Rail electrification scrapped / 'suspended'?

[swrailuser]

With the tripling costs of the complete cock up of the electrification on the GWML suddenly the bi-mode are the way forward, unfortunately these trains will be a much poorer replacement for the HST, so far none of the train companies have considered a replacement power plant such as the Methane fuel cell power pack that is so much cleaner and potentially 75% efficient in changing the energy from the fuel into power unlike a diesel engine that gets 35% conversion of the energy. The Bi modes will have a max speed of 95 mph which is a return to pre HST days, but the PTB will spin that these trains are the future backed by Big Oil.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

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.

As a Conservative party lifelong supporter I am beginning to agree.

 

[najaB]

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.

No matter how many times you say, it isn't true. There is no ban on third rail electrification.

 

[coppercapped]

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.

Dream on.

 

[Starmill]

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

These two projects are at a far more advanced stage than Wigan to Bolton.

The latter especially is - I think it must be around 1/3 constructed. Abandoning it now would be crazy.

 

[158756]

Whilst I can't say I'm happy with the decision, what did anyone realistically expect them to do? The costs are out of control. At some point any responsible government would have to say no, there is no business case and there are far better things that can be done with the money.

Electrification is not in itself an improvement in the rail service. Faster journey times? Upgrade the line or the signalling. More capacity? Long diesel trains exist, and there are off the shelf designs available. Maximum use of existing wires? Bi-modes. Maybe if you've already done all that electrification might be the next improvement to make. If TPE electrification is going to cost £1bn, probably a lot more if it actually happens, what could you do to improve rail services across the North with that sort of money?

 

[jayah]

If diesel obviates the need for "disruptive electrification works" and "putting up intrusive wires and masts", why bother with bi-mode trains at all? :roll:

If you already have wires for 60 or so miles to Bedford you may as well use them.

I see Proterra's E2 bus can go 350 miles on a single battery charge. Spending £bn on rail electrification really is looking like a 1960s technology.

 

[jayah]

With the tripling costs of the complete cock up of the electrification on the GWML suddenly the bi-mode are the way forward, unfortunately these trains will be a much poorer replacement for the HST, so far none of the train companies have considered a replacement power plant such as the Methane fuel cell power pack that is so much cleaner and potentially 75% efficient in changing the energy from the fuel into power unlike a diesel engine that gets 35% conversion of the energy. The Bi modes will have a max speed of 95 mph which is a return to pre HST days, but the PTB will spin that these trains are the future backed by Big Oil.

The Bi Modes won't be limited to 95mph, that was a derating in the original design done via software. They are faster than a HST on diesel, as you would expect being 40 years younger.

 

[DimTim]

I think this breaks the back of the 'electric spine'!

 

[eastdyke]

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.

I am not at all sure that a derogation is possible when the requirements emanate from the EU?
Perhaps the issue will be re-visited in a couple of years or so?
Would possibly make as 'good' a news story then as the current supposedly 'bad' one now and just in time for the next election too.

 

[HowardGWR]

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.

What, all on your own one vote? I don't know whether you have noticed but we have a first past the post constituency electoral system. Even if we had PR, your views are only supported by about 2 - 4 % (greens), or 8% (LDs), not 51% .

 

[The Conductor]

A number of thoughts.
1. The claim by Grayling that bi-modes are as fast as electrics is an outright lie. He was disastrous as a prisons minister and is proving to be so on transport.
2. The closeness of this announcement to the HS2 contracts being let rubs salt in the wound; the concerns that HS2 would suck money from the rest of the system is proving true straight away.
3. There needs to be a public enquiry into NR's inability to control its costs. Other EU states can electrify for a reasonable price without problems -- why not us? The tram-train fiasco, with its 5x escalation in costs, and mounting delays, is another case in point.The WCML from Euston to Manchetsr and Liverpool cost £160m in 1961-67- equal, says the Bank of Engalnd, to £3.8bn now for about 280 route miles in an era when layouts were much more complex. But that was the 'ineffeicient' nationalised railway.
4. Roger Ford in Modern Railways has been predictiing this for some months, not least because of the insane new rules on electrification clearances- to avoid all those many people who get killed by flashovers from passing trains (or something...) which he considers have, on theri own, made electrification unavoidable - but NR has just rolled over and accepted these daft rules.

