Great Western Electrification Progress

[swt_passenger]

Hi guys,

I've just seen this on the BBC site: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-37908735

"BBC transport correspondent Richard Westcott said: "[Network Rail] pinned their hopes on a new, multi-million pound factory train that digs the holes, puts up overhead wire supports, fills the holes with concrete and hangs the wires.

It was meant to put in 120 piles a week, but for a long time, I'm told, only managed about 30."

Any idea what this 'factory train' thing is? I'd like to know more about it and its failings...

Here goes with a quick description and link...

The High Output Plant system
The HOPS will leave the purpose-built depot in Swindon and split up, to head to different parts of the line at its 60mph top speed. It carries enough supplies and equipment to avoid the need to bring anything to the trackside on lorries. Staff can be picked up at stations en-route.

The different elements to the HOPS train are:

A piling rig (with two multi purpose vehicles with Movax vibro piling heads, to vibrate the steel piles into the soil, two pile carrying wagons, and a Fambo hydraulic percussion hammer multi purpose vehicles for tougher ground)
An excavation and concrete batching unit with an Hitachi excavator plus a Kniele concrete unit to mix concrete from onboard aggregate, cement and water tanks
A structures unit which erects the masts, portal booms and twin track cantilevers
An ancillary conductor to install the earthing wires, return wires and small parts such as registration arms and other equipment
The contact and catenary unit to string up the remaining wires under tension. Another unit installs other things such as contenary wires under low bridges, and records information such as height and stagger
Each of the above elements includes two multi purpose vehicles with full driving cabs, powered by MTU power packs, which can be driven at 60mph off-site. On site driving cabs means the train can be driven very slowly when installing contact wire.

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/news/2...-slashes-years-off-electrification-programme/

Best to search this thread for the term "HOPS" - High Output (electrification) Plant System. It's lack of performance compared to spec has been discussed quite a few times since 2013...

 

[sprinterguy]

Any idea what this 'factory train' thing is? I'd like to know more about it and its failings...

There's more information here:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...tput-electrification-train-ready-to-roll.html
And here:
http://www.railengineer.uk/2014/10/...ication-arrival-new-high-output-plant-system/

Windhoff has completed a £40m High-Output Plant System 'factory train' ordered by UK infrastructure manager Network Rail, which will use it to install 25 kV 50 Hz electrification on 380 route-km on the Great Western Main Line from London to Swansea in 2014-18.

OPS consists of 23 vehicles with a combined length of 500 m. They will normally work as five separate trains or consists, designed to undertake the various stages of electrification at different speeds. Each consist is powered by Multi-Purpose Vehicles with a cab and an MTU power pack.

The five consists will perform work in sequence. First on the job will be a piling rig with two MPVs carrying Movax vibro piling heads which vibrate steel piles into the ground, two wagons carrying piles, and an MPV with a Fambo hydraulic percussion hammer for hard ground. Next is the excavation and concrete batching consist. Then follows the structures consist which will erect masts, portal booms and double-track cantilevers. It is intended to carry 30 masts for erection during a single overnight possession.

The ancillary conductor consist will then follow, installing earthing wires, current return wires and small components such as registration arms. Last in the HOPS is the contact and catenary consist which pays out these wires under tension. Another part of this consist will install catenary wires under low bridges, neutral sections, and finally record the height and stagger of the contact wire.

A novel feature of the HOPS is a robust steel structure that can be erected on either side of wagons in the various consists. Its purpose is to stop any part of the equipment protruding into the loading gauge of the adjacent track. This means that HOPS can be deployed while an adjacent track is left open to traffic, probably under a temporary speed restriction, but even that is being questioned. This means that trains can continue to run at night while HOPS is working.

For the Great Western Main Line electrification, HOPS is to be based near Swindon, moving to worksites under its own power at up to 95 km/h.

And here's some comment from last year on it's slow progress:

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/great-western-hops-piling-rates-lower-than-thought
The piling rates achieved by Network Rail’s High Output Plant System (HOPS) are still far below what its business case requires, according to figures supplied to Parliament by the company.

Rail minister Claire Perry MP said that the average number of pilings per shift achieved by Network Rail’s High Output Plant System train during:
•October to December 2014 was 5.0 piles per shift
•January to March 2015 was 4.6 piles per shift
•April to 5 June 2015 was 6.8 piles per shift

These figures, given in answer to a question from shadow rail minister Lilian Greenwood MP, are lower than those given by people involved with the project.

