Rail electrification scrapped / 'suspended'?

[jimm]

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.....

Which pure electric off-the-shelf express trains would those have been? I don't recall anyone was building a 125mph, non-tilt, UK-gauge electric express train at the time the IEPs were ordered. Please enlighten us.

And I'll ask again - knowing full well you won't answer, as you haven't in many years of being asked by me and others - how you propose to serve all the destinations in the GW and EC areas that are off the wires and would have stayed that way for years to come anyway, without the bi-modes?

 

[paul1609]

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?

It would make absolutely no sense for Marshlink to receive third rail electrification now. With the services being truncated at Hastings from December 2018 and the transfer of the line to Southeastern for the Marshlink HS project whats required is OHL or a 186 mph version of the Hitachi Bi mode trains. New rolling stock is badly needed to solve overcrowding on the main HS1 services from Ashford which are mostly standing room only in the peaks now.

 

[jimm]

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.

Eh?

The train management system limits the engine power output, not the top speed of the trains. 800s have comfortably topped 100mph in test running with the engines on the lower power setting.

And how can they be faster on diesel than an HST, when both trains have a top speed of 125mph - with the possibility that in future the IEP family could run at a maximum of 140mph on electric power only.

 

[yorksrob]

It would make absolutely no sense for Marshlink to receive third rail electrification now. With the services being truncated at Hastings from December 2018 and the transfer of the line to Southeastern for the Marshlink HS project whats required is OHL or a 186 mph version of the Hitachi Bi mode trains. New rolling stock is badly needed to solve overcrowding on the main HS1 services from Ashford which are mostly standing room only in the peaks now.

This (bold) is purely a symptom of the problem, rather than a justification for not addressing it with third rail. Were it not for the lack of diesel stock, they would never consider splitting the highly successful through service. Infact, with the impending surplus of third rail electric stock, third rail would allow them to extend the whole through service with four or more carriages. HS1 could switch to third rail as it does with all the other routes East of Ashford.

In terms of the wider situation, halting electrification and switching to bi-modes is a mistake on many levels.

 

[mcnw35282]

Here we go again with this obsession of ripping up 3rd rail and replacing it with ole. I'm willing to bet the Merseyrail system, which has survived rather well on 3rd rail traction for over a century, won't be converted in our lifetimes.

 

[Bevan Price]

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...

Yes - a rubbish decision from a rubbish government. Not helped by failure to resist the over-zealous safety geeks who insisted on largely unnecessary clearance increases between "overhead" and "rest of the world", when existing clearances have largely worked well for over 50 years.

And it leaves UK as the country with the least proportion of "main line" ** electrification in most of Western Europe, and enduring diesel fumes pollution for years to come.

(** - taking "main line" to mean inter-city / inter-urban rather than "suburban" services.)

 

[mike57]

I wont be surprised to see TPE North electrification scrapped. The potential for cost overruns, the fact that bi mode trains would still be required as realistically the eastern end branches are not going to electrified in the foreseeable future, the fact that electrification doesn't address issues such as the need for faster services to overtake slower ones, and the fact that TPE north to Manchester Airport is one of the few 24/7 railways in the UK. It seems like a potential disaster waiting to happen.

The problem is that the money saved isnt going to be redeployed in other 'local' projects, but will probably just disappear into the black hole which is 'public spending' i.e. taxpayer funded spending.

Longer term battery electric may be the way forward, that way you leave the difficult bits unwired, This would reduce electrification costs. Also charging points at the end of branches.

So I would ask, what will TPE north electrification (with no other improvements) deliver?

 

[The Conductor]

Indeed I did! Sorry for the typo.

 

[broadgage]

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

I agree.
I do not expect any significant extension of third rail schemes for the reasons already given, principally who is going to accept legal responsibility for specifying a "system known to be dangerous" as the lawyers acting for the parents of the dead trespasser would put it.

Existing schemes are a bit different as it is somewhat easier to justify retention of existing equipment, as distinct from installing new.

And anyway, this thread started by talking about the cancellation of already planned OHLE electrification, largely due to vast cost overruns.
Replacing existing third rail with OHLE would probably be EVEN MORE costly, complicated and liable to overruns.
Consider the risks of damaging the existing conductor rail and feeder cables whilst erecting overhead. Consider the risks to those doing the work, probably at night.
I suspect that the changeover would require DE-ELECTRIFICATION for a year or two, or three, and diesel operation whilst the new OHLE is installed and commissioned.

