Rail electrification scrapped / 'suspended'?

[lejog]

Money saved to be spent on HS2 I wonder? If further electrification is possible will it be in 3rd rail territory not so disruptive and or visually impacting?

What money saved? The real reason for the cancellations are the spiralling estmates for the costs of electrification and an increased spend on maintenance at the expense of enhancements. Network Rail budgets are not being axed, just not seeing a large increase that would be necessary if projects are not cancelled.

According to NR/DfT presentations discussed elsewhere, the estimates for Trans Pennine electrification have gone from £250m to £650m to over £1bn.

 

[30909]

Don't joke 3rd rail would be ideal for the Windermere Branch Line as it wouldn't involve catenary and given that it has a very low speed limit the limitations of 3rd rail in traveling over 80 mph wouldn't be an issue.

No joke, just to pacify the anti 3rd rail lobby, accepting it's power inefficient speed limiting, unsafe, ancient "technology". Despite that it's pretty robust, with little visual impact, tried and tested and now possibly the only alternative for the Uckfield, North Downs and Basingstoke, Salisbury, Redbridge triangle

 

[HSTEd]

And I remember many people on this forum attacking me for my belief that electrification would be killed by bi-modes.

And now look.

There will be no more significant electrification for the forseable future, 25kV is dead and third rail is verboten.

 

[snowball]

And I remember many people on this forum attacking me for m that electriy belief that electrification would be killed by bi-modes.

And now look.

Bi-modes are being used as the excuse.

 

[HSTEd]

Bi-modes are being used as the excuse.

I'm afraid from a purely economic perspective, using the enormous discount rates the Treasury decrees for capital projects, he is correct.

Bi-modes drastically reduce, if not remove all toogether, the significance of the network effect and thus only tracks that have a certain traffic density will be electrified.

Almost all of those tracks are already electrified, and with the Electric Spine dead the MML hasn't got a hope of making the numbers add up, especially when everything north of Chesterfield will be nicked by HS2.

 

[snowball]

In different financial circumstances, or with different political will, bi-modes could be used to facilitate electrification, by allowing the wires to be extended along a route, or onto branch routes, at whatever pace was practicable, without having to be coordinated with the introduction of new trains.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

In different financial circumstances, or with different political will, bi-modes could be used to facilitate electrification, by allowing the wires to be extended along a route, or onto branch routes, at whatever pace was practicable, without having to be coordinated with the introduction of new trains.

Not in doubt - at least from me - I totally agree with everything you have said in this quote.

 

[notlob.divad]

I have to say this is the most short sighted, politically dubious decision among many.

What Network Rail and the country as a whole needs is a continuous rolling program of electrification. Rather than the here today gone tomorrow spending splurges that see a raft of projects announced and then one by one cancelled. Prioritise the route miles that need to be done, based on the frequency of services that could use the wires and the ability to tie into existing electrified routes. Then give Network Rail a % of GDP as an electrification budget and a target of route miles to be complete per year split across 2 or 3 teams, and leave them to it.

It surely cannot be long before the Transpennine-North Electrification is also permanently parked.

I have nothing against the use of bi-modes they have their place, but for me we should still be utilizing them in Electric mode for the maximum journey length possible, and the use of diesel minimised. This is a massive retrograde step, particularly the MML.

 

[fegguk]

With the world now looking to rapidly developing electric cars and buses. The UK puts its faith in diesel. It's a wonder we ever stopped building steam engines or abandoned the horse as our principle form of motive power.

 

[LeylandLen]

According to NR/DfT presentations discussed elsewhere, the estimates for Trans Pennine electrification have gone from £250m to £650m to over £1bn.

Like most people , I am always at a loss when such increase in proposed cost is published.Surely cant be the cost of labour , or wages?. From £250m to over £1bn is 4 times the first estimate. What has increased four times? Is it the cost of the new trains? I cant see it being the cost of land as no more would be required unless of course new stations were to be included or new depots ? Maybe its the cost of the actual wiring ; is there an increase in demand for steel due to countries like China using more and more thus having an effect on supply and demand ?

 

[YorkshireBear]

I'm afraid from a purely economic perspective, using the enormous discount rates the Treasury decrees for capital projects, he is correct.

