Tyne Valley Electrification?

[Railguy220]

I was thinking the other day, why don't they electrify the Tyne Valley line? It would cause less inconvenience for the ECML as they could still run 91's to Edinburgh and would mean that TVLRUG would stop moaning about Pacers!
Web: (http://www.tvrug.org.uk/)
Facebook: (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Tyne-Valley-Line-Rail-Users-Group-Tvlrug/189782941052088(You can see the complaints here...))

And before you go there I don't know where the money will come from! I doubt that this would ever happen as it probably isn't goin' to make much money. And it's not the most used line in the world. I presume it would probably persuade more people to use the train, since it would get rid of those trampolines on wheels!

 

[Eagle]

I presume it would probably persuade more people to use the train, since it would get rid of those trampolines on wheels!

No it wouldn't; most services on that line originate from Sunderland/Middlesbrough so you'd have to electrify that too...

 

[MidnightFlyer]

No it wouldn't; most services on that line originate from Sunderland/Middlesbrough so you'd have to electrify that too...

1tph Carlisle-Newcastle
1tph Hexham-Middlesbrough

Having said that, I don't know if stock work dedicated services all day or whether they alternate with other runs, so at the very best, only 50% would go over to EMU operation.

 

[Eagle]

Of course we could just electrify Newcastle-Middlesbroigh with Middlesbrough-Northallerton (would also permit GC Sunderland services to go electric).

 

[Nym]

And blow up all the Metro stock

Unless they order some new stuff for the Sunderland Branch as dual voltage

 

[Eagle]

And blow up all the Metro stock

That was the intention...

Now I'm trying to conceive on my head of some kind of double OHLE, one for each system, with the Metro wires being offset and the stock fitted with eccentric pantographs... could it work?

Maybe make the pan angle adjustable so you don't need to rewire all the Metro-only lines with offset catenary.

 

[Nym]

Or maybe just fit some Metro stock for dual voltage working with a sodding big choke/shunt combo to pick up the DC and a 12 pulse rectifier for when on AC...

Or if you don't want to make any electrical changes, 3rd and 4th rail at +750 and -750V wherever there is 25KV OHL, it will need dual mode immunisation anyway. (For signalling systems)

 

[markydh]

Come 2019, NEXUS will start the process of tendering for new stock anyway, so it would be logical to think about prospective changes to voltage at this point...

 

[eastwestdivide]

1tph Carlisle-Newcastle
1tph Hexham-Middlesbrough
...

However, if you're electrifying, you've got the opportunity to recast services, for example change the Hexham service to take over the 1tph between Newcastle and Morpeth (already electrified), also eliminating some diesel working under the wires for that stretch.

Having said that, there are surely better priorities for the money than a line with only 1tph over its entire length.

 

[tbtc]

No it wouldn't; most services on that line originate from Sunderland/Middlesbrough so you'd have to electrify that too...

1tph Carlisle-Newcastle
1tph Hexham-Middlesbrough

Having said that, I don't know if stock work dedicated services all day or whether they alternate with other runs, so at the very best, only 50% would go over to EMU operation.

IIRC at the moment you have:

• Newcastle - Carlisle (would move to EMU operation)
• Morpeth - Metro Centre (would move to EMU operation - allowing better acceleration out of the way of ECML expresses!)
• Newcastle - Metro Centre (would move to EMU operation)
• Middlesbrough - Hexham

Presumably you could tinker a little and run the Morpeth service to Hexham with the Middlesbrough service only going as far as the Metro Centre. You also have scope for giving places like Durham a direct service to the Metro Centre by extending a (token) TPE service?

 

[Nym]

Or extending all of the services and building a bay / reversal siding at MetroCentre so you can have TPE running at 6 car services without everyone moaning about bay platform lengths at Newcastle Central...

 

[142094]

Come 2019, NEXUS will start the process of tendering for new stock anyway, so it would be logical to think about prospective changes to voltage at this point...

Would cost far too much to rejig the overheads - I bet Nexus would rather let the Sunderland extension go to pot before they change the OHL.

As for Tyne Valley line - as has been said, current services are Newcastle - Carlisle, Hexham - Middlesbrough/Nunthorpe (both 1tph), the additional services to/from Glasgow Central and Dumfries, and also not forgetting the Newcastle - MetroCentre shuttle and Morpeth - MetroCentre services. Realistically you could electrify Newcastle - MetroCentre, and EMUs could then take over NCL - MCE and MPT - MCE services, freeing up some 142s from that. For the rest of the Tyne Valley line you'd be looking at a lot of investment for not a lot of benefits. The only real benefits I can see would be better acceleration (so possibly shorter journey times) and 225s would be able to be used on diversions when the ECML is shut between Newcastle and Edinburgh.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Not enough traffic volume , I am afraid. 2 car diesel railway with (intermittent) freight and the odd passenger diversion.