 

[Raul_Duke]

I wont be surprised to see TPE North electrification scrapped. The potential for cost overruns, the fact that bi mode trains would still be required as realistically the eastern end branches are not going to electrified in the foreseeable future, the fact that electrification doesn't address issues such as the need for faster services to overtake slower ones, and the fact that TPE north to Manchester Airport is one of the few 24/7 railways in the UK. It seems like a potential disaster waiting to happen.

The problem is that the money saved isnt going to be redeployed in other 'local' projects, but will probably just disappear into the black hole which is 'public spending' i.e Things in London

Longer term battery electric may be the way forward, that way you leave the difficult bits unwired, This would reduce electrification costs. Also charging points at the end of branches.

So I would ask, what will TPE north electrification (with no other improvements) deliver?

Amended that one.....

 

[ivanhoe]

Interesting that the editorial in this weeks Rail predicted today's announcement.

 

[edwin_m]

Interesting that the editorial in this weeks Rail predicted today's announcement.

Roger Ford has been predicting it for several months.

 

[HowardGWR]

It does seem rather odd that at the same time as the OHLE electrification programme is being curtailed, because it is too costly and behind time, that HSLs are to go ahead using, er, OHLE plus a totally new solus with all the problems of the planning and implementation of that.

If implementing OHLE is such a problem, how come nearly all lines on the mainland have been achieved, down to relatively minor rural routes?

Could we not do what the East Anglian land owners did centuries ago, when they hired Dutch engineers to drain the marshes, and hire in the SNCF, NS and DB experts to do the work?

 

[Steelwheels]

Could we not do what the East Anglian land owners did centuries ago, when they hired Dutch engineers to drain the marshes, and hire in the SNCF, NS and DB experts to do the work?

We may as well, seeing that most of the foreign governments are running our rail franchises!

 

[absolutelymilk]

And how can they be faster on diesel than an HST, when both trains have a top speed of 125mph - with the possibility that in future the IEP family could run at a maximum of 140mph on electric power only.

I imagine the previous poster meant faster acceleration rather than faster top speed.

 

[snowball]

It does seem rather odd that at the same time as the OHLE electrification programme is being curtailed, because it is too costly and behind time, that HSLs are to go ahead using, er, OHLE plus a totally new solus with all the problems of the planning and implementation of that.

Not really. It's precisely the absence of the need to fit around existing operational tracks, trains, bridges and signalling that makes HS2 easier.

If implementing OHLE is such a problem, how come nearly all lines on the mainland have been achieved, down to relatively minor rural routes?

Well, for one thing, their lines were not as old as ours, and were built to more sensible dimensions. And their governments didn't have such stop-start policies.

Could we not do what the East Anglian land owners did centuries ago, when they hired Dutch engineers to drain the marshes, and hire in the SNCF, NS and DB experts to do the work?

As someone has said, they're already running our trains.

 

[HSTEd]

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

And yet the recent report into the Southern crisis and the electrification of the East Grinstead line said that ORR decrees that all significant third rail projects unacceptable.

Which is it?

 

[broadgage]

And yet the recent report into the Southern crisis and the electrification of the East Grinstead line said that ORR decrees that all significant third rail projects unacceptable.

Which is it?

As I have previously said, AFAIK there is no specific law or regulation that says "no more third rail"
But the general modern safety culture does in effect prohibit all but trivial extensions to conductor rail systems.

Who would be willing to state in writing that they have specified a system "known to be dangerous" rather than readily available and safer alternatives.
Someone ultimately has to accept responsibility for the design and face the risk of criminal conviction for manslaughter, maybe decades later.
Therefore it is not going to happen.

 

[HSTEd]

As I have previously said, AFAIK there is no specific law or regulation that says "no more third rail"
But the general modern safety culture does in effect prohibit all but trivial extensions to conductor rail systems.

Which is worse IMHO, it means they get what they want but in no way actually have to take responsibility for their position.

Who would be willing to state in writing that they have specified a system "known to be dangerous" rather than readily available and safer alternatives.

What readily available alternatives?
The 25kV programme has collapsed.
It is now 3rd rail or diesel.

Who wants to be caught condemning photogenic children to horrible deaths from lung diseases?

Someone ultimately has to accept responsibility for the design and face the risk of criminal conviction for manslaughter, maybe decades later.
Therefore it is not going to happen.

