Ore - Ashford Electrification

[RobShipway]

I was having a discussion with a friend the other day as to how best to electrify the route between Ore and Ashford so that Electric trains can run from Brighton to Ashford.

My friend said that they would probably double track some sections and put in 3rd rail DC electrification continued on from Ore.

However, I disagree that it would be better to continue if possible the overhead electrification as part of HS1 along the route to Ore. Would this be possible?

 

[59CosG95]

I was having a discussion with a friend the other day as to how best to electrify the route between Ore and Ashford so that Electric trains can run from Brighton to Ashford.

My friend said that they would probably double track some sections and put in 3rd rail DC electrification continued on from Ore.

However, I disagree that it would be better to continue if possible the overhead electrification as part of HS1 along the route to Ore. Would this be possible?

AFAIK, the only major obstacles on the route for OLE would be Ore Tunnel and the Ashford remodelling-but the latter is a problem in itself.
3rd rail may be expired, it's true, but the fact of the matter is that significant works will have to be carried out to much of the stock if OLE is to be used. This is partially due to the lack of pantograph-equipped trains operating in or around Hastings and Ashford (with the exception of HS1 395s and Eurostar 373s/374s).

 

[Antman]

I got into conversation with a guard on that line a while back and he said if and when it is electrified it would be overhead wires and not third rail.

 

[steamybrian]

AFAIK, the only major obstacles on the route for OLE would be Ore Tunnel and the Ashford remodelling-but the latter is a problem in itself.
3rd rail may be expired, it's true, but the fact of the matter is that significant works will have to be carried out to much of the stock if OLE is to be used. This is partially due to the lack of pantograph-equipped trains operating in or around Hastings and Ashford (with the exception of HS1 395s and Eurostar 373s/374s).

The logical solution is to extend the 3rd rail so that the line can be used by rolling stock used on standard services. Reinstating double track and eliminating speed restrictions would enable a more faster and frequent service to run.
I agree that Ore Tunnel with tight clearances is the biggest problem. A possible solution would be for it to remain single track just through the tunnel which has been similarly done on the Tonbridge to Hastings line.

 

[AM9]

The logical solution is to extend the 3rd rail so that the line can be used by rolling stock used on standard services. Reinstating double track and eliminating speed restrictions would enable a more faster and frequent service to run.
I agree that Ore Tunnel with tight clearances is the biggest problem. A possible solution would be for it to remain single track just through the tunnel which has been similarly done on the Tonbridge to Hastings line.

How about 25kV with battery stock to get through the tunnel? Once the trials are complete there may be a battery upgrade package that could be fitted to compatible Electrostars.

 

[Bald Rick]

I got into conversation with a guard on that line a while back and he said if and when it is electrified it would be overhead wires and not third rail.

OLE is the plan for the javelin extensions. But this will be VERY expensive.

The best case for electric will be battery trains, assuming the 379 trial comes off.

 

[HSTEd]

Javelin extensions will require proper electrification though, not half hearted junk like the battery boosters propose.
Could always do most of it at 25kV but extend third rail through the Ore tunnel, would avoid clearence works but not add a large amount of third rail mileage.

 

[tsr]

Javelin extensions will require proper electrification though, not half hearted junk like the battery boosters propose.
Could always do most of it at 25kV but extend third rail through the Ore tunnel, would avoid clearence works but not add a large amount of third rail mileage.

The latter point in your post is exactly what I was thinking, if OHLE is the only option for the rest.

As the rest of the "classic" lines in the area are third-rail DC if electrified, however, I'd argue this is a classic example of a decent location for third-rail infill to be argued for, unless there is a sudden major and concerted drive to at least electrify with OHLE to Bexhill/Eastbourne/Brighton.

At least that would mean there would be perhaps more opportunities for sensible turnaround if one or another power supply (or a train's pickup gear for one or the other) failed.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Javelin extensions will require proper electrification though, not half hearted junk like the battery boosters propose.
Could always do most of it at 25kV but extend third rail through the Ore tunnel, would avoid clearence works but not add a large amount of third rail mileage.

If OHL electrifcation was used could it be end fed from Ashford avoiding the need for feeder stations on route? If so I imagine it could be cheaper than 3rd rail which require more feeder stations on route.