Makes sense from a Network point of view , but there are many other candidates before this one - the Cross Country "X" to start with.

 

[tbtc]

As for Tyne Valley line - as has been said, current services are Newcastle - Carlisle, Hexham - Middlesbrough/Nunthorpe (both 1tph), the additional services to/from Glasgow Central and Dumfries, and also not forgetting the Newcastle - MetroCentre shuttle and Morpeth - MetroCentre services. Realistically you could electrify Newcastle - MetroCentre, and EMUs could then take over NCL - MCE and MPT - MCE services, freeing up some 142s from that. For the rest of the Tyne Valley line you'd be looking at a lot of investment for not a lot of benefits. The only real benefits I can see would be better acceleration (so possibly shorter journey times) and 225s would be able to be used on diversions when the ECML is shut between Newcastle and Edinburgh.

One benefit of electrifying Newcastle - Carlisle would be that it'd tackle Pacer replacement directly (instead of some complicated scheme where you electrify the Transpennine route so that 185s can replace 155s which will replace 150s which will replace Pacers).

(though I suspect that Pacer replacement isn't top of your priorities! )

 

[ChiefPlanner]

In theory - options for booting out the Pacers will come from other electrification schemes - not just in England - but Paisley Canal , Whifflet , Shotts line will produce 156 units , let alone the options from TPE / Blackpool and so on.

Holds the line for 10 years + (or so)

 

[142094]

One benefit of electrifying Newcastle - Carlisle would be that it'd tackle Pacer replacement directly (instead of some complicated scheme where you electrify the Transpennine route so that 185s can replace 155s which will replace 150s which will replace Pacers).

Problem is that it's about 75% 142s and 25% 156s that do the Newcastle - Carlisle workings, plus there is the odd 156 on Hexham - Boro/Nunthorpe. Also, the one working each way direct from Boro to Carlisle and vice versa is also now booked a 156. I doubt that what is basically a small local line to most outside the north east would warrant new stock - cascades is all we're expected to have IMO. I wouldn't be surprised if many of the routes out of Newcastle remain heavily worked by 142s until they eventually disappear.[/QUOTE]

(though I suspect that Pacer replacement isn't top of your priorities! )

It's a tricky one for me! From an enthusiast point of view I'll be very sad to see them go - I've grown up with them and used them so often that it will be hard to imaging anything else on some services. However, at the same time as a person who wants to encourage growth on the railways, new stock is needed for most of the lines here (and across the North), and a scheme where we could have a large order of similar DMUs, each with corridor connections to enable services to be joined, would be fantastic. We could even keep a few 142s to give some areas increased frequencies

 

[tbtc]

In theory - options for booting out the Pacers will come from other electrification schemes - not just in England - but Paisley Canal , Whifflet , Shotts line will produce 156 units , let alone the options from TPE / Blackpool and so on.

Holds the line for 10 years + (or so)

I appreciate there'll be a few DMUs freed up from the other schemes, but (given the need for additional capacity on a number of lines) I don't think there will be anything like the 100+ needed to replace Pacers.

Sorry, didn't want to hijack another thread with Pacers, but I thought it worth mentioning as a justification for Tyne Valley electrification (as well as the diversionary benefits and the general benefits of electrifying a line)

 

[Jonny]

The main thing is that there isn't much room in the signalling for more than 1-2 tph on the Tyne Valley line - more services NCL<> Hexham and it could really take off and give a massive boost to the area. Hang on, wouldn't it also need to be electrified to get the extra stock?

Oh, and it would be very handy indeed for electrified freight services.

 

[tbtc]

Problem is that it's about 75% 142s and 25% 156s that do the Newcastle - Carlisle workings, plus there is the odd 156 on Hexham - Boro/Nunthorpe. Also, the one working each way direct from Boro to Carlisle and vice versa is also now booked a 156. I doubt that what is basically a small local line to most outside the north east would warrant new stock - cascades is all we're expected to have IMO. I wouldn't be surprised if many of the routes out of Newcastle remain heavily worked by 142s until they eventually disappear

It's a tricky one for me! From an enthusiast point of view I'll be very sad to see them go - I've grown up with them and used them so often that it will be hard to imaging anything else on some services. However, at the same time as a person who wants to encourage growth on the railways, new stock is needed for most of the lines here (and across the North), and a scheme where we could have a large order of similar DMUs, each with corridor connections to enable services to be joined, would be fantastic. We could even keep a few 142s to give some areas increased frequencies

I guess that if you electrified to Carlisle then all that would be required for diesels in the North East (bearing in mind that TPE is going EMU in a few years) would be

• Newcastle - Miiddlesbrough/Nunthorpe - I'd say suited to 100% 156s
• Middlesbrough - Whitby - currently 156 run
• Bishop Auckland - Saltburn - currently almost all 142 run, would a 156 be a waste? Dunno
• Sunderland - London - current GC service, presumably it'll remain HST run for a long time to come?

