MML Electrification: progress updates

[Topological]

My bigger worry for the MML would be that they electrify it and conclude that 110mph EMUs are sufficient. The 810s then go over to CrossCountry for use on lines that still need bimodes.

That said, the Norwich services do not seem to have suffered from becoming EMUs.

 

[QSK19]

My bigger worry for the MML would be that they electrify it and conclude that 110mph EMUs are sufficient. The 810s then go over to CrossCountry for use on lines that still need bimodes.

Indeed. And we’re back to the nonsense suggestion that Pendos are dumped onto the MML whilst the 810s are commandeered for XC.

On balance, I would still back electrification if the consequence were getting Pendos; but I think the MML is going to lose out whatever happens.

NB: I know some people have expressed support for the Pendos replacing the 810s in the case of full MML electrification; however the reasons I think it’s nonsense are that, say if it happened in 10 years’ time, firstly 10 year old trains would be replaced by ~35 year old trains approaching life expiry; and secondly what do you do for diversionary routes.

 

[CdBrux]

But careful what you wish for. There might end up being diesel lines closed because they are not worth electrifying.

This is drifting off topic, but the answer to that is, for me, batteries.

 

[GraphitProjekt]

Hitachi seem to be busy on converting 80Xs to have some batteries instead of diesel engines. My doom prediction is that the future of MML wiring depends probably on Newton Aycliffe being able or unable to build/retrofit a high speed BEMU that can run between Leicester and Sheffield/Nottingham. This probably isn't really feasible without some extension of wires to provide in-running charging at one or two stretches along the way. But until that's concluded I wouldn't put it past new-new labour to "indefinitely defer" the project north of Leicester until a "build less infrastructure" option has been past through a few DfT reports - thus wasting lots of money and further de-stabilising supply chains. Then they'd conclude on a descoped discontinuous system, ignore freight completely and say they've delivered value for taxpayers despite wasting an extra decade and paying engineering firms to scrap redevelop plans and paying off construction companies to cancel contracts (á la HS2). All modern British governments seem vitriolically opposed to building new infrastructure, although decarbonisation politics forces them to do something - for transport they view it myopically as switching diesel engines for batteries in either cars or trains instead of a holistic re-imagining of how to carry out mobility with resource/energy efficiency in mind. (Blindly following cost efficiency means doing what always has been done because all the stuff is still there.)

 

[Mr. SW]

A couple of days ago I went out to look at Loughborough (Mid) Station to see if there hade been any signs of - well - anything and I came across these markings on the Nottingham Road Bridge.

Three marker pegs at the corners of the bridge marked B75H3 (North west corner), B75H2 (North East corner) and B75H5 (South east corner).

I couldn't find any others and apart from that it was cold.

The Bridge Number is SPC5/75 so this accounts for B (bridge) 75. H is presumably Height and the 2/3/5 is just an identifying number.

Question: Are markers in connection with a possible bridge raising in view of electrification? The arch looks comparatively low and the platforms mean you can't lower the track. Replacing the bridge will be interesting as there is an access point to the former Brush Works which could be potentially cut off in view of the GCR Bridge 326 being of restricted clearance, but not unduly so.

Edit for position of B75H2

 

[PJM]

A couple of days ago I went out to look at Loughborough (Mid) Station to see if there hade been any signs of - well - anything and I came across these markings on the Nottingham Road Bridge.
View attachment 172615View attachment 172616View attachment 172617
Three marker pegs at the corners of the bridge marked B75H3 (North west corner), B75H2 (South west corner) and B75H5 (South east corner).

I couldn't find any others and apart from that it was cold.

The Bridge Number is SPC5/75 so this accounts for B (bridge) 75. H is presumably Height and the 2/3/5 is just an identifying number.

Question: Are markers in connection with a possible bridge raising in view of electrification? The arch looks comparatively low and the platforms mean you can't lower the track. Replacing the bridge will be interesting as there is an access point to the former Brush Works which could be potentially cut off in view of the GCR Bridge 326 being of restricted clearance, but not unduly so.

