GW to be electrified

[PhilipW]

Klambert, your post sounds as if you are anti-electrification of any scheme.

Here are 20 reasons why Wales would like Electrification to come there

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/w...electrifying-wales-rail-lines-91466-27576605/

 

[TGV]

Its not anything like bridges or tunnels, I'm talking about the network itself, if you electrify it as far as cardiff, the trains to swansea will still be diesel hauled, also the trains to cornwall will also be diesel. the stopping services from Paddington to Bedwyn will still be diesel, so the rouglhly only 40% of the services uing the GWML will be electric. Get my point, I thought that was a no brainer.

Evidently it wasn't a no brainer as many of us thought the same thing. Perhaps if you explained your reasons better in the first place instead of leaving us to guess. And don't get tetchy - just admit you didn't communicate it clearly enough in the first place.

Any electrified railway in the UK has a large proportion of diesel haulage under wires - look at services on the ECML between York and Edinburgh. Putting up wires doesn't guarantee electric exclusivity. It never has. But in part of the plan, it's very possible that the services will be changed to suit the new traction and optimise the use of the wires.

 

[LE Greys]

Klambert, your post sounds as if you are anti-electrification of any scheme.

Here are 20 reasons why Wales would like Electrification to come there

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/w...electrifying-wales-rail-lines-91466-27576605/

Just had a look through it, plenty of good, sound reasons, but a few things worth looking at.

14. International connections

IMMINENT relaxation of Channel Tunnel regulations will enable other passenger trains, besides Eurostar’s long trains, to operate between England and France. The UK Government will review the security regime which restricts outbound Channel Tunnel trains to picking up at specially equipped international stations in London and Kent. An electrified Swansea line, with standard European signalling equipment, might eventually host a few daily trains from South Wales and Bristol to Paris, combining in London if necessary with trains from another British region. In the European context, a diesel- only Swansea line will always be out on a limb.

Ambitions people.

17. Help rail freight

SOUTH Wales’ railways carry bulk materials, including metals, oil and aggregates. Some freight trains could switch to electric power after electrification, providing many of the benefits listed above. If electrification improved rail freight’s competitiveness, more goods could transfer from the roads, easing congestion and wear and tear on the M4 and other roads.

Not sure whether this will work. It just might, provided there are enough diversionary routes, and possibly if there is an electrified connection to the West Midlands.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Heaspans are no longer used.

All new electrification uses lineside cantilever arrangements where possible, and gantries where there are multiple tracks and reduced clearances.

Good.

 

[Trog]

Heaspans are no longer used.

All new electrification uses lineside cantilever arrangements where possible, and gantries where there are multiple tracks and reduced clearances.

That's good, I broke an insulator in one once, you could see the wires over the open roads spring away sideways. So I rang the box and suggested running at caution until the OHL had had a look at it.

Caused no end of bother, the operating department wanted all sorts of please explain letters. But went very quiet after the first one which detailed how they had tested the wire after my report of damage with a class 45 hauled train. Then run an EMU that lost the wire at linespeed, after the Class 45 driver reported not having had any problems.

 

[starrymarkb]

Tony Miles is suggesting that the Thameslink stock replacement and the cheaper IEPlite have swung the CBR back to the GW.

Some Snippets
ALL IEP is to be 5 car sets
GWML to be Bi
ECML to be Electric and Bi

 

[Dennis]

Some Snippets
ALL IEP is to be 5 car sets

5 car with corridor connections? Or have lessons from the recent past been forgotten already?

 

[starrymarkb]

Its not anything like bridges or tunnels, I'm talking about the network itself, if you electrify it as far as cardiff, the trains to swansea will still be diesel hauled, also the trains to cornwall will also be diesel. the stopping services from Paddington to Bedwyn will still be diesel, so the rouglhly only 40% of the services uing the GWML will be electric. Get my point, I thought that was a no brainer.

Not if you use Bi-Mode stock....

 

[Fincra5]

I agree fully with the electrification, however 5 Car IEPs is an awful idea. They need to be at least 9 car.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I agree fully with the electrification, however 5 Car IEPs is an awful idea. They need to be at least 9 car.

at least, id hope for 10 car, seen as the end two cars wont be full itd be mroe like a 9 car anyway.

5 car would be an absolute disgrace....

 

[Chafford1]

Hammond Thursday:

"No decision on IEP has been made yet. The review of the revised Hitachi bid has been more complicated to examine than we first thought and we have had to draft in extra resources to evaluate it. We are talking WEEKS not Months before we announce a way forward."