Would that be enough to justify a collection of (say) 156s at Heaton, with cascaded EMUs on the Morpeth/ Metro Centre/ Hexham/ Carlisle corridor?

An EMU's capacity would be much more attractive to some of the wealthier commuters from the Tyne Valley - having being crammed onto Hexham bound Pacers in the past amongst the suits etc.

 

[Eagle]

• Newcastle - Miiddlesbrough/Nunthorpe - I'd say suited to 100% 156s
• Middlesbrough - Whitby - currently 156 run
• Bishop Auckland - Saltburn - currently almost all 142 run, would a 156 be a waste? Dunno
• Sunderland - London - current GC service, presumably it'll remain HST run for a long time to come?

Newcastle–Glasgow? That'd still need 156s.

 

[markydh]

To be fair, the Newcastle - Glasgow services run more for operational convenience than anything else. Few people get on at Newcastle or Tyne Valley stations and stay on after Carlisle (though there are some who do). Personally, I try and book myself on one of these purely for the fact they are the only services you can guarantee won't be a dreaded Pacer! This has become more important recently given some of the even more-dreaded ex-FNW bus seated Pacers have moved to Heaton and now often blight Tyne Valley services...

Anyway, back to the point, through Newcastle - Carlisle - Dumfries - Glasgow services wouldn't be much of a loss if, in some amazing ideal world, the Tyne Valley line was ever electrified.

 

[142094]

I guess that if you electrified to Carlisle then all that would be required for diesels in the North East (bearing in mind that TPE is going EMU in a few years) would be

• Newcastle - Miiddlesbrough/Nunthorpe - I'd say suited to 100% 156s
• Middlesbrough - Whitby - currently 156 run
• Bishop Auckland - Saltburn - currently almost all 142 run, would a 156 be a waste? Dunno
• Sunderland - London - current GC service, presumably it'll remain HST run for a long time to come?

Would that be enough to justify a collection of (say) 156s at Heaton, with cascaded EMUs on the Morpeth/ Metro Centre/ Hexham/ Carlisle corridor?

An EMU's capacity would be much more attractive to some of the wealthier commuters from the Tyne Valley - having being crammed onto Hexham bound Pacers in the past amongst the suits etc.

I wouldn't say 156s on the Darlington - Saltburn services would be a waste, as they're pretty well loaded for most of the day. Realistically, I bet 15xs will be used on the majority of lines up here when the 142s do depart.

As for the NCL - Glasgow/Dumfries, these services are a bit of an anomaly as sometimes they cover for a normal Newcastle - Carlisle service and there are one or two which look to run in addition to a normal Northern service. Wouldn't be much of a hardship to find a couple of extra units and use them on Newcastle - Carlisle with Scotrail terminating their services at Carlisle.

 

[tbtc]

I wouldn't say 156s on the Darlington - Saltburn services would be a waste, as they're pretty well loaded for most of the day. Realistically, I bet 15xs will be used on the majority of lines up here when the 142s do depart

I was thinking of the stop/start nature of the Saltburn services - they certainly can be busy enough but would a 156 be suitable for the nature of the route (vs a 150?)

As for the NCL - Glasgow/Dumfries, these services are a bit of an anomaly as sometimes they cover for a normal Newcastle - Carlisle service and there are one or two which look to run in addition to a normal Northern service. Wouldn't be much of a hardship to find a couple of extra units and use them on Newcastle - Carlisle with Scotrail terminating their services at Carlisle.

What's the current number of Scotrail units to Newcastle vs Northern units in Scotland (each day)? Who would save more resources if there were to be a "split"?

 

[142094]

I was thinking of the stop/start nature of the Saltburn services - they certainly can be busy enough but would a 156 be suitable for the nature of the route (vs a 150?)