Once again more signs of activity! Someone more qualified than me will hopefully shed some light on this. Well interpreted so far Mr SW

 

[Edvid]

On the OLE125 side of things, some of the anti-fall BWAs between Cricklewood and Borehamwood (and occasionally north thereof) now have two adjacent 'half-size' weights. However these are only located at one end of the wire runs they support, with a 'full-size' weight at the other end.

In addition, only a few of the old fast-line STCs on that stretch remain in situ.

 

[59CosG95]

On the OLE125 side of things, some of the anti-fall BWAs between Cricklewood and Borehamwood (and occasionally north thereof) now have two adjacent 'half-size' weights. However these are only located at one end of the wire runs they support, with a 'full-size' weight at the other end.

In addition, only a few of the old fast-line STCs on that stretch remain in situ.

I think the "two half-weights" practice might be based on the local geography around the anchor mast, and would lower the risk of the weights touching the floor (and thereby losing tension).

 

[londonmidland]

I’ve noticed quite a few wooden pegs placed adjacent to the UDS, just south of Leicester station.

Makes me wonder based on the track layout here, that they’ll be utilising portals here?

 

[59CosG95]

I’ve noticed quite a few wooden pegs placed adjacent to the UDS, just south of Leicester station.

Makes me wonder based on the track layout here, that they’ll be utilising portals here?

Within or south of the retained cutting?

 

[Discuss223]

This is drifting off topic, but the answer to that is, for me, batteries.

The answer for me is to keep using what works for the route. The typical customer doesn't care if the train is powered by a diesel engine. They want a reliable and convenient service. The current set up at places such as Nottingham, Derby, Sheffield has worked well for years.

 

[londonmidland]

Within or south of the retained cutting?

So they seemed to be dotted on the eastern side/edge of the UDS. I didn’t check the other side where the retaining brick wall is.

 

[Mr. SW]

Further to my entry #7925, I've found three more surveyor's points and have them plotted on Google Maps. The points are B75H1, one illegibly marked one on the middle of the bridge and a big X on the Down Platform.

Google Map of Loughborough Station

X marks the spot of the blue pin.

 

[Nottingham59]

X marks the spot of the blue pin.

Thanks for the update. That looks like just the sort of structure that needs very careful and accurate surveying before making any potentilally expensive and disruptive decisions on electrification.

 

[londonmidland]

What are the chances that the South Wigston avoider lines, as well as the lines through the station itself, will also be electrified, as part of an overrun from the MML?

This will mean all sides of the triangle will be electrified. I imagine electrification would run just beyond the Saffron Road, road bridge.

 

[zwk500]

What are the chances that the South Wigston avoider lines, as well as the lines through the station itself, will also be electrified, as part of an overrun from the MML?

This will mean all sides of the triangle will be electrified. I imagine electrification would run just beyond the Saffron Road, road bridge.

It is possible that no overrun at all will be provided.

 

[tram21]

It is possible that no overrun at all will be provided.

I can't remember what overruns are normally provided for?

 

[Ploughman]

To protect against incidents such as happened with the first Electric charter train into York.
When it was sent into P4
An over run would make recovery of the situation lot easier.

 

[Merle Haggard]

On the subject of over-run wiring; I understand the concept of over-run wiring for a short distance on a diverging and not electrified route - but what happens when the wiring just stops on straight line? I am thinking of the Down Loop from Kilby Bridge Jct Northwards, where, viewed from a passing train, the wiring appears to cease halfway along. Is the last section electrically dead? Is the contact wire carried to one side before it terminates? I guess the same situation on the Up and down main lines, more difficult to see from a train.
Probably basic (?silly?) questions, but with non-contiguous electrification becoming commonplace it's something that will become more common.

 

[Nottingham59]

what happens when the wiring just stops on straight line?

Well at Blackfriars the wiring just stops; the pantograph pops upwards - and smashes itself to bits on the ceiling of Blackfriars station.

