Waterloo to Exeter replacement trains.

[London Trains]

If electrifying, I would use OHLE for all of it and go:

Reading - Basingstoke - Salisbury - Bristol, then go back and do Southampton to Salisbury both routes.

 

[broadgage]

As has already been said, there is no urgency to replace the 159s though eventually this will be required.
Significant expansion of conductor rail is effectively ruled out.

So that leaves as options.

1) Keep the infrastructure as it is, but order new trains that are bi mode diesel and third rail.
2) Keep the infrastructure as is, but order new trains that bi mode, third rail and battery.
3) Electrify the non conductor rail sections at 25Kv, and buy dual voltage trains.

Since new stock is not needed for some years, I suspect that third rail/battery trains may be the optimum choice. Batteries are still improving, and with a possible timeframe of five years before designing the new trains, and ten years before delivery, the required range should be readily obtainable.
The batteries would be charged from the third rail, or from a shore supply at the depot. Short lengths of conductor rail MIGHT be allowed within the platforms at Salisbury for charging trains. This could be interlocked and only rendered live when a train is over it.

 

[The Ham]

Another decade of life at least.

However that s mean that they have to stay with SWR, if they were replaced in sure that there's plenty of other places which would love to have them (either for nicer trains or more capacity or both).

That's not an argument that they must be replaced, but rather to show that they wouldn't necessarily be scrapped if they were before they were life expired. However that's less likely to happen the closer they are to being life expired (i.e. few are going to want them for 18 months).

The other thing to consider is the replacement of the 442's, if you could have a new fleet which does this will add well as replacing the 158/159's that's another 90 coaches on the order. With a small increase in overall numbers as well you could be looking 250 coaches or maybe even more and a fleet of 50+ units.

 

[A0]

The other possible power source is hydrogen - the Coradia iLint is a 90mph capable hydrogen unit already in use in Germany. That may be a better solution than battery for longer distances.

 

[Spamcan81]

I'd settle for a fleet of Merchant Navies and some Bulleid rolling stock but something tells me that I'll have a very long wait for that to materialise.

 

[30907]

ISTR Network Rail has Basingstoke-Exeter on its list for ultimate electrification?

The end scenario then will be dual-voltage EMUs - so, assuming the wires dont reach Exeter by 2030, the logical intermediate step is a purpose-built dual-voltage BEMU. 5x23m×100/110mph should do nicely.
With the limits of battery capability, you would need to wire Basingstoke-Laverstock-Western Docks first.

 

[SJDCornwall]

"Electrification to Salisbury" seems to crop up on here as often as "moar HSTs for XC" and "My Idea For Future Uses For Some 1970s/1980s Trains".

The way I see it (as someone living in Yorkshire, who was last in Salisbury before the Russians made it trendy), SWT ran a slightly messy service with a slightly messy assortment of two/three coach 158/159s - they were able to expand the fleet a little and use the "weakness" of the relatively short trains (compared to the rest of the SWT fleet) as a "strength" and make various incremental improvements (effectively running a half hourly Yeovil service in the direction of the peak flow, extensions towards Bristol/ Weymouth).

Making the best of the units they inherited was admirable but if you started speccing new stock for the line you probably wouldn't order pure diesels, you probably wouldn't order such short units, you probably wouldn't order 90mph stock and you might not even order 23m long coaches (given that the majority of the SWT/SWR franchise is electric, 100mph, four coach minimum and generally 20m coaches).

It's the difference between Ready Steady Cook (cobble together the best you can with the ingredients that someone else has selected) and Masterchef (chose the ingredients yourself and then cook something with them).

If you assume that electrification isn't going to happen any time soon then you'd have to have a serious discussion about exactly what you are planning.

158/159s are one thing - you can plan to get your hands on cascaded ones from other TOCs to expand operations - but if you are ordering bespoke stock then you need to be sure exactly how many you need and what you plan to provide over the next generation.

