Great Western Electrification Progress

[jyte]

Good question. Now that I have the magazine, they also suggest, in a short piece on page 9 quoting the NAO report, that the intention is "to complete these projects in CP6 (2019-24)".

Maybe the footnote saying "2024 at the earliest" should have been "2024 at the latest"?

With the GWML project "deferred" (most likely into CP6) will other CP6 projects take priority? (That's if the CP6 works have even been decided yet.)

 

[snowball]

I think at least part of the problem with knowing where the cables are is that the position of the cables was recorded relative to the track, but with tamping and minor realignment over the years the track isn't exactly where it used to be.

Also perhaps that resignalling should have preceded electrification.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Maybe the footnote saying "2024 at the earliest" should have been "2024 at the latest"?

My guess is that it was an unwarranted inference by Roger Ford. I don't think it's a typo as you suggest as that would imply a statement by the government that the deferred jobs will be completed in CP6. I think they will be completed in CP6, but I don't think the government has said they will.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

With the GWML project "deferred" (most likely into CP6) will other CP6 projects take priority? (That's if the CP6 works have even been decided yet.)

The CP6 works have not been decided yet. The whole HLOS/SOFA process for CP6 has yet to happen. However my guess is that all or nearly all the electrification capacity in England and Wales in CP6 will be taken up by jobs that were once planned for CP5: Bristol via Bath, Bristol via Filton, Oxford, the Thames branches, MML, TP, Windermere, Bolton-Wigan, possibly Swansea.

 

[jyte]

The CP6 works have not been decided yet. The whole HLOS/SOFA process for CP6 has yet to happen. However my guess is that all or nearly all the electrification capacity in England and Wales in CP6 will be taken up by jobs that were once planned for CP5: Bristol via Bath, Bristol via Filton, Oxford, the Thames branches, MML, TP, Windermere, Bolton-Wigan, possibly Swansea.

Wow I forgot how much has been deferred :/

 

[59CosG95]

Wow I forgot how much has been deferred :/

Derby-B'ham-Bristol and the Electric Spine look to be CP7 projects now...which ties in perfectly with the near-end of the lives of most of the 66s! How convenient!

 

[jyte]

Derby-B'ham-Bristol and the Electric Spine look to be CP7 projects now...which ties in perfectly with the near-end of the lives of most of the 66s! How convenient!

I wasn't aware B'ham-Bristol was even on the cards...

 

[Peter Sarf]

Ideally, once GW electrification has reached Swansea, Bristol and Oxford, the surplus Bi-modes could then be replaced by straight electric trains for GW where possible.. Those displaced Bi-modes could find then use on other routes where electrification is progressing.

I am probably being too optimistic .

 

[J-2739]

Ideally, once GW electrification has reached Swansea, Bristol and Oxford, the surplus Bi-modes could then be replaced by straight electric trains for GW where possible.. Those displaced Bi-modes could find then use on other routes where electrification is progressing.

I am probably being too optimistic .

The engines can be removed, simples!

 

[Peter Sarf]

The engines can be removed, simples!

I know and that is the straight forward approach. But I was hoping these wonderful* Bi-modes could find use in the future on other routes where electrification is progressing. Thus allowing the knitting to be used at an earlier stage of progress. Then the money spent on engines and fuel tanks etc would not be going to waste.

* = Maybe I am too optimistic again ?

 

[snowball]

I wasn't aware B'ham-Bristol was even on the cards...

George Osborne when Chancellor, or Patrick McLoughlin when SoS fr Transport, asked Network Rail to start planning for it. Probably before the 2015 election and the subsequent Hendy collapse!

I too had been wondering about the idea of cascading bi-modes from lines where electrification is completed to ones where it's in progress.

 

[J-2739]

I know and that is the straight forward approach. But I was hoping these wonderful* Bi-modes could find use in the future on other routes where electrification is progressing. Thus allowing the knitting to be used at an earlier stage of progress. Then the money spent on engines and fuel tanks etc would not be going to waste.

* = Maybe I am too optimistic again ?

The engines and fuel tanks could be stored for a later date. They'll have a home, don't worry!