For instance, Great Western route director Patrick Hallgate told an audience at the Railtex conference in mid-May: “I’m pleased to say that in the last three months in particular, we are starting to see production rates expanding. The business case was predicated on being able to put in 18 piles a night, over a six-hour shift…in the last couple of weeks we’ve started to hit the 18 piles.”

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Any idea what this 'factory train' thing is? I'd like to know more about it and its failings...

It's called HOPS (High Output Plant System), and is repeatedly mentioned in the previous 3335 postings in this thread.
Here's a thumbnail: http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/rail-news/great-western-hops-piling-rates-lower-than-thought
If you travel on the GW route it works from a depot just east of Swindon station.

 

[DarloRich]

the question is why it only managed 30 piles

 

[NSEFAN]

It wasn't properly specified, so I believe it took much longer to dig holes than expected.

 

[kieron]

It's costing a serious amount of cash to have all of the electric only IEP fleet converted to bi-modes.

Is that the answer to what will happen to the £146-165 the government imagines this will save according to this statement?

My bold: Roger's point was that we never did need to meet the higher spec but that po-faced bureaucrats here did not encourage or support a derogation application.

Po-faced bureaucrats only support politicians in the decisions they make. If the politicians make a bad decision, that's their responsibility.

 

[RobShipway]

I do not get the fact that work was recently completed on the Severn Tunnel, so that electric overhead cables can go in the tunnel, yet if I reading this issue correctly the overhead electric cables will not be put into the tunnel until about 2022 at the earliest?

 

[jw]

With regards to the Henley and Windsor branches, how many DMUs will now need to remain to service these lines? Do they operate as self contained shuttles?

Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk

 

[northwichcat]

Oxford to Didcot being deferred will have a greater impact than Filton Bank. This being the impact on rolling stock cascade of the class 165/166's to the Bristol area. Which will have a ripple effects on the cascades of 150s and 158s to points West and 150s that were due to move to Northern.

The 143s aren't due to go anywhere else so GWR can easily extend the lease on those beyond 2017 if required. 6 of the 153s are due to go to LM next year and Northern need 15 extra 150s by the December 2017 timetable change. It sounds like those leases have been signed so either DfT would have to intervene for GWR to keep the 150s and 153s (which they said they aren't going to do anymore) or the losing TOC will have to find a makeshift solution similar to what happened when TPE lost the 170s it still needed.

I bet Vivarail are pleased then...!

Vivarail don't have a unit cleared for mainline use yet. Given how long they are taking and how much the reported cost of a D-Train has increased it might be CAF or Stadler who will be pleased instead.

 

[RobShipway]

With regards to the Henlow and Windsor branches, how many DMUs will now need to remain to service these lines?

Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk

The Windsor Branch only ever has one DMU each day doing the services on it and I believe it is the same with the Henlow branches as well, so at most you probably would only need 5 DMU units.

 

[swt_passenger]

I do not get the fact that work was recently completed on the Severn Tunnel, so that electric overhead cables can go in the tunnel, yet if I reading this issue correctly the overhead electric cables will not be put into the tunnel until about 2022 at the earliest?

There's no evidence for that surely?

Bristol Parkway to Cardiff is still on the existing plans, with completion (infrastructure authorised for use) in Dec 2018, and has not been mentioned in this latest DfT announcement.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I do not get the fact that work was recently completed on the Severn Tunnel, so that electric overhead cables can go in the tunnel, yet if I reading this issue correctly the overhead electric cables will not be put into the tunnel until about 2022 at the earliest?

As things stand, the wires are due to reach Cardiff at the end of 2018.
Unlike Bristol TM, all the resignalling work has been done (or will be by Christmas).
The Severn Tunnel has just had a solid bar installed instead of wires.
Work is in progress on the rest of the route from Bristol Parkway (piles, masts, power supplies etc).

Cardiff-Swansea is indeterminate (and was before today), but the main depot is at Swansea.
IEPs to Swansea will run on diesel beyond Cardiff.

 

[jw]

The Windsor Branch only ever has one DMU each day doing the services on it and I believe it is the same with the Henlow branches as well, so at most you probably would only need 5 DMU units.

I did of course mean Henley, not Henlow!

 

[Dave1987]

You’re complaining without offering any solution. What would you rather we’d done?

Ordered something like 390s which wouldn’t be able to get to Bristol/ Oxford without drags?

Kept the 125s sweating for another decade of squadron service?

Replaced current through services with London – Didcot shuttles (or London – Bristol Parkway shuttles)?

Really, the problem here is the infrastructure side of things – Network Rail seem to have been struggling for some time (hence the MML being postponed... though I don't think you can blame bi-modes for that?).