 

[Dave1987]

Gotta love all those who ridiculed anyone for suggesting bi-modes would cause electrification to be cancelled backtracking wildly. If pure off the shelf electric trains had been ordered they would have had to complete the damn thing. Bi-modes have directly facilitated them being able to cancel electrification with little consequence. Therefore bi-modes are directly part of the problem that electrification is in tatters. Well bi-mode fans I hope you are happy.....

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Gotta love all those who ridiculed anyone for suggesting bi-modes would cause electrification to be cancelled backtracking wildly. If pure off the shelf electric trains had been ordered they would have had to complete the damn thing. Bi-modes have directly facilitated them being able to cancel electrification with little consequence.

I agree

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Would it be now worth pressing for the following bits to be done as 3rd rail?

* Waterloo-Exeter, at least as far as Salisbury
* Marshlink Line
* North Downs Line
* Uckfield Line

or will absolutely all new electrification projects (either 3rd rail or OLE) now be on indefinite hold?

 

[broadgage]

I do not consider that party politics are relevant in this case.
As has already been stated, costs were totally out of control, with one scheme quadrupling in price without even doing any work.

A responsible government of any colour had no realistic alternative to cancellation, or last a LONG postponement.

Politics, but not strictly PARTY politics did have a part to play of course. Whichever party is in power naturally hope to stay in power, and electrification was seen as a vote loser, hugely expensive, hated by NIMBYs, leads to a much worse service for some years whilst the work is underway (i.e. those years between now and the next election), and it carries a long term reputational risk that it might go even worse, like the failed east coast scheme that still fails in windy weather.

Had the other party been in power, I suspect that this would still have been cancelled for the same reasons as already stated.

 

[Senex]

If you already have wires for 60 or so miles to Bedford you may as well use them.

Even if that means running to a 100 maximum instead of a 125 maximum and so needing longer than today's timings?

 

[Train man]

Does this affect Scotland???.

 

[Bornin1980s]

Roger Ford in Modern Railways has been predictiing this for some months, not least because of the insane new rules on electrification clearances- to avoid all those many people who get killed by flashovers from passing trains (or something...) which he considers have, on theri own, made electrification unavoidable - but NR has just rolled over and accepted these daft rules.

Don't you mean unviable? It's certainly avoidable!

 

[snowball]

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

Not sure,,,though there are some bases already in situ

Unless you've seen something nobody else has, they're for the overrun from the junction with the Chorley line at Lostock, and a requirement of the scheme via Chorley. Likewise the recent work to raise the bridge over the Wigan line at Lostock.

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

Those are both already under construction so not likely to be threatened.

 

[birchesgreen]

Maybe meant unaffordable

 

[broadgage]

Would it be now worth pressing for the following bits to be done as 3rd rail?

* Waterloo-Exeter, at least as far as Salisbury
* Marshlink Line
* North Downs Line
* Uckfield Line

or will absolutely all new electrification projects (either 3rd rail or OLE) now be on indefinite hold?

Third rail is in effect now prohibited for new schemes other than for VERY MINOR infills and extensions.
AFAIK no act of parliament or regulation specifically states "no more conductor rail" But a general tightening of the safety culture effectively prohibits it, when safer alternatives are readily available.
Would YOU want to be the engineer who approves a conductor rail scheme, and faces prosecution, perhaps decades later, after a child trespasser is killed.

Significant OLE expansion is now dead for a generation at least, some minor additions may go ahead, but large scale, not for some years.

 

[Darandio]

Maybe meant unaffordable

Doubt it, money isn't an issue. All they need to do is look down the same side of the sofa that they did when they needed money for the DUP.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Does this affect Scotland???.

Since that decision is devolved I would not think so. I suspect the Scottish government will want to show how enlightened they are and they will press on.

 

[Xavi]

It is all politics. When all the electrification schemes were announced government wanted a vote winning story - modernised electric railways at a cost that would get the right headlines. NR was told to budget for the original £750m (I think) for GWEP by ministers. NR had no opportunity for a proper costing exercise; politicians wanted a quick vote-winning headline. Millions sounds better than billions.