See what you mean - depends on the stopping pattern, some trains run direct from Thornaby through to Darlington (not many though) and a few go MBR - TBY - Eaglescliffe - Allens West and next stop Darlington. The main problem would be at the other end, as Redcar Central and Redcar East are close together, as are Longbeck, Markse and Saltburn. 150s might be more suited, but there is an occassional 156 that does Darlington - Middlesbrough (can't remember if it goes through to Saltburn anymore), so mustn't be a problem with that in Northern's eyes.

What's the current number of Scotrail units to Newcastle vs Northern units in Scotland (each day)? Who would save more resources if there were to be a "split"?

3 services from Newcastle - Glasgow Central, two services from Dumfries to Newcastle and 3 from Glasgow Central to Newcastle. That's quite strange as it should mean two units are spare somewhere but I'm not sure what happens to those (unless one service is doubled up). The 06.30 comes in empty off Heaton, so one service must be. Have to double check that. Anyway, I'm sure it is only Scotrail 156s that are used, so Scotrail would be getting more use out of them.

Interestingly the 16.22 to Whitehaven from NCL always used to be doubled up.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Just had confirmation - the 1st Dumfries to Newcastle service is worked by a Northern 156, with the rest Scotrail 156s. The last Scotrail one to Newcastle stays overnight, so I guess the Northern 156 in the morning gets put onto some other working.

So, Northern would gain one unit back from the early morning Dumfries train and Scotrail would have 4 spare 156s.

 

[tbtc]

Just had confirmation - the 1st Dumfries to Newcastle service is worked by a Northern 156, with the rest Scotrail 156s. The last Scotrail one to Newcastle stays overnight, so I guess the Northern 156 in the morning gets put onto some other working.

So, Northern would gain one unit back from the early morning Dumfries train and Scotrail would have 4 spare 156s.

Cheers for looking into it.

So Northern would need to cover at least some of those Scotrail duties (west of Carlisle) if the split ever did happen due to electrification then.

The GSW is highly unlikely, I guess, even if they wired the Glasgow - Kilmarnock stretch.

 

[142094]

Unless Scotrail just terminated at Carlisle throughout the day. Northern could extend the 06.30 service from Newcastle that currently goes to Hexham through to Carlisle to cover the 06.47 to GLC (not 06.30 as I said previously, it is only on Saturdays that it is 06.30). 13.22 off NCL to GLC wouldn't need to be replaced to keep the hourly NCL - CAR service. 17.16 NCL - GLC would probably have to be replaced with a Northern service.

Going the other way - first train is a Northern unit anyway so keep that and not go to Dumfries. 08.28 could be replaced using that extended NCL - HEX service easily I'd guess. 09.37 off CAR from GLC would have to be replaced with another Northern unit, as would the 14.33 and 18.37. So the real issue is the trains from the Carlisle direction - you could easily get rid of the Newcastle - GLC trains but would have to find a few spare Northern units to cover some of the CAR - NCL ones.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Actually, apparently it is the first two services from Dumfries that are operated using Northern 156s, which changes things a bit.

 

[daveslee]

On a slightly different tack - wouldn't electrification of the Tyne Valley line itself be rather difficult if it was to be compatible with the main East and West coast mainloine to be a diversionary route? There are lots of historic and (I think) listed structures along the line that would prevent over head lines - I'm thinking Wylam signal box and the footbridges at Wylam, Stocksfield, Riding Mill, Corbridge and Hexham.

I live in Riding Mill and the Parish Council is being consulted on the materials used to refurbish and repair the footbridge at the station because it is probably listed. The whole Tyne Valley line has some sort of heritage interest being close to the Stephenson's home - some of the structures seem to be "practise runs" for what was to come later.

I don't see anyone rushing to build new third rail electric railways in rural areas either.

The most logical change around the Newcastle end of the Tyne Valley would be some kind of change to "long distance Metros" extending coverage out to Blaydon, Metrocentre, Chester Le Street, Washington, Ashington and Blyth. But I can't see an economic case for that either.

Don't get me wrong - I'd love to see investment in public transport, but there are areas of greater need like extensions of the rail network out to Aberdeen, Glasgow and Edinburgh airports for instance.

 

[142094]

Electrification could probably be done quite easily to get around the listed structures if needed (or dispensation could be given). For example, look at Monkwearmouth station in Sunderland which had overhead posts stuck into it for the Metro (which looks terrible but they were allowed to do it).

As an aside, Wylam footbridge really could do with painting.

 

[Railguy220]

As an aside, Wylam footbridge really could do with painting.

Lets hope Northern don't paint It blue like they did at Stockesfield! :roll:

In my opinion it looks ghastly compared to the lovely red of the other bridges along the line.

Aside from that, there has been a lot of interesting comments. Thanks for the feedback.