So if they have decided on the GWML electrification they havent decided on what stocks going to be working it.

According to Christian Wolmar on Twitter, mark next Tuesday in your diary. Look out for revised Meridian/Voyager type bi-mode with pantograph.

 

[Old Timer]

This is a disasterous decision as far as the long term strategy of the Railway is concerned.

I imagine it is only being done for Political reasons because there is no possible operational or financial benefit to be gained here at all. None of the figures add up.

Richard Woodward has posted an excellent response on the Railnews website and his observations are spot on.

As Klambert states only 40% (his figure) of the train services will be electric, and the majority of services diesel operated and the greatest majority of passengers will be I suspect without any benefit.

I presume that only the section via Badminton will be electrified ? It would be even greater madness to electrifiy via Bath. I would hate to see the financial justification for this - if it is even possible to write one that is not set within a parallel universe.

Of course presuming only Badminton is electrified, this will mean that the natural diversion via Bath is not available thus creating considerable disruption as and when there are any OHL problems.

 

[Zoe]

Of course presuming only Badminton is electrified, this will mean that the natural diversion via Bath is not available thus creating considerable disruption as and when there are any OHL problems.

I would have thought both routes would be electrified. If one of them is not though it shouldn't be an issue in any case if reports are to be believed that the GW fleet will be bi-mode.

 

[Old Timer]

I would have thought both routes would be electrified. If one of them is not though it shouldn't be an issue in any case if reports are to be believed that the GW fleet will be bi-mode.

Yes but my point is that if you then look at the costs of that and relate it to the increased (if there even will be any) revenue, the costs will not be recovered for decades, if at all.

Simply electrifying a route in isolation (pardon the unintentional pun) is complete madness.

All the figures for the MML and the infill sites stack up. The GW does not. Exactly WHAT improvement will electrification bring ?

 

[starrymarkb]

Isn't the GWML being done for Stock Replacement at the same time. The MML has a large fleet of 222s all ~5 years old. Using ex-Thameslink 319s to cascade 16x you release more DMUs for elsewhere... Its this that has swung the C/B Ratio

Plus with a Bi Mode fleet then the wires can be extended from the core (possibly to include Bristol to Barnt Green, The Cardiff Valleys and to Swansea), I imagine WAG will want shot of the Pacers roughly around the time that the wires reach Cardiff.

 

[ainsworth74]

Using ex-Thameslink 319s to cascade 16x you release more DMUs for elsewhere... Its this that has swung the C/B Ratio

Just how many 319s are being released? Because some of these are also going to the North West so is there even going to be enough to replace all the various DMUs under these new wires on the GWML and in the NW?

 

[starrymarkb]

86 Cl319s and about 50 Turbos on the GWML. Remember that Crossrail is going to account for some of the 165s on routes closer to London. There will also be some 5 car 360s and possibly 332s (if Crossrail replaces HEX) going spare too

IIRC the original plan was for the Northern schemes to get some 350s from LM for the Scotland runs as well as 319s (with Commuter IEP on the southern WCML where Tilt isn't as essential), whether that is still happening I don't know.

 

[WatcherZero]

My feeling was that if Thameslink order went ahead it would be much smaller than originally planned. Like Crossrail an 'if we build the platforms long enough or able to be lengthened we can always order longer stock later' attitude.

 

[Aictos]

My feeling was that if Thameslink order went ahead it would be much smaller than originally planned. Like Crossrail an 'if we build the platforms long enough or able to be lengthened we can always order longer stock later' attitude.

That attitude is being carried out at Royston as Down Cambridge Platform is being extended 20m more then is needed to take a 12 car train in order to be able to cope with IEPs if and when they go on the Kings Lynns.

I just hope that if they do go with the option to lengthen the trains at a later date that they don't leave it too late to do so and have to design and build new jigs for the extra coaches.

 

[route:oxford]

I agree fully with the electrification, however 5 Car IEPs is an awful idea. They need to be at least 9 car.

Won't all depend on how the use of the 5 car units is planned?

The HST replacements could well come as two 5 car units semi-permanently coupled as 10 car Units. (Pointy end at one end and corridor at the other). One unit would be all standard, the other unit 2 First, one first/shop/restaurant and two standard.

The benefit of the (partial) GWML electrification is that it will essentially be the continuation of an underway electrification (cross-rail to Reading). Every extra station that is added merely improves the percentages.