 

[AM9]

Javelin extensions will require proper electrification though, not half hearted junk like the battery boosters propose.
Could always do most of it at 25kV but extend third rail through the Ore tunnel, would avoid clearence works but not add a large amount of third rail mileage.

That was what I was implying. It would of course need an EMU with Battery, ac & DC to be perfected.

 

[yorksrob]

I'm putting my 50p on 3rd rail. I know there are arguments for overhead, but I think it would be easier to integrate the Coastway services with it, plus third rail is already the standard mode for Javelins (at least on the classic lines).

As for the battery train - I hope it works as it would be revolutionary for many routes. It may even be a way to overcome current supply issues on the third rail core) I.e if there are too many trains for the juice rail, intersperse the 3rd rail services with some battery ones. However, I too think that Javelins will need to be fed.

 

[21C101]

The down side of third rail is that it would need several substations. The down side of Overhead is that it would be very expensive to immunise all the signalling in the Hastings area. To my mind the logical thing to do would be to electrify Ashford to Three Oaks with 25kV a.c. and change over to 3rd Rail there with 3rd Rail extended from Ore to Three Oaks through Ore Tunnel.

That solves the following problems:

• Immunisation of Hastings area signalling. Change over is at Three Oaks in the middle of Tokenless Block section.
  
• Lack of Clearance in Ore tunnel.
  
• No need for any third rail substations
  
• By the 25kV ending at Three Oaks the 25kV is only 22.75 miles long (rather than 26.6 to Hastings) which means it may well be possible to feed it from Ashford with no feeder station needed at Hastings or intermediately. (I believe the 16 mile branch Southminster Branch is similarly fed from one end).

Would still need to immunise Rye. Ashford should already be immunised, but you would still need a crossover across all four "original domestic" tracks at the East End of Ashford Station.

 

[TheKnightWho]

If OHL electrifcation was used could it be end fed from Ashford avoiding the need for feeder stations on route? If so I imagine it could be cheaper than 3rd rail which require more feeder stations on route.

The advantage with OHLE is that it allows the Javelins to accelerate at full power rather than reduced as they're forced to with 3rd rail.

Even if the top speed on the line would never require OHLE above 3rd rail in itself, these accelration improvements do make a difference.

 

[edwin_m]

Do the Javelins have an operating mode for UK OLE like the NoL Eurostars do/did, and if they don't is it known whether the OLE mode is compatible with NR as well as HS1?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

AFAIK, the only major obstacles on the route for OLE would be Ore Tunnel and the Ashford remodelling-but the latter is a problem in itself.
3rd rail may be expired, it's true, but the fact of the matter is that significant works will have to be carried out to much of the stock if OLE is to be used. This is partially due to the lack of pantograph-equipped trains operating in or around Hastings and Ashford (with the exception of HS1 395s and Eurostar 373s/374s).

If the Electrostars have all the internals in place for AC then it shouldn't be too hard to make them dual voltage. Southern would just need to shift stock around a bit so that 455s didn't get sent to the AC section

 

[Domh245]

455s don't usually get further south than caterham. If they made it as far as gatwick, there would be questions I think! Also, whilst it would be relatively easy to bolt a pantograph onto a 377 and then put some new panels in the cab, it would cost a fair bit to do - pantographs ain't cheap, especially when you are fitting them to a large fleet!

 

[DJ_K666]

Personally, I don't agree with the idea of 3rd rail being expired. It doesn't seem logical to have odd bits of OLE, even if they do plan to convert the whole of the Southern Region. But then I don't agree with the scrapping of platform ramps either.

 

[yorksrob]

But then I don't agree with the scrapping of platform ramps either.

Yes, stations without platform ramps seem wrong to me too.

 

[paul1609]

The logical solution is to extend the 3rd rail so that the line can be used by rolling stock used on standard services. Reinstating double track and eliminating speed restrictions would enable a more faster and frequent service to run.
I agree that Ore Tunnel with tight clearances is the biggest problem. A possible solution would be for it to remain single track just through the tunnel which has been similarly done on the Tonbridge to Hastings line.