 

[alxndr]

Also perhaps that resignalling should have preceded electrification.

Even resignalling doesn't solve the whole issue, if a cable is found it still needs to be determined that it's redundant and not live. For example, a while ago some drainage works unearthed a whopping great cable that didn't initially show on the CAT scan and the job had to be put on hold until they could get some E&P guys out to say it was theirs, redundant, and dead.

 

[The Planner]

Derby-B'ham-Bristol and the Electric Spine look to be CP7 projects now...which ties in perfectly with the near-end of the lives of most of the 66s! How convenient!

Derby Bristol has never been dated and Electric Spine is pretty much dead.

 

[HowardGWR]

Even resignalling doesn't solve the whole issue, if a cable is found it still needs to be determined that it's redundant and not live. For example, a while ago some drainage works unearthed a whopping great cable that didn't initially show on the CAT scan and the job had to be put on hold until they could get some E&P guys out to say it was theirs, redundant, and dead.

Excuse ignorance. What is E and P please? I could guess but would rather hear it, thanks.

 

[jyte]

Electric Spine is pretty much dead.

Eugh...

Shame, really.

 

[HowardGWR]

Eugh...

Shame, really.

So much for my tri-modes then.

 

[alxndr]

Excuse ignorance. What is E and P please? I could guess but would rather hear it, thanks.

Sorry, Electrification and Plant. Power supplies and the ilk.

 

[jyte]

So much for my tri-modes then.

I thought we'd ascertained that 3rd rail, overhead and diesel tri modes didn't exist!

 

[D1009]

I thought we'd ascertained that 3rd rail, overhead and diesel tri modes didn't exist!

No, but someone mentioned bi-mode 319s earlier.

 

[mr_jrt]

Eugh...

Shame, really.

It'll be back in some form. That DC infrastructure has a fixed lifetime, and when it's up for renewal, unless dieselisation (or using bimodes) is on the cards, it'll need replacing. If the need for capacity increases continues as we've seen, then replacement DC infrastructure sufficient to handle said capacity is unlikely to come out cheaper than replacement OHLE, even with all the overruns we've seen on the GWML.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I know and that is the straight forward approach. But I was hoping these wonderful* Bi-modes could find use in the future on other routes where electrification is progressing. Thus allowing the knitting to be used at an earlier stage of progress. Then the money spent on engines and fuel tanks etc would not be going to waste.
* = Maybe I am too optimistic again ?

I don't think the contracts with Hitachi allow for cascading the main GW or EC class 800/801 fleets to other routes.
It's not like BR who were able to move things around at will as they had ownership of all rolling stock.
Hitachi/Agility owns the trains and the depots and has 27.5-year contracts for their use.
According to the NAO report, the DfT hasn't worked out how to pay for the 21 extra diesel packs yet.

 

[HSTEd]

It'll be back in some form. That DC infrastructure has a fixed lifetime, and when it's up for renewal, unless dieselisation (or using bimodes) is on the cards, it'll need replacing. If the need for capacity increases continues as we've seen, then replacement DC infrastructure sufficient to handle said capacity is unlikely to come out cheaper than replacement OHLE, even with all the overruns we've seen on the GWML.

The clearance issues that have now become apparent seem to make that extremely unlikely.
Southern Region clearances are tiny by British standards, let alone the new continental standards that are required for 25kV installations.

 

[deltic08]

With the GWML project "deferred" (most likely into CP6) will other CP6 projects take priority? (That's if the CP6 works have even been decided yet.)

As GWML electrification is so far behind schedule, why not introduce all electric class 800 units, and the few bimodes required, to East Coast first and cascade class 91/Mk4 stock to London-Norwich with HSTs to Great Western?

Retain HSTs on GWML until Paddington-Swansea is completed, which should coincide with completion and delivery of East Coast sets, then cascade so many HSTs away to be replaced by all electric 800s. When Paddington-Bristol via Parkway is finished, introduce more all electric 800s and then when via Bath is completed cascade away the remaining HSTs.

