Midland Mainline Electrification

[swt_passenger]

Anyone know when the big blockade of Nottingham station is happening to redo signals and junction layouts?

Civils complete* December 2012
Signalling installation complete* June 2013
Blockade starts July 2013
Blockade completion August 2013
GRIP 6 completion January 2014
* pre-blockade works only.

CP4 enhancement plan update Dec 11

 

[barrykas]

For a start, I believe that the 823XX DVTs are no longer compatible with class 90s as they have been modified to work with class 67s. Murmurs of Chiltern main line electrification have been cited in conjunction with the withdrawal of 165s, probably towards the end of the CP6 period (Although I would think that the 165s would have a few more years of life in them beyond that).

My understanding is that you can still quite happily stick virtually anything on the front of one of the Chiltern rakes, the 82/3 designation merely indicates that they've been modified to work with AAR fitted locos (i.e. 59s, 66s and 67s).

Cheers,

Barry

 

[sprinterguy]

If the ECML is lined up to get IEP then the Mk4s will be spare - sufficient to move onto MML metals and plenty of life left in them.

The alternative of course is to build additional pantograph cars for the 222s, as is planned for 220/221 fleets.

I like the idea of moving the 225s to the MML if it is electrified, as it solves the conundrum that East Coast are already short of about four electric trains necessary to operate all their under the wires services, and if Hull is electrified as part of Transpennine North and Aberdeen as part of Scottish electrification by the end of the decade then they would be short of even more: If electrification of TPE goes to Hull, as it certainly should in a sensible world, then I think that the two-hourly Newark terminators should be extended to Hull to give the Humberside city a regular, franchised rail service throughout the day. With Aberdeen electrified as well (hypothetically) that would surely constitute a fleet of around 42 eight or nine carriage electric IEP trains. Whereas thirty mark 4 sets (31 locomotives but only 30 carriage rakes since Hatfield and Great Heck) would be about the right size of fleet for the MML.

Of course it is also worth bearing in mind that by the time the MML is likely to be electrified then the 225s will be 30 years old, which is the same age that the 87s made it to when they were withdrawn from WCML duties. Although many have since been sold on to work in Bulgaria and most of the mark 3s have found further work.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

My understanding is that you can still quite happily stick virtually anything on the front of one of the Chiltern rakes, the 82/3 designation merely indicates that they've been modified to work with AAR fitted locos (i.e. 59s, 66s and 67s).

Ah, fair enough, I really don't know the ins and outs of the multiple working arrangements of the 82/3s.

 

[brianthegiant]

Blockade starts July 2013
Blockade completion August 2013

Ah, thanks, not for a while then.

 

[Edvid]

Line speed is going up to 125mph over the next couple of years.

Those works should really be underway now, but I've heard nothing from Network Rail about it for the best part of a year now.

Can anyone definitively state whether or not the programme's started?

 

[David Goddard]

Yes the current plan is for the MK4s to stay put on the ECML indefinitely. I personally can see the 222s from the MML being the HST replacement on EC as it makes perfect sense. The longer 8/9 carriage versions could cover the current highland and Edinburgh HST runs and the shorter ones could do the York stoppers, Harrogate etc allowing the 225s to do more Newcastle,Leeds and Edinburgh runs.

This would also work well. There are enough Mk4 sets to be able to provide a half hourly service to Leeds and Newcastle all day. The 222s could then be deployed as above, with the mixture of lengths offering flexibility such that Scottish services could be 1x8 car, or 2x5 car that split at Edinburgh.

 

[Martin222002]

I like the idea of moving the 225s to the MML if it is electrified, as it solves the conundrum that East Coast are already short of about four electric trains necessary to operate all their under the wires services, and if Hull is electrified as part of Transpennine North and Aberdeen as part of Scottish electrification by the end of the decade then they would be short of even more: If electrification of TPE goes to Hull, as it certainly should in a sensible world, then I think that the two-hourly Newark terminators should be extended to Hull to give the Humberside city a regular, franchised rail service throughout the day. With Aberdeen electrified as well (hypothetically) that would surely constitute a fleet of around 42 eight or nine carriage electric IEP trains. Whereas thirty mark 4 sets (31 locomotives but only 30 carriage rakes since Hatfield and Great Heck) would be about the right size of fleet for the MML.