The engineer that was in charge of the refurbishment of Ore Tunnel a couple of years back gave a talk to the Marshlink Rail Users Group at the George hotel in Rye at the end of the project (unfortunately I can't remember his name).
He reckoned that the project had left enough room for a single track ac electrified line or double tracked dc line with the existing Electrostars. However if you double tracked the line more clearance work would be needed at the Ore end of the tunnel to accommodate 23 metre vehicles like the existing 171s.

 

[MarkyT]

3rd rail extends through to Ore today, ending in the reversing siding at the Ashford end of the station. 395s are dual system already and can switch over on the move or whilst stopped, so OHLE from Ashford needs only to extend to Ore itself with a relatively short dual electrified area. Signalling at Hastings and Rye is due for renewal sometimes soon - it will shortly be the only mechanical island remaining in Kent and Sussex, so any new equipment can be specified dual immune to cater for any future electrification scenario, including a wider conversion roll out of OHLE over current 3rd rail territory. The bigger problem for through operation of 395s is the lack of a direct connection to the Hastings line from HS1 through the junctions around Ashford station. Although not impossible to rectify, this is likely to be very expensive as it may require a complete redesign and renewal of the west end junctions.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

The engineer that was in charge of the refurbishment of Ore Tunnel a couple of years back gave a talk to the Marshlink Rail Users Group at the George hotel in Rye at the end of the project (unfortunately I can't remember his name).
He reckoned that the project had left enough room for a single track ac electrified line or double tracked dc line with the existing Electrostars. However if you double tracked the line more clearance work would be needed at the Ore end of the tunnel to accommodate 23 metre vehicles like the existing 171s.

What about if the "electrified rail" was used for AC electrification in the Ore tunnel, could there still be double track?

 

[RobShipway]

Thanks for the posts in the thread folks. It is good to see that it is not only my friend and I that have different views on how things should be done to electrify Ore to Ashford either with 3rd rail dc or AC OHLE.

I like MarkyT favour that the changeover point should be at Ore where the 3rd rail goes to at the moment and then it changes over to OHLE.

However, I would not have the class 395 go along the route. I would extend any routes done by any South Eastern class 375 service that comes into Ashford from say Blackfriars and then have it goes via hastings back up to London Bridge.

The above service would be interchanged with a southern class 377 service from Brighton via Ashford to London Victoria via Brixton, which I believe is possible?

 

[HSTEd]

The engineer that was in charge of the refurbishment of Ore Tunnel a couple of years back gave a talk to the Marshlink Rail Users Group at the George hotel in Rye at the end of the project (unfortunately I can't remember his name).
He reckoned that the project had left enough room for a single track ac electrified line or double tracked dc line with the existing Electrostars. However if you double tracked the line more clearance work would be needed at the Ore end of the tunnel to accommodate 23 metre vehicles like the existing 171s.

Well would there be any 23m vehicle units around to operate it if it went electric? The only electric units I know that would reasonably work it are 20m.
I think it would be better to go to DC even if the tunnel remains (for the moment) single track as it will make doubling works easier and cheaper in the future.

Also if there is a problem with the substation loading the tunnel area can be made a 'series winding only zone' (or whatever they call the notch restriction areas now?) to keep current in the rail down.
Its only a mile or so from the end of the third rail to the north end of Ore tunnel.

 

[TheJRB]

I think the whole Javelin concept is rather pie in the sky. Electrification needs to be considered on the basis of the existing Ashford to Brighton service, not a through High Speed service which would rely on significant rebuilding at the Ashford end.

The idea of running dual voltage stock via the Marshlink is surely not out of the question but neither is electrifying with third rail. To get a regular two trains per hour service, some redoubling will be necessary though and I'd argue this is perhaps even more important than electrification.

I think without the Javelin through service, one train per hour Ashford to Brighton calling only at Rye (or maybe Ham Street too) before Hastings and one Ashford to Hastings all stations service each hour (maybe Doleham excepted) would be a good upgrade to the line's existing service. A better service like this could also bring credibility to the long proposed and to date unbuilt South Ashford station which could bring in a fair amount of passengers I'm sure.

 

[GatwickDepress]

I'd say the biggest issue with running services via the Marshlink to London Victoria or any "classic" terminal would be time. While it'd provide direct journey opportunities to places in Kent, there would be no reason for the average passenger on the Coastway to switch from via Haywards Heath or via Tonbridge.