This assumes that the "get-you-home" power unit in the pure electric version can propel between Parkway and Temple Meads and Bath and Temple Meads until resignalling of Temple Meads is completed and Swansea-Carmarthen.

The bimodes should be put on Paddington-Gloucester/Worcester/ Hereford and Paddington-Paignton/Plymouth/Penzance now so that Scotrail can begin their HST conversion to GT sets.

 

[Starmill]

It's a bit late for that. All of the GW sets will now be delivered as bi-modes. Besides, that would not release HSTs quickly enough.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

As GWML electrification is so far behind schedule, why not introduce all electric class 800 units, and the few bimodes required, to East Coast first and cascade class 91/Mk4 stock to London-Norwich with HSTs to Great Western?

That idea is going nowhere as the future traction for London-Norwich has already been ordered: see the Greater Anglia franchise thread.

Retain HSTs on GWML until Paddington-Swansea is completed, which should coincide with completion and delivery of East Coast sets, then cascade so many HSTs away to be replaced by all electric 800s. When Paddington-Bristol via Parkway is finished, introduce more all electric 800s and then when via Bath is completed cascade away the remaining HSTs.

Quite apart from there being no certainty (yet) about electrification west of Cardiff this idea would simply exacerbate the operation of diesels under the wires.

This assumes that the "get-you-home" power unit in the pure electric version can propel between Parkway and Temple Meads and Bath and Temple Meads until resignalling of Temple Meads is completed and Swansea-Carmarthen.

A significant assumption which I suspect will not stand up if only on the basis of the gradients involved.

The bimodes should be put on Paddington-Gloucester/Worcester/ Hereford and Paddington-Paignton/Plymouth/Penzance now so that Scotrail can begin their HST conversion to GT sets.

For the first service group quite feasible, for the second group less clear. Again gradients come into the equation. HSTs over the South Devon banks are a known quantity but bi-modes have yet to be tested in the various possible failure configurations there. It's an issue that might eventually tip the balance in favour of a Dawlish avoiding line engineered to modern standards instead of Brunel's failed atmospheric concept.

 

[Starmill]

It's an issue that might eventually tip the balance in favour of a Dawlish avoiding line engineered to modern standards instead of Brunel's failed atmospheric concept.

Are you able to elaborate a little on 'failed atmospheric concept' here?

 

[jyte]

Are you able to elaborate a little on 'failed atmospheric concept' here?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_railway

Using atmospheric differential to power trains. There's also a lot on the South Devon Railway's system on that page, but for some reason I can't link directly to it.

 

[class26]

Post deleted
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As GWML electrification is so far behind schedule, why not introduce all electric class 800 units, and the few bimodes required, to East Coast first and cascade class 91/Mk4 stock to London-Norwich with HSTs to Great Western?

Retain HSTs on GWML until Paddington-Swansea is completed, which should coincide with completion and delivery of East Coast sets, then cascade so many HSTs away to be replaced by all electric 800s. When Paddington-Bristol via Parkway is finished, introduce more all electric 800s and then when via Bath is completed cascade away the remaining HSTs.

This assumes that the "get-you-home" power unit in the pure electric version can propel between Parkway and Temple Meads and Bath and Temple Meads until resignalling of Temple Meads is completed and Swansea-Carmarthen.

The bimodes should be put on Paddington-Gloucester/Worcester/ Hereford and Paddington-Paignton/Plymouth/Penzance now so that Scotrail can begin their HST conversion to GT sets.

The get you home is limited to 30 mph I believe

 

[HowardGWR]

Post deleted
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---




The get you home is limited to 30 mph I believe

Chance would be a fine thing up Filton Bank or Box.

 

[deltic08]

It's a bit late for that. All of the GW sets will now be delivered as bi-modes. Besides, that would not release HSTs quickly enough.

Why and why not? East Coast has about a dozen HST sets that could be cascaded to GWR to release a dozen sets for Scotrail by early delivery to East Coast first of a dozen bimodes now. How many HST sets work both Cotswold routes and West of England? Probably another dozen. How many sets does Scotrail need?

 

[snowball]

Are the East Coast depots and staff ready for IEP? Are there platform clearance issues?