Thameslink Core pantograph strike

Currently at St. Pancras low level and at the time of posting, all Thameslink services have been suspended due to a pantograph on a 700 not being lowered within the core, which has subsequently damaged it. All lines are blocked whilst inspections take place.

www.railforums.co.uk

I really don't know why they don't have a non-conducting slider bar to keep the pantograph down so it doesn't destroy itself, and only allowing it to rise where there is enough space for the lifting mechanism to detect tthe over height condition and lower automatically

 

[Mikey C]

With the 810s being Bimodes and even modern pure EMUs tending to be specified with some sort of emergency battery power, being sent down a non electrified line is less of an issue now. They can just reverse out!

 

[GraphitProjekt]

Although I've heard that it can be a problem if your pantograph is taken off the wires. I might be wrong on this but i though GB pantographs have no set maximum height, as in without a wire it'll "break its back".

 

[Merle Haggard]

Well at Blackfriars the wiring just stops; the pantograph pops upwards - and smashes itself to bits on the ceiling of Blackfriars station.

Thameslink Core pantograph strike

Currently at St. Pancras low level and at the time of posting, all Thameslink services have been suspended due to a pantograph on a 700 not being lowered within the core, which has subsequently damaged it. All lines are blocked whilst inspections take place.

www.railforums.co.uk

I really don't know why they don't have a non-conducting slider bar to keep the pantograph down so it doesn't destroy itself, and only allowing it to rise where there is enough space for the lifting mechanism to detect tthe over height condition and lower automatically

Thanks. Just seems a bit inconsistent that so much attention is given to avoid panto. damage on a diverging route but not on a continuing, but unwired, one. RailwayCodes > Bridges gives Kilby Bridge as 74.14 and there are then 3 overbridges before MP 75, so if there's an overrun with the pan up one might predict a 'Blackfriars' event.

 

[zwk500]

Although I've heard that it can be a problem if your pantograph is taken off the wires. I might be wrong on this but i though GB pantographs have no set maximum height, as in without a wire it'll "break its back".

I think there is an Automatic Dropper (Dropping?) Device that will sound an alarm in the cab and lower the pantograph if it exceeds a certain height.

 

[edwin_m]

I think there is an Automatic Dropper (Dropping?) Device that will sound an alarm in the cab and lower the pantograph if it exceeds a certain height.

I believe so, but the pantograph rises rather slowly so there is a risk of it hitting a bridge before this activates.

 

[jthjth]

This from a leaflet from a local councillor:

(reply to councillor from Network Rail)

We can confirm that our current plan for Blaby Road bridge as part of the electrification work is now to lower the track underneath the bridge rather than reconstructing the bridge. This decision has been made following extensive review of both options to ensure the most efficient use of public money.
The track lower option will avoid any lengthy road closures. The track lower is currently in the planning review process. The design work is planned to start in December 2024. The physical works could be between Summer and Autumn 2025, but these are provisional dates at the moment.
We will also need to amend the bridge parapets on this bridge. This work is needed to minimise the risk to members of the public, railway front line workers and emergency services for when the OLE is installed and live at 25,000 volts. For the parapet work, some traffic management will be required (i.e., single lane working) but until we have a design confirmed we cannot confirm the programme and timescales. It will however be a much shorter period compared to the reconstruction, potentially 4 — 6 weeks.
Kind regards
<redacted by me> Community Relations Executive.

OCR from a scan of the leaflet so apologies for any errors.

 

[tram21]

This from a leaflet from a local councillor:

(reply to councillor from Network Rail)



OCR from a scan of the leaflet so apologies for any errors.

If this is being planned does that mean there's probably some sign-off for a continuation in works? Odd they would be planning to do it in Autumn otherwise.

 

[345 050]

I noticed that the recently installed Series 2 single track cantilever has been ‘put to the side’ and replaced with a more traditional style of STC, whilst passing it this morning? If it’s due to be replaced, then that’s an incredibly short lifespan since it was first installed.



View attachment 166075

 

[59CosG95]

Recent addition: pegs have started creeping up along the Trent East to Trent West curve (ELR: TES) along with the Trent South Jn to Nottingham line (TSN1). I only saw the Up side from the train I was on... but encouraging signs nonetheless!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Really good news indeed. I thought there maybe a chance that Nottingham got done marginally before Derby.