Reality (with or without new clearance legislation) meant the cost would be treble or more to update a 'Victorian' railway. Over 30 years with reduced maintenance and running costs of electric trains, the business case is still overwhelmingly in favour of electrification, but the likes of Grayling can't see beyond his current term in office, so NR gets the full blame and a new spin story tells passengers and tax payers that they'll be better off with bi-mode (diesels). Politicians playing trains.

Had NR said £3bn for GWEP after a proper feasibility and costing exercise, government would have said no (sounds too much for a good headline) even though a 30-year business case would have still stood up comfortably.

NR could be more efficient but politicians are responsible for a large part of this fiasco.

 

[lejog]

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 ?

It's Network Rail's cost of electrification. Classic causes of cost inflation in any engineering project is that the more detailed the design gets, it is realised that the project is more compicated than originally thought, more materials, more labour, more project management etc.

According to this presentation (by Network Rail, I should add) straight transpennine electrification was "paused" when costs had risen from £250m to £650m, with a zero decrease in the journey time between Manchester and Leeds.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTGnTgdWfh4

They are now persuing a series of infrastructure interventions plus electrification, at a an unspecified but high cost.A forum member has attended a presentation by the DfT saying that if the interventions alone result in the target time of 40mins being met, electrification could be scrapped at a saving of >£1bn. Its all hidden away in the Manchester to Stalybridge thread.

So don't to be too surprised if transpennine electrification is the next project cancelled, with a sweetener of speed improvements and lower journey times.

 

[ag51ruk]

Whilst I can't say I'm happy with the decision, what did anyone realistically expect them to do? The costs are out of control. At some point any responsible government would have to say no, there is no business case and there are far better things that can be done with the money.

Electrification is not in itself an improvement in the rail service. Faster journey times? Upgrade the line or the signalling. More capacity? Long diesel trains exist, and there are off the shelf designs available. Maximum use of existing wires? Bi-modes. Maybe if you've already done all that electrification might be the next improvement to make. If TPE electrification is going to cost £1bn, probably a lot more if it actually happens, what could you do to improve rail services across the North with that sort of money?

Other reasons to run electric trains (from the NR website)

- more capacity for passengers: more seats than diesel trains of the same length.
- faster than diesel trains: superior braking and acceleration make journey times shorter.
- quieter than diesel trains: good news for people living near the railway – our lineside neighbours.
- better for the environment: their carbon emissions are 20 to 35 per cent lower than those from diesel trains, and there are no emissions at the point of use, improving air quality in pollution hot spots, such as city centres.
- lighter: less maintenance is needed because electric trains cause less wear to the track, so the railway is more reliable for passengers.

Plus when the electrification programme started, I remember much being made of the superior reliability of electric trains (a look at the reliability figures used for the Golden Spanner awards would appear to confirm that ), lower purchase cost of a pure electric train and increase in flexibility as refuelling not required.

Those benefits haven't suddenly disappeared...

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Will the Basingstoke-Reading electrification likely now get pushed back further or could it now get scrapped as well?

 

[thenorthern]

Would it be now worth pressing for the following bits to be done as 3rd rail?

* Waterloo-Exeter, at least as far as Salisbury
* Marshlink Line
* North Downs Line
* Uckfield Line

or will absolutely all new electrification projects (either 3rd rail or OLE) now be on indefinite hold?

Third rail is in effect now prohibited for new schemes other than for VERY MINOR infills and extensions.
AFAIK no act of parliament or regulation specifically states "no more conductor rail" But a general tightening of the safety culture effectively prohibits it, when safer alternatives are readily available.
Would YOU want to be the engineer who approves a conductor rail scheme, and faces prosecution, perhaps decades later, after a child trespasser is killed.

Significant OLE expansion is now dead for a generation at least, some minor additions may go ahead, but large scale, not for some years.

Yep 3rd rail has reached the end of the line, its done well but with modern safety standards I think we will start seeing it removed soon in favour of overhead electrification on the grounds of safety.

Given that all new trains designed to run on 3rd rail are classed as AC units as they contain a space for a pantograph to be added in the future I think the Class 444 and Class 450 could very well be the last National Rail trains built that are designed solely to run on 3rd rail.

 

[birchesgreen]

I doubt we'll be seeing any third rail replaced by OHLE any time soon.