• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

MML Electrification: progress updates

Status
Not open for further replies.

Trainbike46

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2021
Messages
4,361
Location
belfast
Surely the diesel engines can just be taken out and the units made a little lighter, once electrification is finished? Maybe leave one or replace with a traction battery pack.

I thought the main feature making it a microfleet was the need for a shorter length to fit the platforms at St Pancras.
That could have been avoided with an all 9-car standard length 80x fleet - of course, the decision was made to go for slightly shorter 5-cars that can run combined as 10-cars. I'm assuming that the all 9-car option would have been more expensive as that would have meant more carriages.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Roger B

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2018
Messages
1,259
Location
Gatley
That could have been avoided with an all 9-car standard length 80x fleet - of course, the decision was made to go for slightly shorter 5-cars that can run combined as 10-cars. I'm assuming that the all 9-car option would have been more expensive as that would have meant more carriages.
Though fewer costly cabs to build, commission and maintain, no need to duplicate catering and crew arrangements within full length trains, more operational flexibility, and greater potential to cascade to other routes at a later date.

As for the genset removal removal discussion - why not replace with traction batteries of simlar weight to the gensets? Would require minimal changes to suspension, and enable diversion over unelectrified routes as engineering work dictates.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
9,276
Ask the voters and they will ask what’s in it for them?
Will fares on an already very expensive MML come down? Doubtful.
Will journey times decrease? Probably not in any meaningful way.
If they jumped to the Derby-Nottingham bit it would be quieter and cleaner in the stations and it might be enough for some BEMUs on local services.
 
Joined
5 Aug 2015
Messages
869
Location
Norfolk
I think Springfield is very slightly later than Norwich, just looking at the type of switchgear. It’s more likely to be early 90s. I’d suggest it was installed to strengthen supplies in the area.

The GE has seen many changes over the years, not least because it was one of the earliest areas to be electrified, complete with sections of DC electrification (Shenfield) and 6.25kV AC (Southend). Altering all of this into a standard 25kV AC system has produced a setup that is rather messy compared to if the whole thing had been done from scratch.
Yes I have it on some authority that the original DC substations along with their railside 33kv 3 phase distribution cables were retained for the 6.25kv upgrade in 1960. This is Liv street - shenfield - southend vic while shenfield-chelmsford went straight to 25kv from DC. LTS and Lea Valley commuter lines started out as mixed AC (majority 6.25kv tho). I have good information on how all three of those started in the early 60s but there are very few sources around what was happening regarding upgrading the 6.25kv sections. All i know is that it was authorised in 1975 and was done by the mid-80s. Some OHNS dates imply more feeding changes happened in the 1990s. And of course AT feeding appeared in the 2010s

Looks like there's more things going on at Springfield right now. New switchgear being installed against the Dn line - no idea if it's anything to do with the railway however.
 

londonmidland

Established Member
Joined
22 Dec 2009
Messages
2,347
Location
Leicester
So what’s scheduled to happen next? Fill in the gap between South Wigston to Leicester or is ‘the Leicester gap’ still an issue, with electrification continuing from Syston north?
 
Joined
5 Aug 2015
Messages
869
Location
Norfolk
So what’s scheduled to happen next? Fill in the gap between South Wigston to Leicester or is ‘the Leicester gap’ still an issue, with electrification continuing from Syston north?
I think nobody is really sure atm. I'm not sure if the other sections are awaiting approval or funding (or perhaps both) from government. Leicester gap is not an issue but it probably isn't as finished design-wise as north of Syston, so Syston northwards is likely to be the next bit whenever a next bit is allowed to happen
 

PeterW

New Member
Joined
23 Dec 2023
Messages
3
Location
London W14
Though fewer costly cabs to build, commission and maintain, no need to duplicate catering and crew arrangements within full length trains, more operational flexibility, and greater potential to cascade to other routes at a later date.

As for the genset removal removal discussion - why not replace with traction batteries of simlar weight to the gensets? Would require minimal changes to suspension, and enable diversion over unelectrified routes as engineering work dictates.
Isn't that what Hitachi are already trialling on a TPE 802 set ? https://www.hitachi.com/New/cnews/month/2024/08/240829.html
 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
7,986
Location
Surrey
I think nobody is really sure atm. I'm not sure if the other sections are awaiting approval or funding (or perhaps both) from government. Leicester gap is not an issue but it probably isn't as finished design-wise as north of Syston, so Syston northwards is likely to be the next bit whenever a next bit is allowed to happen
Given Reeves has amended the fiscal rules to allow additional borrowing for investment this project will benefit and the teams can be held together and continue northwards
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
9,276
Given Reeves has amended the fiscal rules to allow additional borrowing for investment this project will benefit and the teams can be held together and continue northwards
There are a lot of projects competing for the money….even on the railway!
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
9,276
Indeed but some of this additional cash will make its way to the DfT and this project is shovel ready to keep moving northwards and ticks the net zero box.
It doesn’t tick the net zero box as much as an electrification scheme that results in replaced diesel trains.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
35,584
Given Reeves has amended the fiscal rules to allow additional borrowing for investment this project will benefit and the teams can be held together and continue northwards

I wouldn‘t bank on that. Given the noises coming out of Government, I can’t see more money coming towards the railway, or transport as a department.
 

