in due course, but there's no special testing planned for them, if the OLE works (which it does) with the IEP stock with two pantographs at 125mph, it'll manage everything else with ease, the only other stock really needing tested on the OLE is 3 x Class 387 at 110mph but we know from WCML how it should behave.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

I wonder if we could eventually see a bi-mode loco the same sort of size as a 66 with pantograph, 3rd rail shoes and diesel engine. Possibly wouldn't be able to a train on it's own but in pairs maybe

 

[Philip Phlopp]

I wonder if we could eventually see a bi-mode loco the same sort of size as a 66 with pantograph, 3rd rail shoes and diesel engine. Possibly wouldn't be able to a train on it's own but in pairs maybe

No.

There's the Vossloh Class 88 which is a bi-mode locomotive - 4MW on electric, but it can only fit a 700kW diesel engine within the bodyshell (about the same as a single engine under an IEP carriage). Third rail is out - there's not the power available for lots of freight on third rail.

The small diesel engine is designed for shunting and moving through a dewirement or isolation. It won't move 2000 tons at 60mph, even in pairs.

 

[Envoy]

No.

There's the Vossloh Class 88 which is a bi-mode locomotive - 4MW on electric, but it can only fit a 700kW diesel engine within the bodyshell (about the same as a single engine under an IEP carriage). Third rail is out - there's not the power available for lots of freight on third rail.

The small diesel engine is designed for shunting and moving through a dewirement or isolation. It won't move 2000 tons at 60mph, even in pairs.

Would a Class 88 have enough power to pull a freight train for the relatively short distances off wire to Avonmouth/Portbury docks near Bristol?