Bi-modes drastically reduce, if not remove all toogether, the significance of the network effect and thus only tracks that have a certain traffic density will be electrified.

Almost all of those tracks are already electrified, and with the Electric Spine dead the MML hasn't got a hope of making the numbers add up, especially when everything north of Chesterfield will be nicked by HS2.

I still stand by that bi-modes have not caused this. Politicians have, aided by poor planning and execution by NR and poor overarching control from the ORR.

As said above, they are a convenient excuse.

 

[WatcherZero]

One thing to worry about is we are going to have a good 3-4 year gap after the current crop of electrification projects are finished and before any work is needed on HS2 (and around another 5 years before NPR/Hs2 phase 2) so back to the old issue of skills and equipment disappearing from lack of use.

 

[jimm]

And I remember many people on this forum attacking me for my belief that electrification would be killed by bi-modes.

And now look.

There will be no more significant electrification for the forseable future, 25kV is dead and third rail is verboten.

So it's all a cunning conspiracy by the Japanese to enslave us into buying their sinister bi-mode trains for years to come, is it?

Clearly it has nothing to do with political hubris on the part of ministers from Lord Adonis onwards, who assumed you could instantly start a major programme of electrification from near enough a standing start after years of doing nothing and the DfT being openly hostile to any suggestion of electrification - then add on more and more schemes at the drop of a hat without actually asking whether Network Rail could handle it - not that it was going to say 'no' when its credit card still came without any spending limits.

And nothing to do with Network Rail's clear and obvious failings when it comes to basic project scoping and management and cost control.

Nor anything to do with recent economic difficulties, the resulting public spending cuts and the continued uncertain economic outlook - or maybe your amazing crystal ball is telling you that all will be fine and dandy amid the turmoil Brexit will inevitably create.

And clearly there was no need whatever to devise a way of continuing to serve destinations in areas that IEP will operate that were not getting wires or planned to get them in the future - please can we manage without someone piping up about non-existent 100mph-capable diesel locos that like a duty cycle of full-power starts, a couple of minutes cruising at top speed, then another stop and start, repeated every seven or eight minutes, like Oxford-Worcester runs.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Bi modes haven't caused it any more than the ability to swap locomotives caused it years ago.

 

[WatcherZero]

No joke, just to pacify the anti 3rd rail lobby, accepting it's power inefficient speed limiting, unsafe, ancient "technology". Despite that it's pretty robust, with little visual impact, tried and tested and now possibly the only alternative for the Uckfield, North Downs and Basingstoke, Salisbury, Redbridge triangle

3rd possesses safety requirement of high fences (higher than those required for overhead) to be built along its length for safety.

 

[notlob.divad]

Like most people , I am always at a loss when such increase in proposed cost is published.Surely cant be the cost of labour , or wages?. From £250m to over £1bn is 4 times the first estimate. What has increased four times? Is it the cost of the new trains? I cant see it being the cost of land as no more would be required unless of course new stations were to be included or new depots ? Maybe its the cost of the actual wiring ; is there an increase in demand for steel due to countries like China using more and more thus having an effect on supply and demand ?

Cost of copper is generally on the rise, but steel plummeted in price because China was producing far too much. From my experience, the biggest increases in cost always comes from a civil works, and b re-designing things when the scope changes. I don't see how the railways are any different.

Digging holes in the ground and filling them in again with concrete is insanely expensive. Combined with the fact that TPE went from a simple, electrification of the route for the existing service pattern, to increased line speeds and frequency, which undoubtedly required a significant amount of re-work at the design stage. Without seeing the accounting, that would be my guess as to where the cost increases come from.

 

[snowball]

Like most people , I am always at a loss when such increase in proposed cost is published.Surely cant be the cost of labour , or wages?. From £250m to over £1bn is 4 times the first estimate. What has increased four times? Is it the cost of the new trains? I cant see it being the cost of land as no more would be required unless of course new stations were to be included or new depots ? Maybe its the cost of the actual wiring ; is there an increase in demand for steel due to countries like China using more and more thus having an effect on supply and demand ?

Mostly it's numerous different types of extra, unforseen work. This is fairly clear from several previous discussions.