John R

Established Member
Joined
1 Jul 2013
Messages
6,061
I wouldn‘t bank on that. Given the noises coming out of Government, I can’t see more money coming towards the railway, or transport as a department.
The fact that elsewhere Network Rail was told to abruptly stop work on the York 3rd Line project would tend to reinforce that view unfortunately.
 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
7,986
Location
Surrey
I wouldn‘t bank on that. Given the noises coming out of Government, I can’t see more money coming towards the railway, or transport as a department.
The fiscal rules change specifically enables increased capital spending ie MML electrification. The deeper issue for DfT is that they are being squeezed on day to day spending and a the railway is the biggest recipient of that budget element. So for the DfT they will need to convince treasury that there is latent demand that will now flow through to fare revenue following settlement of the disputes. Also pretty solid Labour constituencies on the remaining section although i get hospitals and schools will trump MML locally when it comes to priorities. Anyhow lets see what Wednesday brings.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
35,584
The fiscal rules change specifically enables increased capital spending ie MML electrification. The deeper issue for DfT is that they are being squeezed on day to day spending and a the railway is the biggest recipient of that budget element. So for the DfT they will need to convince treasury that there is latent demand that will now flow through to fare revenue following settlement of the disputes. Also pretty solid Labour constituencies on the remaining section although i get hospitals and schools will trump MML locally when it comes to priorities. Anyhow lets see what Wednesday brings.

I know that. I suspect there will be a reduction in capital spending for the railway.
 

Richard123

Member
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
110
Location
Rugby
In an ideal world MML would be complete and electric trsains procured, then the 810s can move on to another route thsat is gradually getting electrified. Snag is all these non-standard bespoke small fleets don't make cascading easy. I can see that one day maybe in my lifetime there will be a surplus of BiModes because we have picked at parts of several different networks !. Finish the MML, otherwise we get it half done until the relevant BiModes reach the end of their life.

One day we will be looking forward to infil electrification on the Cross Country network. But in the meantime, as you say, we need more to hang that on and MML as far as Sheffield leaves some tempting infils (Birmingham-Derby plus Sheffield to Leeds/Doncaster.
With 78 voyagers coming up to 25 years old and thirsty for diesel, there may be a logical cascade for the 810s when the wires reach Sheffield...
 

Richard123

Member
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
110
Location
Rugby
About 2035 if we're lucky? Could fit, but would there be enough 810s?
No, 33 class 810s versus 66 (planned) voyagers that are already grossly overcrowded. But even if they just replaced the 34 class 220s that would be a capacity boost and diesel fuel saving.
 
Joined
5 Aug 2015
Messages
869
Location
Norfolk
Wouldn't you need some new power supply upgrade projects if XC services were to start using wires. Does the ECML power supply project account for this idea north of York? Is there available power for Birmingham - Manchester already?
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,228
Wouldn't you need some new power supply upgrade projects if XC services were to start using wires. Does the ECML power supply project account for this idea north of York? Is there available power for Birmingham - Manchester already?
The ECML is power limited north of Newcastle, specifically around Berwick, in the current timetable. That‘s why TPE still run on diesel, so it’s almost certain a theoretical bimode XC service would also have to do the same.

(Work on the new SFC feeder station at Marshall Meadows appears to have started but then been deferred until some unknown date, but it’s probably better to keep that discussion in the ECML thread.)
 

Nottingham59

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2019
Messages
3,326
Location
Nottingham
Wouldn't you need some new power supply upgrade projects if XC services were to start using wires.
Yes they will. Hopefully smart control and communications systems will allow bimode trains to be smarter at using AC power whenever the local network has capacity, and switching to diesel ahead of times and places where the OHLE gets overloaded.


Is there available power for Birmingham - Manchester already?
They're going to have upgrade most of the whole network. Or else the decarbonisation strategy is just hot air.
 
Joined
5 Aug 2015
Messages
869
Location
Norfolk
yeah the whole notion that we can achieve even some carbon goals with Bimodes instead of with electrification infrastructure has always been naïve, but i feel it's gotten even sillier if it just means 125mph DMUs with pantographs that go mostly unused.
 

Merle Haggard

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2019
Messages
3,850
Location
Northampton
yeah the whole notion that we can achieve even some carbon goals with Bimodes instead of with electrification infrastructure has always been naïve, but i feel it's gotten even sillier if it just means 125mph DMUs with pantographs that go mostly unused.

The 810s are said to be high performance on diesel - presumably high fuel consumption (when oil diesel) to match. Bi modes are always carrying the dead weight of the unwanted traction source around, that must increase both diesel and electric consumption.
 

Nottingham59

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2019
Messages
3,326
Location
Nottingham
yeah the whole notion that we can achieve even some carbon goals with Bimodes instead of with electrification infrastructure has always been naïve, but i feel it's gotten even sillier if it just means 125mph DMUs with pantographs that go mostly unused.
But bimodes can deliver a major reduction in carbon emissions. Sure, you have to upgrade the power supply, but that's far cheaper than electrifying a whole new line.

Take Cross Country as an example. If they were to convert to bimodes then around half of XC's route miles would be under the wires. That's a lot of carbon reduction from today at relatively little cost.

The effect is even more pronounced on say an overnight intermodal from Gateway to Mossend, switching from a diesel 66 to a bimode class 99.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
28,594
Location
Nottingham
Perhaps under GBR a fully electrified MML will have pure electric trains, and when Sunday diversions are needed spare bi-modes can be borrowed off the CrossCountry routes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top