Of course it is also worth bearing in mind that by the time the MML is likely to be electrified then the 225s will be 30 years old, which is the same age that the 87s made it to when they were withdrawn from WCML duties. Although many have since been sold on to work in Bulgaria and most of the mark 3s have found further work.

Personally I don't think 225s would be suitable for the MML, as the majority of the services have a stop-start service patter for at least some of there journey (examples being the London - Nottingham stopper which stops at all the major stations on the MML and the London - Sheffield semi-fast which is fast to Leicester but stops at the majority of stations north of there) where the 225s would not be able to keep at to 222 timing due to there slower acceleration.

Also why would you replace the 222s with rolling stock twice there age.

The ECML is the best place for the 225s to operate, due to the large gaps between stations, and longer stretches of non-stop running (ie London - York), and it would be best for them to live out the remainder of there life on the ECML.

Back to the the MML. Whatever happens with electrification, the HSTs on the MML will eventually need replacing, and whatever does replace them will most likely be a multiple unit of some sort.

 

[IanXC]

I like the idea of moving the 225s to the MML if it is electrified, as it solves the conundrum that East Coast are already short of about four electric trains necessary to operate all their under the wires services, and if Hull is electrified as part of Transpennine North and Aberdeen as part of Scottish electrification by the end of the decade then they would be short of even more: If electrification of TPE goes to Hull, as it certainly should in a sensible world, then I think that the two-hourly Newark terminators should be extended to Hull to give the Humberside city a regular, franchised rail service throughout the day. With Aberdeen electrified as well (hypothetically) that would surely constitute a fleet of around 42 eight or nine carriage electric IEP trains. Whereas thirty mark 4 sets (31 locomotives but only 30 carriage rakes since Hatfield and Great Heck) would be about the right size of fleet for the MML.

Of course it is also worth bearing in mind that by the time the MML is likely to be electrified then the 225s will be 30 years old, which is the same age that the 87s made it to when they were withdrawn from WCML duties. Although many have since been sold on to work in Bulgaria and most of the mark 3s have found further work.

I agree with the ECML aspect but I'm not sure the MML is the right home for the 225s. Given the age issues you mention I think its likely that the Mark 4s will end up being hauled by other locos, rather like the previously 86/87 mark 3 hauled stock has outlived its original motive power.

I'm not sure that 30 sets would be required but I would have thought that the Mark 4 sets would make a sensible long term replacement for the HST sets due to be retained for the non electrified Great Western services to the far South West. Quite whether an electrodiesel locomotive might be available, or whether a loco swap could be used I don't know but the HSTs aren't going to last forever!

 

[tbtc]

I'm not sure that 30 sets would be required

At the moment there are around forty long distance trains at EMT (the HSTs and 222s), but that includes those used on the Corby service (where a full 225 rake would be a waste) and a few four/five coach sets (that are sometimes doubled up).

But, with rough maths, even if you were to extend the two London - Sheffield services to Leeds (via Barnsley) you'd struggle to justify thirty full length 225s.

 

[Bridge189]

I'm pretty confident that the 225s will see out their remaining life (probably 15-20 years) on the ECML. As somebody has already noted they were never intended to work anywhere else especially not the stoppers up the MML. They are not great accelerators at lower speeds.

 

[IanXC]

At the moment there are around forty long distance trains at EMT (the HSTs and 222s), but that includes those used on the Corby service (where a full 225 rake would be a waste) and a few four/five coach sets (that are sometimes doubled up).

But, with rough maths, even if you were to extend the two London - Sheffield services to Leeds (via Barnsley) you'd struggle to justify thirty full length 225s.

Except thats not what I was suggesting!

I'm not sure that 30 sets would be required but I would have thought that the Mark 4 sets would make a sensible long term replacement for the HST sets due to be retained for the non electrified Great Western services to the far South West.

 

[tbtc]

Except thats not what I was suggesting!

Sorry, I was trying to answer the suggestion that 225s would be suitable for the MML, and your post quoted their number, so I quoted it out of context ()

 

[IanXC]

Sorry, I was trying to answer the suggestion that 225s would be suitable for the MML, and your post quoted their number, so I quoted it out of context ()

No worries. I think to be fair even fewer would be required for my suggested home...

