MML Electrification: progress updates

[snowball]

Public Account Committee report recommendation to make sure MML and Transpennine are properly spec and planned etc. and lesson learned fron GWML experience.

It also says this:

Recommendation: The Department needs to reassess the case for electrification on a section by section basis and fund schemes only where worthwhile benefits for passengers could not be achieved otherwise at lower cost. In its new business case for the Great Western programme, which it expects to complete by the end of March 2017, it should reassess the extent of electrification, and it should also look again at its plans for the Midland Main Line and TransPennine routes.

https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmpubacc/776/77605.htm

 

[asylumxl]

It also says this:

https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmpubacc/776/77605.htm

I read that as "reassess business cases, decide they're no longer economically viable, cancel electrification projects (again)".

 

[HSTEd]

And it looks like I am to be proved right yet again. This fiasco and NR/ORRs irrational dislike of third rail has killed the electrification programme

 

[Mordac]

And it looks like I am to be proved right yet again. This fiasco and NR/ORRs irrational dislike of third rail has killed the electrification programme

Not to mention the bi-mode mania.

 

[RichmondCommu]

And it looks like I am to be proved right yet again. This fiasco and NR/ORRs irrational dislike of third rail has killed the electrification programme

Can you run 125 mph electric trains using 3rd rail electrification?

 

[HSTEd]

Can you run 125 mph electric trains using 3rd rail electrification?

No, but the majority of the network does not operate at 125mph.
If all remaining 125mph diesel traction stayed diesel and everything else was electric at third rail we would have done very well.

Indeed there is not really very much 125mph not already electrified once the GWML is finished.

 

[Class 170101]

That would make sense - given the Corby's are meant to be staying with EMT, who currently don't have any electric stabling or maintenance facilities.

And I'm guessing Bedford and Cricklewood are pretty full with existing TL requirements.

Didn't look all that full between the peaks when I passed there recently around lunchtime.

 

[bengley]

And it looks like I am to be proved right yet again. This fiasco and NR/ORRs irrational dislike of third rail has killed the electrification programme

Third rail is crap.

I can drive a train between Flitwick and Harlington and easily reach 90mph (on the slows)

Yet Burgess Hill to Hassocks, which is a similar distance, you'd be lucky to reach 75mph in the same unit.

That's a big performance difference.

You also have to shut off over gaps to prevent arcing - this reduces performance even further. I'm lucky to be doing 45mph before Horley after leaving Gatwick.

Not to mention the number of substations needed and the frequent problems during icy weather.

 

[HSTEd]

Third rail is crap.

Not having electrification at all is even worse, which is apparently the alternative.

I can drive a train between Flitwick and Harlington and easily reach 90mph (on the slows)

Yet Burgess Hill to Hassocks, which is a similar distance, you'd be lucky to reach 75mph in the same unit.

That's a big performance difference.

That might have something to do with the third rail in that area being pushed to the absolute maximum.
It is probably the highest power third rail installation on the planet.

A less intensively operated secondary route (including many electrification candidates) would have nothing like the same issues.

Not to mention the number of substations needed

Advances in power electronics and electronic control systems means that the price of a DC substation falls all the time.
Meanwhile the price of 25kV electrification climbs all the time!
At some point the increased capabilities and efficiency of modern compact DC power electronics will overwhelm the voltage-drop advantages of 25kV.
When I can put intertripping cross-feeding 'substations' at spacings similar in magnitude to the train length for less money than a 25kV installation costs.... the rules change somewhat.

Unfortunately 25kV installations on existing lines are dead.
You can either accept this and work out some way of getting an electric railway that doesn't cost such an enormous sum of money, or you can continue to pretend that the electrification programme is in rude health.

All the press releases out of the ORR and DfT lead towards the inevitable conclusion that the Transpennine Project and/or the MML project is heading for the axe.
I would honestly be surprised if either is finished, let alone both.

And as for icy weather and power limitations, they could be solved if we were to adopt a more... modern third rail standard that is still likely to come out drastically cheaper than existing ones.
Which would likely consist of some sort of insane 1500Vdc bottom contact system, but I honestly more attached to simply using the existing standards. The mobilisation costs are just too big.

 

[NotATrainspott]

There's no logical reason why 750V DC third would be any more acceptable to the various rail bodies than 25kV AC OHLE. If they would ever allow more third rail installations then they would certainly be allowing more overhead line ones. Third rail is therefore no solution. Third rail as a concept really does not work over long distances. It works fine for the network that the Southern Region electrified back in the early 20th century but it simply not be practical or worthwhile for electrification of long regional routes, such as Edinburgh to Aberdeen or Bristol to Penzance. With so many trains running at 100mph for long distances the energy cost would be significant enough over the long term to make it not worthwhile to do.