You’ve somehow managed to make this sound like it was the fault of the traction – whereas I see this as proof of the benefits of bi-mode – it means that we can still have new trains (regardless of the infrastructure delays).

The 800/801s are the one Good News story here – can’t blame them for Network Rail (or pretend that we’ve somehow cut back on electrification commitments

Whilst I understand the reasons behind not running into Oxford/ Bristol (since you can dump some of the electrification costs onto the project paying for remodelling/ resignalling etc), I’m surprised at the wires still going from Bristol Parkway to Cardiff – that’s a long way to go for two trains per hour which involves the complication of going under the Severn. Politically sensitive to be seen to cut electrification to Wales?

The problems now become "how does the lack of 165/166s affect DMU cascades around Bristol and subsequent cascades of Sprinters" and "will the Government trust the railway to deliver more infrastructure projects, given how much it is struggling to deliver things it committed to five years ago, and will spend most of CP6 doing what it had promised to do in CP5. Would you trust that railway with a bucket of cash for future schemes? I really hope we don't look back on these years as a wasted opportunity.

I wouldn't have bothered wasting vast amounts of money on massively expensive trains. Rather got the electrification done and then ordered off the shelf electric trains which are incredibly cheap at the moment. The pure fact that these are bi-modes has given an ideal excuse to cancel/delay/defer the rest of the project while still keep the political PR of introducing shiny new trains. I could see this happening months and months ago, I posted a few times that I could see these bi-modes providing a great excuse for them to delay electrification. I was lambasted by the usual suspects saying that it wouldn't delay electrification at all, yet here we are with MP's and NR deferring it! They will not even commit to a date as to when it will be completed, with some saying that it may never be completed at all. Like I said before when the politicians get nervous about the costs with bi-modes they have a fantastic excuse to just push the whole issue of getting electrification done way into the future. And to think I was told repeatedly by people on this forum that electrification would not be delayed, just shows how much people on here really know!

 

[Blindtraveler]

Well said Dave1987.

I am sure it will be completed eventually but when is the big question.

 

[notlob.divad]

I wouldn't have bothered wasting vast amounts of money on massively expensive trains. Rather got the electrification done and then ordered off the shelf electric trains which are incredibly cheap at the moment. The pure fact that these are bi-modes has given an ideal excuse to cancel/delay/defer the rest of the project while still keep the political PR of introducing shiny new trains. I could see this happening months and months ago, I posted a few times that I could see these bi-modes providing a great excuse for them to delay electrification. I was lambasted by the usual suspects saying that it wouldn't delay electrification at all, yet here we are with MP's and NR deferring it! They will not even commit to a date as to when it will be completed, with some saying that it may never be completed at all. Like I said before when the politicians get nervous about the costs with bi-modes they have a fantastic excuse to just push the whole issue of getting electrification done way into the future. And to think I was told repeatedly by people on this forum that electrification would not be delayed, just shows how much people on here really know!

You are absolutely correct dave1987, and I fully expect to see exactly the same with respect to Transpennine electrification and Midlands Mainline Electrification. The only electrification projects that will continue are ones where cascaded London commuter stock with some life left in it can work out the rest of its days.

 

[jimm]

As Oxford Electrification is now reliant on the big Oxford Station rebuild (not the current Chiltern one) which won't be finished in CP5 it is hardly surprising it has been deferred. I would be surprised if some of the numbers quoted weren't being put towards the Oxford Station rebuild.

Wrong.

Oxford electrification has never been dependent on the proposed major station rebuild, for which there has never been the slightest hint of a target date - no one has worked out how to pay for it yet - and a lot of the money will have to come from associated property redevelopment around the station and nearby, which is all theoretical at the moment.

The resignalling of the Oxford area and related track alterations due to take place ahead of electrification on the previous schedule, for completion in June 2019, including the work on the north end bays for Chiltern, was all designed with the footprint of an expanded station in mind, such that the Chiltern bays can be converted to become the north end of new through platforms. An additional through line at the other side of the station can be fitted in at the rear of platform 4, so no issues there either.

 

[RobShipway]

I did of course mean Henley, not Henlow!

Well, you also have the Marlow branch from Maidenhead so I thought that you might be including this with the branch to Henley from Twyford.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

NR said in 2009 (Electrification RUS) that the cost would be £500K to £650K per stkm (single track km), "with opportunities to reduce this figure".
The electrification programme was committed on something like this value, and found its way into CP5 plans and NR budgets.
It seems NR can't meet anything like this value, so the projects have to be cut or delayed to meet the budget.
The long-term rail CP5 budget was set at £38 billion and cannot be increased.
It also seems other projects are being impacted by the electrification cost overruns (as happened a decade ago with WCRM).
No government will allow cost inflation on that scale without taking action.