Modern safety cultures are not safety at any price.
Otherwise airliners would be fitted with redundant ejector seats for all passengers.
Cars would be entirely banned.

It can be demostrated (as I have done using Network Rail/OOR's own figures) that the value of the saved fatalities from selecting 25kV relative to third rail are trivial, and recent advances in technology may serve to further reduce them.
Given that landlords are only required to take reasonable actions to protect tresspassers from harm - the fact that 25kV is enormously expensive is very important to that defence.

 

[Mikey C]

Where does this leave the Chiltern lines? Fast growing, and an obvious candidate to be the next electrification project.

And unlike the MML, with NO electrified lines into London, so the bi-mode option can't be used either. With the crackdown on diesel road transport in London, a 100% diesel terminus surely can't be considered to be a long term solution>

 

[CyrusWuff]

Where does this leave the Chiltern lines? Fast growing, and an obvious candidate to be the next electrification project.

Continuing to run diesels into London for the next fifty years I suspect...unless another 20 year franchise is forthcoming and the new franchisee is willing to invest in electrification as part of a potential "Evergreen 4".

Well...One can but dream.

 

[najaB]

Which is it?

If you can make the safety case work, you can have third-rail. It's as simple as that.

 

[DarloRich]

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.

My concern is that it will be difficult to retain those skilled staff on UK rail projects once HS2 work ( which I am sure will pay better) ramps up.

The industry has invested in training and building up a pool of skilled people to do this work. Money has gone into training facilities, course generation, human development and the sharing of hard won experiences to deliver a number of trained OHLE people. I fear this investment wont continue on the back of these announcements.

 

[Dr Hoo]

If you can make the safety case work, you can have third-rail. It's as simple as that.

I am regularly surprised that there is little reference in these sort of discussions to the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989. (Note that these pre-date rail privatisation, the existence of ORR and modern EU 'standards'.)

Basically Regulation 7 says that conductors must either be 'covered in insulating material' or 'out of reach'. A conductor rail at ground level is patently neither of these.

Even back in BR's day I recall unease that (new) third rail installations were incompatible with the Revgulations.

As public bodies the ORR, Network Rail, DfT, etc. clearly have to uphold and comply with 'the law'. Failure to do this is likely to raise the prospect of liability if anybody is harmed by an installation that dates from the era after the Regulations came into effect.

 

[danielnez1]

Given the cost overruns I'm not surprised this has happened. I do think Network ail need to take some of the blame though. As a layman, the Series 1 OHLE looks crude and and clunky, perhaps like with the Class 210 DEMU, evidence that the engineers have had too much control and delivered something expensive for them to marvel at, but is unsuitable for the rest of us.

 

[Feathers44]

Given the cost overruns I'm not surprised this has happened. I do think Network ail need to take some of the blame though. As a layman, the Series 1 OHLE looks crude and and clunky, perhaps like with the Class 210 DEMU, evidence that the engineers have had too much control and delivered something expensive for them to marvel at, but is unsuitable for the rest of us.

Thanks for dismissing an entire profession there. Much appreciated.

 

[DarloRich]

Thanks for dismissing an entire profession there. Much appreciated.

Remember - we don't need experts now

 

[Feathers44]

Remember - we don't need experts now

Good point, well observed!

As an industry outsider, I partly buy into the 'keep going with a miles-per-year target'. As the required hardware and knowledge have been built up again, the prosepct of simply binning it all for another generation is appalling to me.

The problem I see with that is the impact on the functioning railway through creeping along a line more slowly than would otherwise have been the case with a big-bang approach leading to months/years disruption in specific areas for a very slow-to-materialise benefit.

Basically, you get the best of no worlds at all.

I'm not at all convinced that we've reached the point where these are areas where 'wires are not required' (or whatever the silly soundbite was). I suppose that might possibly be true by the time wires go up however.

 

[JonasB]

Sad news, but on other hand, you will have bi-modes. They might have contributed to the decrease in en electrification, but they will improve the environment at major stations! I wish there were some bi-modes on their way to Sweden.

Regarding replacing 3rd rail with overhead wires. What would be the benefits and the drawbacks of that (apart from the cost)? Is is easy to buy new trains for 3rd rail electrification or do they cost a lot more? How about freight trains? I presume there are a few freight train going to and from Port of Southampton, are they diesel hauled today?

 

[danielnez1]

Thanks for dismissing an entire profession there. Much appreciated.

You are more than welcome.