As far as I understand the ORR's concerns it relates to the passenger-OHLE interface at stations, with a suggestion that existing installations may need to be re-examined in future. Platforms make up only a tiny fraction of the total installed length of OHLE across the country. The clear and obvious solution is to have extended neutral sections through platforms and fit electric trains with enough batteries to get moving again. There would be no additional energy wastage and you could use the same technology to get around every single problematic area for wiring - bridges, tunnels, level crossings, platforms, complex junctions, et cetera.

 

[richieb1971]

So all these bridges getting replaced is only going to facilitate better gauge clearances then?

I suppose thats something.


Still wondering about Bromham road in Bedford. I just can't see how it can be done easily. And its arched which means it won't be compliant with the newer bridges and gauge clearances. If its not switched to a new one then what is the point of doing all the others?

 

[Flying Phil]

Sorry Richieb - I was confusing the Bromham Road bridge for the new by-pass bridge. The old bridge will certainly be a problem as it is such a key route into Bedford but the new bypass is an inconvenient, but possible, alternate route whilst alteration/replacement takes place - which it must, otherwise why the Corby upgrade.....let alone MML electrification....

 

[richieb1971]

I watched my friends video of the Wellingborough bridge being put in and the crane was so big. Swinging the whole beam left and right. At Bromham road you won't be able to get anything big in there. Not to mention keeping over 200 nearby neighbours up all night. The road is quite steep as it is, so going to a steeper gradient won't work well.

Looking at this, you can use the car park. And possibly if you cut down all the trees on the north east corner you can gain access there.

 

[DarloRich]

I watched my friends video of the Wellingborough bridge being put in and the crane was so big. Swinging the whole beam left and right. At Bromham road you won't be able to get anything big in there. Not to mention keeping over 200 nearby neighbours up all night. The road is quite steep as it is, so going to a steeper gradient won't work well.

Looking at this, you can use the car park. And possibly if you cut down all the trees on the north east corner you can gain access there.

there is a ready made compound next to the site - it is a standard bridge replacement done many many times before

 

[DarloRich]

I read that as "reassess business cases, decide they're no longer economically viable, cancel electrification projects (again)".

It says make sure your business case actually stacks up before you get any money ( and if it doesn't don't bother asking for any cash) and prove you can, actually, deliver your stated benefits

 

[asylumxl]

It says make sure your business case actually stacks up before you get any money ( and if it doesn't don't bother asking for any cash) and prove you can, actually, deliver your stated benefits

Which is different to before how? And if the numbers are massaged now to make them look more viable, what is to stop the same happening now?

 

[DarloRich]

Which is different to before how? And if the numbers are massaged now to make them look more viable, what is to stop the same happening now?

it is also to make sure any work fits in the with government led change of strategic message - essentially is a positive benefit for the country as an economic whole.

Plus money is tight so surely it is right to re asses each suggested business case and ensure it actually offers value for money or if the benefits can be delivered by other ( aka cheaper) means

 

[Mordac]

Has the laying of the second track between Kettering and Corby finished?

 

[Urobach]

Has the laying of the second track between Kettering and Corby finished?

No

Trains now run on what will be the up slow between north of Kettering however

 

[Camden]

it is also to make sure any work fits in the with government led change of strategic message - essentially is a positive benefit for the country as an economic whole.

Plus money is tight so surely it is right to re asses each suggested business case and ensure it actually offers value for money or if the benefits can be delivered by other ( aka cheaper) means

Wonder how much more cost effectively projects like this could be delivered by stripping out the majority of the Grey Army of workers involved in the massive multi billion pound industry of proving something has or hasn't got a business case.

We know that we have Europe's most costly railway, but the reason why appears to be a complete mystery only to those paid above a certain amount.

If we are to have a business case review it strikes me it's this aspect we should be looking at. Start with the people who lay the tracks and erect the gantries, and ask them "How many of you does it take to do this job, what do you do, what/who else do you need and for how long?" and work upwards until you reach people who really can't explain their essential purpose. I don't think you'd have to travel too far up the chain.

Two birds, one stone.

 

[DarloRich]

Wonder how much more cost effectively projects like this could be delivered by stripping out the majority of the Grey Army of workers involved in the massive multi billion pound industry of proving something has or hasn't got a business case.

We know that we have Europe's most costly railway, but the reason why appears to be a complete mystery only to those paid above a certain amount.

If we are to have a business case review it strikes me it's this aspect we should be looking at. Start with the people who lay the tracks and erect the gantries, and ask them "How many of you does it take to do this job, what do you do, what/who else do you need and for how long?" and work upwards until you reach people who really can't explain their essential purpose. I don't think you'd have to travel too far up the chain.

Two birds, one stone.

good idea. :roll: Because the people doing the work on the ground are best placed to negotiate supply contracts or deal with finances or arrange all the logistics or challenge the contractors on their accounts and what they actually deliver or ensure that money is spent on what is best for everyone or deal with environmental standards or safety standards or ensure that everyone turning up for work has the right training and competencies or make the tea or anyone of a 100 jobs that need to be done to help the guy with the shovel do his job.

but yeah sack them all that will really help deliver things on time................