 

[broadgage]

Like most people , I am always at a loss when such increase in proposed cost is published.Surely cant be the cost of labour , or wages?. From £250m to over £1bn is 4 times the first estimate. What has increased four times? Is it the cost of the new trains? I cant see it being the cost of land as no more would be required unless of course new stations were to be included or new depots ? Maybe its the cost of the actual wiring ; is there an increase in demand for steel due to countries like China using more and more thus having an effect on supply and demand ?

Steel and concrete prices have been broadly static.
Copper has increased in price, and wages gone up a bit, but not by anything like 4 times.
Most of the increase is probably continual alterations and modifications.

And remember that this more than quadrupling of the cost was without actually building anything ! Had it been built, I would estimate the cost at about 2.5 billion, this figure being obtained by multiplying the original estimate by 10.

 

[CdBrux]

I have to say this is the most short sighted, politically dubious decision among many.

What Network Rail and the country as a whole needs is a continuous rolling program of electrification. Rather than the here today gone tomorrow spending splurges that see a raft of projects announced and then one by one cancelled. Prioritise the route miles that need to be done, based on the frequency of services that could use the wires and the ability to tie into existing electrified routes. Then give Network Rail a % of GDP as an electrification budget and a target of route miles to be complete per year split across 2 or 3 teams, and leave them to it.

It surely cannot be long before the Transpennine-North Electrification is also permanently parked.

I have nothing against the use of bi-modes they have their place, but for me we should still be utilizing them in Electric mode for the maximum journey length possible, and the use of diesel minimised. This is a massive retrograde step, particularly the MML.

I am not sure I agree as I think you focus on one way of achieving an improvement and not what the improvement is in itself.

Take TPE. The improvement specified is faster times and more capacity. The solution of electrification at escalating costs would have delivered just 2 minutes improvements. Apparently, according to NR now, the interventions planned / being proposed in the coming years will deliver much more than this, but with no electrification.

So electrification is one potential solution alongside things like additional tracks, grade separation, signalling improvements etc... all in the mix to deliver the desired outcome.

Too many people here seem to think electrification must be done come what may.

I would hope though that limited electrification projects do continue where it does make sense on the criteria above to improve UK ability to do electrification and using bi-modes to facilitate as others have said. However the pace must slow to see these as more pilot and learning projects to avoid the mess of the last years and regain confidence that they can be done to budget and that budget is a reasonable cost. Until then no-one can approve electrification where on several key projects this has swallowed far more money than planned to the detriment of other projects.

 

[edwin_m]

To my mind this announcement is bad for the country but also a bad move politically. I suppose I ought to rejoice at the latter considering how I believe the Tory Brexiters like Grayling should be cast into the outer darkness. But I don't.

The right thing to do would be to announce that the programme is being slowed down due to over-hasty estimation and lack of qualified resources leading to poor costing and overspend. Bi-modes could be spun as allowing (some of) the benefits of MML electrification to be realised before it is finished, so it can be done as funds allow and implicitly the railway has to get its house in order costwise before the next step northwards is agreed. The consequences would be very similar in the short term, but still holding out the prospect of progress in the future.

As it stands it's a kick in the teeth for the East Midlands, one of the few areas the Tories gained seats last month, and more ammunition for those who would argue that the North and Wales are being neglected while the affluent Thames Valley which caused most of the problems in the first place still gets the benefit.

 

[LeylandLen]

Thanks notlob.divad broadgage and snowball for the relevant information, very interesting

 

[HSTEd]

So it's all a cunning conspiracy by the Japanese to enslave us into buying their sinister bi-mode trains for years to come, is it?

No, it is merely rule by accountants that know the price of everything and the value of nothing. The same ones responsible for our energy 'policy' and industrial 'strategy'.
The Japanese did not invent bi-mode trains, infact we have had electrodiesels in the UK for 50 years.

Nor anything to do with recent economic difficulties, the resulting public spending cuts and the continued uncertain economic outlook - or maybe your amazing crystal ball is telling you that all will be fine and dandy amid the turmoil Brexit will inevitably create.

The country is not poor.
The country is not going to be poor.
The country can easily afford a billion or two that buys improvements in the balance of payments (replacing expensive liquid fuels with cheap power station fuel, be it uranium, gas, coal or petcoke)

And clearly there was no need whatever to devise a way of continuing to serve destinations in areas that IEP will operate that were not getting wires or planned to get them in the future

The same way every other BR era electrification proposal from the 70s onwards did it?
Run diesel trains?