 

[HSTEd]

No worries. I think to be fair even fewer would be required for my suggested home...

Indeed, the fleet of Mark 4s is rather large compared to the sorts of places that could possibly need them, unless we see a massive increase in the charter business, or new EMUs are not ordered from the GEML to replace the Cl90 sets for whatever reason.

 

[sprinterguy]

Personally I don't think 225s would be suitable for the MML, as the majority of the services have a stop-start service patter for at least some of there journey (examples being the London - Nottingham stopper which stops at all the major stations on the MML and the London - Sheffield semi-fast which is fast to Leicester but stops at the majority of stations north of there) where the 225s would not be able to keep at to 222 timing due to there slower acceleration.

Also why would you replace the 222s with rolling stock twice there age.

The ECML is the best place for the 225s to operate, due to the large gaps between stations, and longer stretches of non-stop running (ie London - York), and it would be best for them to live out the remainder of there life on the ECML.

Back to the the MML. Whatever happens with electrification, the HSTs on the MML will eventually need replacing, and whatever does replace them will most likely be a multiple unit of some sort.

That's a set of very good points, which once again leaves me scratching my head as to what to do when we have a case that the ECML is already short of electric trains, even in lieu of any further electrification work, but the 225s still have plenty of life left in them. I'm keen on the idea of 222s displaced from the MML by electrification replacing the HSTs on the East Coast and having pantograph cars added, but I'm not keen on the idea of them being used on services entirely under the wires in the same capacity as some of the East Coast HSTs are now. Although admittedly with them converted for electro-diesel operation it would be a reasonable compromise until the 225s are due to be replaced.

 

[whhistle]

Said it before, will say it again. Big issue when they get to Leicester.
They can't really raise London Road (it's a major junction) and lowering the track to fit wires underneath would be difficult unless you move the station platforms. However, there's a large bridge at the opposite end anyway.

I'm not sure that 30 sets would be required but I would have thought that the Mark 4 sets would make a sensible long term replacement for the HST sets due to be retained for the non electrified Great Western services to the far South West.

I thought this.
Pendolino's / their successor on the ECML.
MK4 and 91's go to Great Western.
Give the Great Western HST's to XC.
XC Voyagers elsewhere.

 

[Waverley125]

NO to pendolinos on the EC. Mk4s are much nicer stock, and, given there are few sections of sharp curves south of Newcastle, pendos would be wasted.

It might be useful to have Pendolinos for LKX-EDB services given the time savings tilt could give between Berwick and Edinburgh, but otherwise it'd just be a waste.

Mk4s & 91s to stay on EC, until replaced with something similar to the eurostars, the same for Paddington-Bristol/Cardiff trains. Maybe Pendolinos for GW services west of Cardiff & Exeter, buth othewise no need. Definitely pendos for MML.

 

[tbtc]

That's a set of very good points, which once again leaves me scratching my head as to what to do when we have a case that the ECML is already short of electric trains, even in lieu of any further electrification work, but the 225s still have plenty of life left in them. I'm keen on the idea of 222s displaced from the MML by electrification replacing the HSTs on the East Coast and having pantograph cars added, but I'm not keen on the idea of them being used on services entirely under the wires in the same capacity as some of the East Coast HSTs are now. Although admittedly with them converted for electro-diesel operation it would be a reasonable compromise until the 225s are due to be replaced.

The frustrating thing is that if the logical electrifications happen in/around Yorkshire after TPE North is wired (e.g. Harrogate, Hull) then you'd only need to wire the line from Edinburgh to Aberdeen so that 95% of ECML services could be wholly electric (i.e. everything but the one Inverness service a day, north of Dunblane).

But that expects Scotland to pay for the wiring of the Aberdeen line, and they may have different priorities...

 

[HSTEd]

Why would the EC fleet be displaced to other routes anyway? the EC order for IEP is entirely bi-mode (atleast when I last checked) and will likely be taking over the HST diagrams, especially the cross border ones.

However with Hull electrification apparently commited and numerous other projects looking likely the sense in commiting to purchase bi mode trains on a route that is already short of pure electrics has to be questioned.