 

[RichmondCommu]

Wonder how much more cost effectively projects like this could be delivered by stripping out the majority of the Grey Army of workers involved in the massive multi billion pound industry of proving something has or hasn't got a business case.

Why have you decided to call them the grey army?

 

[YorkshireBear]

good idea. :roll: Because the people doing the work on the ground are best placed to negotiate supply contracts or deal with finances or arrange all the logistics or challenge the contractors on their accounts and what they actually deliver or ensure that money is spent on what is best for everyone or deal with environmental standards or safety standards or ensure that everyone turning up for work has the right training and competencies or make the tea or anyone of a 100 jobs that need to be done to help the guy with the shovel do his job.

but yeah sack them all that will really help deliver things on time................

Yeah those good old days we keep getting reminded of. I imagine many of the roles you mention will be disregarded as pointless and simply a symptom of the modern H&S world we live in.

 

[DarloRich]

Yeah those good old days we keep getting reminded of. I imagine many of the roles you mention will be disregarded as pointless and simply a symptom of the modern H&S world we live in.

I am sure - but that is the world we live in. A prosecution for breaching HSEA legislation or environmental legislation will cost more in one day than all of these jobs put together

 

[HowardGWR]

Why have you decided to call them the grey army?

Camden can speak for himself but I just thought he meant the 'suits' which are usually grey.

I (who was a 'suit') recognise that there is one advantage of writing reports as opposed to erecting wires in a rainstorm at midnight, which is that you are not erecting wires in a rainstorm at midnight.

 

[Bald Rick]

Camden can speak for himself but I just thought he meant the 'suits' which are usually grey.

I (who was a 'suit') recognise that there is one advantage of writing reports as opposed to erecting wires in a rainstorm at midnight, which is that you are not erecting wires in a rainstorm at midnight.

The main disadvantage of writing reports as opposed to erecting wires in any weather at any time of day, is that it is almost certain you be earning less money.

 

[richieb1971]

What are we looking at in the real world financially per foot of railway?

I bet its over £1000 per 12 inches of a single track.

And lets not forget that people see "value" in different ways. From what I've learnt in this forum is that railways are so expensive to run they really shouldn't exist at all.

I'm only here on these forums because I like the railways. But it blows my mind how much it costs to build and maintain them. Especially considering we don't have anything here to brag about.

In any business, there is always a black hole that money goes down.

I can't remember facts but someone once said that if they put a post and sign up on the road it would cost £800, if you put the same post and sign on railway property it goes up 8x, 10x the cost because of health and safety, regulations, signing off on everything etc etc. So many people in the chain to decide a simple thing like that.

 

[Flying Phil]

Whilst I agree with Richieb, to an extent, when the road sign is put up, they also have "temporary" traffic lights that are there for 48 hours ( for 3 hours actual work!) and motorist queuing for ages - then the water main leaks and is fixed, then the electric main....and then a car crashes into the sign!
But all those costs get "lost" .........
So when will we get wires to Leicester?

 

[DarloRich]

What are we looking at in the real world financially per foot of railway?

I bet its over £1000 per 12 inches of a single track.

And lets not forget that people see "value" in different ways. From what I've learnt in this forum is that railways are so expensive to run they really shouldn't exist at all.

I'm only here on these forums because I like the railways. But it blows my mind how much it costs to build and maintain them. Especially considering we don't have anything here to brag about.

In any business, there is always a black hole that money goes down.

I can't remember facts but someone once said that if they put a post and sign up on the road it would cost £800, if you put the same post and sign on railway property it goes up 8x, 10x the cost because of health and safety, regulations, signing off on everything etc etc. So many people in the chain to decide a simple thing like that.

As I have said before you don't understand what you or looking at or how those costs are made up or why. I am not sure you want to understand. BTW according to the BBC the M74 extension in Glasgow cost £138.4m per mile or £78,000 a yard or £86,500 a metre! The average cost is about £30m per mile of motorway. I would suggest the M74 extension is similar to changing an existing railway corridor in that the road he to be added to the existing network and run right into the heart of the city with new bridges and earthworks. The compulsory purchase alone cost c£200m!

PS for god sake don't look at the cost of the Limehouse Link Road!

 

[A0]

In any business, there is always a black hole that money goes down.

Rubbish - in any well run business they know EXACTLY where the money is going - it's how you know where to look for savings and improvements.

Businesses tend to fail because they haven't responded to changing demands which leads to a decline in income whilst costs remain the same. And unless that is addressed they eventually run out of money.

Whilst no doubt there are costs arising from H&S or Environmental legislation such costs impact all businesses, not just the railways - e.g. WEEE legislation has hit retailers and distributors for example - yet they've managed to incorporate it into their overall business models without massively increasing costs.