Roger Ford has talked about de-speccing the project (or reversing the degree of overengineering), so the delay possibly means NR will go back with a better price to finish the job.

 

[3141]

Did I read about a year ago that the DfT had asked Hitachi to deliver all the IEPs for GWR as bi-modes?

If so, I don't see how postponing electrification from Didcot to Oxford affects the DMU cascade, because the Oxford service would still be provided by IEPs - just bi-modes instead of pure electric ones.

The bigger problem would be whether the IEP bi-modes can keep to schedule on the unelectrified sections elsewhere. But if the unelectrified bits are a few miles between a point west of Bath and Bristol, and a few miles south of Bristol Parkway, they are more likely to be able to manage on their diesel engines.

 

[QueensCurve]

Did I read about a year ago that the DfT had asked Hitachi to deliver all the IEPs for GWR as bi-modes?

If so, I don't see how postponing electrification from Didcot to Oxford affects the DMU cascade, because the Oxford service would still be provided by IEPs - just bi-modes instead of pure electric ones.

The bigger problem would be whether the IEP bi-modes can keep to schedule on the unelectrified sections elsewhere. But if the unelectrified bits are a few miles between a point west of Bath and Bristol, and a few miles south of Bristol Parkway, they are more likely to be able to manage on their diesel engines.

I don't recall whether this has been covered earlier, but is GWML electrification affected by the same up-speccing as EGIP?

 

[Domh245]

Did I read about a year ago that the DfT had asked Hitachi to deliver all the IEPs for GWR as bi-modes?

If so, I don't see how postponing electrification from Didcot to Oxford affects the DMU cascade, because the Oxford service would still be provided by IEPs - just bi-modes instead of pure electric ones.

Correct about the IEPs all becoming bimodes, but it is the fact that all of those brand spanking new 387s that are being built won't be able to operate the services to Oxford (benefiting the intermediate stations more than anything as mentioned upthread) which is the issue! Oh well, more 12 car trains on the mainline I guess.

 

[RobShipway]

Did I read about a year ago that the DfT had asked Hitachi to deliver all the IEPs for GWR as bi-modes?

If so, I don't see how postponing electrification from Didcot to Oxford affects the DMU cascade, because the Oxford service would still be provided by IEPs - just bi-modes instead of pure electric ones.

The bigger problem would be whether the IEP bi-modes can keep to schedule on the unelectrified sections elsewhere. But if the unelectrified bits are a few miles between a point west of Bath and Bristol, and a few miles south of Bristol Parkway, they are more likely to be able to manage on their diesel engines.

I not sure if this is correct, but I think it was actually GWR that requested Hitachi deliver their class 801 trains which were going to be all electric to be bi - mode instead after seeing how late running the GWML electrification project was running.

The issue is though, that even with that late running the electrification would have still been completed within the next couple of years to Oxford so that the class 387's can do the local stopping service from Oxford to Paddington, with the class 800 doing the fast and semi - fast services I believe.

Now, it is going to be the case that you are going to have the shuttle service from Didcot Parkway to Oxford doing all the stops with class 165/166 units for a far longer period than was expected, which means less of these units moving westwards.

 

[47802]

Did I read about a year ago that the DfT had asked Hitachi to deliver all the IEPs for GWR as bi-modes?

If so, I don't see how postponing electrification from Didcot to Oxford affects the DMU cascade, because the Oxford service would still be provided by IEPs - just bi-modes instead of pure electric ones.

The bigger problem would be whether the IEP bi-modes can keep to schedule on the unelectrified sections elsewhere. But if the unelectrified bits are a few miles between a point west of Bath and Bristol, and a few miles south of Bristol Parkway, they are more likely to be able to manage on their diesel engines.

Well It doesn't really they were already expecting major delays hence more AT300's ordered this year and less EMU since the change to all 387's, presumably the cascade of 165/166's will be slower and a lot longer if ever for some units, one suspects the Branches will be dropped perm.

 

[Domh245]

I not sure if this is correct, but I think it was actually GWR that requested Hitachi deliver their class 801 trains which were going to be all electric to be bi - mode instead after seeing how late running the GWML electrification project was running.