 

[IanXC]

I thought this.
Pendolino's / their successor on the ECML.
MK4 and 91's go to Great Western.
Give the Great Western HST's to XC.
XC Voyagers elsewhere.

I was thinking of the point where HSTs are retired, the mark 4 sets would seem to be the best answer to intercity services beyond the wires to the south west.


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

NO to pendolinos on the EC. Mk4s are much nicer stock, and, given there are few sections of sharp curves south of Newcastle, pendos would be wasted.

Maybe Pendolinos for GW services west of Cardiff & Exeter, buth othewise no need.

Pendos don't have to tilt! There's plenty of non tilting pendo fleets out there!

I'm not sure the wires will extend as far as Exeter for many many years.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Exactly pendilions are a family of train not just specifically the virgin 390s.

There sucess with the public (ignore enthusiasts for a bit) on the WCML is no coincidence, so if they can do that to the WCML then they can do it to the GW and ECML too.

91s could be shortened. 7 Coach rakes? would that provide better acceleration? that would still be a capcity increase on a 7 car meridian.

 

[swt_passenger]

However with Hull electrification apparently commited...

Really? When was that announced then?

 

[HSTEd]

Really? When was that announced then?

I thought that was effectively commited to under the TPE-North proposals?

 

[YorkshireBear]

I thought that was effectively commited to under the TPE-North proposals?

No it is York Manchester that is confirmed, they have been asked to do stuides on the three branches - Scarborough, Middlsborough and Hull. And it has been discussed on here that Hull most likely has a very good buisness case, Scarborough has a poor one and Middlsborough no one is really sure about.

Nothing confirmed yet, most on here just think Hull should be done, like sprinterguy said earlier 'in a sensible world'.

 

[Yew]

Why buy non tilting pendolinos?

 

[HSTEd]

Why buy non tilting pendolinos?

Proven traction package.
Although I would have thought something derived from the AGV would be better if we were looking at Alstom products. (Zero maintenance traction motors and all that).

 

[BR Blue]

The idea to cascade the 225 sets goes back to the early days of the IEP. When the amount of carriages required was up to 1400. This has been cut back to a little over 500. So, it looks like the class 91`s and their mk4`s will be staying on the ECML.

As for the MML being wired up. If it does get the go ahead, it will be at the back of a long queue. Behind the GWML, which will not be finished till 2017. The Cardiff valley lines may get wired first, just to get rid of some pacers and make a new home for cascaded 315/317/319s.

 

[Martin222002]

Exactly pendilions are a family of train not just specifically the virgin 390s.

Exactly. If any Pendolino's were ordered for the MML, GWML or ECML, they would most likely be based on the newer Pendolino platform which are in use in Italy and Switzerland, and a non-tilt version has recently been ordered for Poland. Below are a few photo's from Flickr (not mine) of the interior of the new Swiss Pendolino's, which I think is much nicer than what we have with the 390s.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaeschol/5574402842/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mattingham/5032541965/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mattingham/5032541227/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mattingham/5032543627/

Of cause any UK version would have to have a lower celling so it could fit in the UK loading gauge, but still nicer.

91s could be shortened. 7 Coach rakes? would that provide better acceleration? that would still be a capcity increase on a 7 car meridian.

It would help a little, but the 91s weren't designed for fast acceleration, and you would have less capacity then there currently is on there HST and any double 5 car 222 formations.

 

[Yew]

Exactly pendilions are a family of train not just specifically the virgin 390s.

There sucess with the public (ignore enthusiasts for a bit) on the WCML is no coincidence, so if they can do that to the WCML then they can do it to the GW and ECML too.

91s could be shortened. 7 Coach rakes? would that provide better acceleration? that would still be a capcity increase on a 7 car meridian.

The sucsess is not entirely down to pendolinos, it's more reflective of the increase in service levels and the dire state of some of the ICWC stock. Remember it was suppose to be replaced by the apt in the 70's

 

[YorkshireBear]

The sucsess is not entirely down to pendolinos, it's more reflective of the increase in service levels and the dire state of some of the ICWC stock. Remember it was suppose to be replaced by the apt in the 70's

Yes what im saying is the pendilinos clearly are not that bad otherwise members of the public would complain whereas most 'non-enthusiasts' i meet love the pendilinos.