 

[YorkshireBear]

so does GW electrification mean crossrail could run to reading?

 

[route:oxford]

so does GW electrification mean crossrail could run to reading?

It's always been a tentative aspiration.

Probably too much "politics" involved - both railway and political...

Would FGW really want Reading to become essentially an outer zone of the Underground system, with the potential oversight of City Hall on fares?

Would the Councillors of Berkshire cope with the potential political conflict with the Mayor of London (It's not that long since Red Ken was in power).

Could the planned cross-rail services cope with the significant change in passenger flows that an inter-change at Reading would bring? Got to remember a change at the newly rebuilt Reading would be far easier than one at Paddington.

 

[Trog]

Looking on the brighter side if the government have one of the less economically justified electrifications done. That still leaves the railway to wave the figures that show that the MML as a follow on scheme to keep the expertise working, is economically good value.

Also even if the GWML electrification does not stack up well economically on its own. Once it is done it may improve the economics of electrifying branches and lines between it and other parts of the OHL electric network. By allowing through electric traffic that drive the figures for doing the link lines, and then add value to the GWML electrification by improving its utilisation.

 

[Chafford1]

Today's Sunday Times and Express say announcement will be on Thursday.

 

[PhilipW]

so does GW electrification mean crossrail could run to reading?

Yes, but emphasis on "could".

Electrification to Reading also makes it more likely that at some time in the future there can be a spur from the GWML around Iver going to Heathrow allowing direct Reading-Heathrow trains. This has been talked about in the past but electrification helps the case.

Crossrail could then go from Reading into London via via Heathrow. Heathrow is then, effectively on a loop line off the GWML.

Sounds good to me.

 

[swt_passenger]

Would FGW really want Reading to become essentially an outer zone of the Underground system, with the potential oversight of City Hall on fares?

Why would it? I don't think anyone has ever suggested that Maidenhead, or Shenfield would become part of the zonal system just because Crossrail runs there. The fare system used on Crossrail is equally likely to be the same as Thameslink isn't it?

What seems to be a more fundamental question is whether or not passengers commuting from Reading would be tempted to use a slower stopping Crossrail service instead of their current preferred mode, the HST? Perhaps differential fares would affect their preferences?

 

[route:oxford]

Why would it? I don't think anyone has ever suggested that Maidenhead, or Shenfield would become part of the zonal system just because Crossrail runs there. The fare system used on Crossrail is equally likely to be the same as Thameslink isn't it?

What seems to be a more fundamental question is whether or not passengers commuting from Reading would be tempted to use a slower stopping Crossrail service instead of their current preferred mode, the HST? Perhaps differential fares would affect their preferences?

It could be a tough choice.

If it were 100mph stock and there were a peak time limited stop service on the Cross Rail, say Reading, Slough, -plunge into tunnels-, Paddington, Bond Street, TC Road, Farringdon, Liverpool Street and I worked in the City - I'd be inclined to use the Cross-rail service from the start, likewise with heading home.

The alternative would be to take the loveable but elderly HSTs to Paddington, trail down to the bowels of the station and get a CR service a few trains behind the one I could have been sitting on all the way from Reading.

 

[YorkshireBear]

It depends where in london you wanna go, if paddington get express.... if not then easier to get crossrail, id pick that over changing in london any day of the week

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Would FGW really want Reading to become essentially an outer zone of the Underground system, with the potential oversight of City Hall on fares?

No reason why it would have to really; on the Paris RER several of the extremities of the lines are outside the Paris fares zones and are priced "normally" - this is clearly indicated on the relevant maps, with no problems.

 

[Zoe]

Would FGW really want Reading to become essentially an outer zone of the Underground system, with the potential oversight of City Hall on fares?

Watford Junction is much closer to London than Reading but is still excluded from the zones. I doubt anywhere west West Drayton will ever be part of the zones. Even Hayes & Harlington to Heathrow will have premium fares on Crossrail.

 

[cle]

The only way this would be true is if Crossrail began running non-stop trains on the fast lines between Reading and next stop Paddington Crossrail.

This would effectively put Reading on the tube map or bring it into London.

But I think it would be a good idea - you could have all sorts of local and regional services from Newbury/Bedwyn, Oxford/Banbury/some Cotswolds and Basingstoke feeding in, as if it were Paddington. Much easier and less hassle to have these transfers at Reading, rather than in London.

And from there, it would be two stops and 27 mins to Bond St, direct, and so forth. Paddington Mainline could be for long distance and diesel trains only.