Plus the current set-up works well during disruption. An Ore terminator can become a Victoria or Brighton service at the whim of control, and Southeastern are very good at juggling their stock and crew at Hastings.

Third rail until post Ore tunnel with a dual voltage section thereafter sounds like it'd be the most economical if NR want to push OHLE.

455s don't usually get further south than caterham. If they made it as far as gatwick, there would be questions I think! Also, whilst it would be relatively easy to bolt a pantograph onto a 377 and then put some new panels in the cab, it would cost a fair bit to do - pantographs ain't cheap, especially when you are fitting them to a large fleet!

455s have run Gatwick Express services (as a substitution, I hasten to add!) before, and I swear a 455/456 combo has made it to Brighton. Be a hell of a racket with the windows open.

 

[tsr]

455s have run Gatwick Express services (as a substitution, I hasten to add!) before, and I swear a 455/456 combo has made it to Brighton. Be a hell of a racket with the windows open.

455s have been to Reigate at least once (they already run to Redhill as ECS and from Redhill in passenger service once per weekday) and of course Horsham-Three Bridges-Redhill a few times due to Horsham-Dorking route blockages - and I believe you are correct in that they have also been to Brighton. I can't comment on 456s on that route in passenger service, I'm afraid, though they did run to Haywards Heath and IIRC via Preston Park to Eastleigh as ECS when transferring from Southern to SWT.

 

[JamesRowden]

The idea of running dual voltage stock via the Marshlink is surely not out of the question but neither is electrifying with third rail. To get a regular two trains per hour service, some redoubling will be necessary though and I'd argue this is perhaps even more important than electrification.

I think that no redoubling is required for a half hourly service. If the line is upgraded to have a speed limit of at least 70mph (as the 2014 Route Specification document expects it to be by 2024) a half hourly service should be able to operate in both directions. A train travels 10+6/80 miles between Ore and Rye. A train travelling such a distance at a constant speed of 67.5mph would take less than 9 minutes between the stations. I think that adding 2 minutes to this time will account for the train potentially accelerating and deccelerating at either end of the singe tracked section. This makes 11 minutes. Multiplying this by 4 means that trains would be using this single track section for no more than 44 minutes of each hour. Four minutes can then be added to this time to account for the fact that trains travelling in opposte directions must pass at Rye twice per hour (and up to 2 minutes is timetabled a time stationary at Rye when trains pass off-peak). Therefore there is 12 spare minutes each hour available to provide timetable robustness between trains travelling in opposite directions at Ore and to allow some services to call at some of the stations on the single tracked section. I read in a timetabling guide that it is common practice to provide four minutes between conflicting movements. If we account for this happening twice per hour at Ore it leaves four (12-2X4) minutes available for services to call at the other stations. Three Oaks and Winchelsea would therefore be able to maintain their present 1tp2h service if stopping at each station extended a service's journey by no more than 2 minutes. Bald Rick's battery train suggestion could be implemented in this way to provide 2tph between Brighton and Ashford (if the battery train performs as well as the Alternative Solutions RUS expected).

 

[mr_jrt]

I'd say the biggest issue with running services via the Marshlink to London Victoria or any "classic" terminal would be time. While it'd provide direct journey opportunities to places in Kent, there would be no reason for the average passenger on the Coastway to switch from via Haywards Heath or via Tonbridge.

Would however be quite useful were they to shut the Tonbridge line whilst they rebored the tunnels to make room for double track, and probably OHLE as well. I don't think a bus servicing the "gap" around whichever tunnel is being worked on would work very well.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

As for the battery train - I hope it works as it would be revolutionary for many routes. It may even be a way to overcome current supply issues on the third rail core) I.e if there are too many trains for the juice rail, intersperse the 3rd rail services with some battery ones. However, I too think that Javelins will need to be fed.

Would battery trains make any difference to the power supply constraints? A battery train will still presumably need to draw the same amount of power in total as a normal EMU making the same journey on fully electrified lines would, it's just that it'll be intensively drawing all the power for its entire operating route during the window when it's on an electrified line, with some of that power being stored in the battery rather than used immediately.

 

[Bald Rick]

Would battery trains make any difference to the power supply constraints?

Not on busy main lines. It could do on branch lines with infrequent services that need an upgrade. However providing more juice would probably be cheaper.