The original bi-mode fleet would have been - please can we manage without someone piping up about non-existent 100mph-capable diesel locos

Why are we talking about locos?

that like a duty cycle of full-power starts, a couple of minutes cruising at top speed, then another stop and start, repeated every seven or eight minutes, like Oxford-Worcester runs.

..... So how do diesel powered trains run this route now?

EDIT:

One good thing to come out of this is now that 25kV is well and truly out of the window, ORR might actually have to justify its ban on third rail schemes.

 

[snowball]

So electrification is one potential solution alongside things like additional tracks, grade separation, signalling improvements etc... all in the mix to deliver the desired outcome.

Too many people here seem to think electrification must be done come what may.

I agree but see below.

I would hope though that limited electrification projects do continue where it does make sense on the criteria above to improve UK ability to do electrification and using bi-modes to facilitate as others have said. However the pace must slow to see these as more pilot and learning projects to avoid the mess of the last years and regain confidence that they can be done to budget and that budget is a reasonable cost. Until then no-one can approve electrification where on several key projects this has swallowed far more money than planned to the detriment of other projects.

I think the main lesson has already been learned: route improvements and, where necessary, resignalling should precede electrification.

The danger with slowing down too much is that experienced teams will be broken up. Sadly I think it highly likely that this will now happen due to the government's over-reaction.

 

[DarloRich]

The sad news in all this is the fact that teams which have reached a peak level of performance and experience will be broken up and we will very quickly return to square one. again.

Cost of copper is generally on the rise, but steel plummeted in price because China was producing far too much. From my experience, the biggest increases in cost always comes from a civil works, and b re-designing things when the scope changes. I don't see how the railways are any different.

Digging holes in the ground and filling them in again with concrete is insanely expensive. Combined with the fact that TPE went from a simple, electrification of the route for the existing service pattern, to increased line speeds and frequency, which undoubtedly required a significant amount of re-work at the design stage. Without seeing the accounting, that would be my guess as to where the cost increases come from.

this! and especially b

 

[Chester1]

The sad news in all this is the fact that teams which have reached a peak level of performance and experience will be broken up and we will very quickly return to square one. again.

Except TP electrification has not been cancelled , Wigan to Lostock is only paused and the Valleys lines electrification continues to depend on WG funding. These three projects must have been left out of the announcement delibrately. There is enough work until end of 2019 finishing electrification to Cardiff, Corby and Wigan. After that huge resources will be needed to meet the 2022 TP electrification target. I am very surprised because it appeared that TP electrification would be axed instead of Kettering-Clay Cross. If the Welsh government is prepared to partlt fund electrification of some of the Valleys Lines then there would be enough work to occupy the current electrification workforce for the rest of CP6.

 

[WatcherZero]

I don't blame NR as much as others, they basically said this will cost X to do and then ORR come along and say okay but we are only going to give you 13% less than you say you require in your first year and 19.4% less in last year (net 17%) because we want you to improve your efficiency (in the worst tradition of accountants they think that you become more efficient simply by spending less) and NR has actually ended up being 4.8% less efficient in this control period so far with estimated close out at 1.5% less than they were in the last, though its most of the budget overrun has been in renewals rather than enhancement spending.

 

[Senex]

I think the main lesson has already been learned: route improvements and, where necessary, resignalling should precede electrification.

Shouldn't that always have been self-evident?

 

[Dixie]

I think it's down to the incompetence of Network Rail and the Government, and in particular, the original decision to design the OLE for 140 mph, rather than a more realistic 125 mph and the cost of the very expensive Hitachi trains (at twice the cost of Pendolinos), plus to some degree, the decision not to apply for a derogation regarding the "flashover gap" issue.

 

[DJH1971]

Wonder if Lostock Jct to Wigan is still Live or wether that is dead as well now?

Same with the Chase line from Rugeley and Redditch to Bromsgrove.

 

[MatthewRead]

Wish I'd voted in the Green Party or Liberal Democrats they would have continued these projects and introduced electrification to the far South West.