IIRC the contracts are between Hitachi/Agility Trains and the DfT rather than GWR. Certainly given how much difficulty GWR seem to be having getting their 800s to be delivered in Green instead of white, I'd be amazed if it was a GWR contract

 

[221129]

IIRC the contracts are between Hitachi/Agility Trains and the DfT rather than GWR. Certainly given how much difficulty GWR seem to be having getting their 800s to be delivered in Green instead of white, I'd be amazed if it was a GWR contract

The contract for the up rated AT300s for the West of England services is with GWR.

The IEP sets are with DfT.

 

[jimm]

I wouldn't have bothered wasting vast amounts of money on massively expensive trains. Rather got the electrification done and then ordered off the shelf electric trains which are incredibly cheap at the moment. The pure fact that these are bi-modes has given an ideal excuse to cancel/delay/defer the rest of the project while still keep the political PR of introducing shiny new trains. I could see this happening months and months ago, I posted a few times that I could see these bi-modes providing a great excuse for them to delay electrification. I was lambasted by the usual suspects saying that it wouldn't delay electrification at all, yet here we are with MP's and NR deferring it! They will not even commit to a date as to when it will be completed, with some saying that it may never be completed at all. Like I said before when the politicians get nervous about the costs with bi-modes they have a fantastic excuse to just push the whole issue of getting electrification done way into the future. And to think I was told repeatedly by people on this forum that electrification would not be delayed, just shows how much people on here really know!

Back to the same old script, I see.

Where we are now is a result of a failure to "get electrification done", or have you missed that rather stark staring obvious point?

Whereas Hitachi has got the development and manufacture of IEPs in hand, on schedule, and is now going to deliver more of the trains as bi-modes because of that failure to "get electrification done".

It is not the trains that are causing the change of plans, they are baling out Network Rail and the DfT for failure to deliver the wires.

I previously understood your theory to be that bi-modes would mean no more electrification full stop, not that they would delay what was already planned.

Electric trains may allegedly be "incredibly cheap at the moment" - but probably less so with every drop in the value of the pound - and the IEP order was placed four years ago, not now.

GWR passengers will benefit from new stock - though I think what you really mean is 'incredibly cheap to finance over their lifetime thanks to ultra-low interest rates' new trains - in the shape of an all-new 387 fleet. Or did I just miss Bombardier's two for the price of one sale?

Should the DfT have delayed ordering new express stock on the off-chance that a propitious moment to place an order arrived somewhere along the way...? And that there was an off-the-shelf 125/140mph inter-city train available to be ordered in the first place - could you enlighten us as to which manufacturer is offering such a product to the UK market at the moment?

Bi-modes would have been needed anyway to serve all the places that weren't getting wires under the GWML scheme, though I seem to recall you have never actually answered how you proposed to continue to provide GW express services to those places whenever anyone has had the temerity to raise this also stark staring obvious point, so I know we are guaranteed another deafening silence this time round.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Now, it is going to be the case that you are going to have the shuttle service from Didcot Parkway to Oxford doing all the stops with class 165/166 units for a far longer period than was expected, which means less of these units moving westwards.

All of about two sets will be needed to work such a shuttle, with back-up available at Oxford in the shape of two two-car 165s that were always going to be there post-wiring to work the Banbury shuttle and Cotswold Line halts services - so not exactly rushed off their feet most of the day outside the peaks.

 

[J-2739]

British logic for you.

 

[swt_passenger]

Did I read about a year ago that the DfT had asked Hitachi to deliver all the IEPs for GWR as bi-modes?

This was confirmed to be a done deal in a DfT parliamentary question response in May this year, I don't think there was a press release, but google finds articles reporting it anyway, e.g. this one:

The new Class 801 units being introduced to the Great Western Main Line (GWML) will be converted to bi-mode operation, the Department for Transport (DfT) has confirmed.
In response to a written question from Ben Howlett MP, Claire Perry, the rail minister, announced that the transport secretary, Patrick McLoughlin, has now approved the conversion of the 21 Class 801 Intercity Express Programme (IEP) Units.

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/dft-confirms-new-gwml-class-801s-will-be-bi-mode

Implications for speed when off the wires have been discussed numerous times in this thread previously, my view is that it won't be a significant problem, because the majority of sections of track beyond the wiring limits are not 125 mph, and many are less than 100 mph. No doubt we'll find out more about real performance as the current trials make progress...

 

[bnm]

The contract for the up rated AT300s for the West of England services is with GWR.

The IEP sets are with DfT.

The contract for the Class 802s is with a RoSCo at the behest of the current Greater Western franchisee with the agreement of the DfT. FirstGroup, trading as GWR, suggested the stock, but have little financial input in the procurement. They may not be operating the 802s much beyond introduction.