• Is this a direct replacement for the existing frequencies?
• Are you planning on expansion?
• Should you replace the short trains and all the required joining/splitting with longer trains that don't require as much portion-work (but are less flexible)?
• Can all of the "local" stations cope with something longer than a 158/159?
• Are you giving up on any ambitions to run a Waterloo - Okehampton - Plymouth service?
• Is Waterloo - Bristol continuing as a long term service?
• Are you focussing on passengers east of Salisbury or longer distance ones (in terms of seating, doors etc)?
• If we are moving away from "private" franchises to a "publicly owned" unified railway then do we forget about using the Salisbury route as a "cheap and cheerful" alternative to the full price B&H route? (i.e. we only plan for intermediate passengers, or are you going to keep some seating to keep competing with the parallel service from London?)
• If we expect passenger numbers to bounce back towards pre-Covid levels then presumably you want to be able to fill platform space at Waterloo etc (and not have it taken up by a locomotive)?

Plus there's the issue of whether ordering something "bespoke" for the Waterloo services means doing the same for the "Salisbury 6" routes or leaving that as a relatively small fleet of pure-DMUs within the SWR operation? Passing it to the GWR operation?

Thankfully the 158/159s don't need replacing right now, so there's plenty time to take a longer term approach to what stock runs the route in the future (rather than being bounced into ordering something off the shelf like 195s). It's going to be over a hundred carriages so you should be able to order something suited to the Salisbury route in the 2030s/2040s/2050s. Maybe by then the technology will have changed a bit from today's developments - remember what people were worrying about the 800/801s five years ago - a lot can change.

These are all good points that will need much time and thought along with the fact that the 2040s look like being the cut off point for diesel only trains. Procurement of new trains is not a 5 minute job these days as there are so many variables that have to be taken into consideration. By the time the 159s are life expired another 10 or so years will have passed by. As has been said electrifying Salisbury Exeter is certainly not cost effective at the moment but I am thinking of how the rail operators should operate East of Salisbury. Salisbury would a good place to have the two different types of electrification meet, it is not as busy as Basingstoke and it is a good crossroads on the rail network. As i have said SWR local trains could then be pure EMU throughout between Waterloo and Salisbury, Portsmouth and Salisbury, and the Romsey via Eastleigh roundabout trains could be the same. You only need some Bimodes so that diesels can be banished from Waterloo on a regular basis. Commonality needs to be the name of the game here just like the old Southern Railway/ BRSR which if they had been supported by the government as they should have been would have meant that these future issues would not exist today. Environmental concerns are here today like it or not, we cannot that fact. I know trials have been recently completed on a class 159 to reduce emissions however that is really only a stop gap for some years to come. Much planning and meetings etc will be required before any physical work commences on this whole area. Britain these days does not have a very good track record for getting big improvement schemes costed and approved and we all tend to end up with poor services at our expense. Post covid theseare the sort of projects the government must look at especially as recently even house building projects were announced by the government. Our roads cannot cope now-I hate to imagine what things will be like in another 10 or so years time on our roads. Also people come down to the WOE to get away from massive developments etc, do we freally want to see our lovely countryside ruined by even more roads. The 159s along with their maintainance staff at Salisbury depot have done a wonderful job on bringing the Mule back from the dead days of when BRWR had charge of it West of Wilton, the next generation of trains need to reflect on the present times and also the potential for further growth on this route.

 

[tbtc]

I don't understand, can't we just build more DMUs? I mean, what's going to replace the other 158s knocking around British railways?

The plan was that a lot of DMUs would ultimately be replaced by electrification - however that relied on all of the CP5 commitments being delivered - instead we are still humming and hawing about some lines and scaling back other commitments (even something relatively simple like Windermere) - so maybe the hope is that bi-mode units will save the day, but converting old trains (like 319s or D78s) has been "problematic", so brand new bi-modes may be the answer.

Regardless, if the plan is to stop production of (pure) diesel cars in the next few years, and rail uses its "green" credentials to justify investment then we really need to stop building pure diesel trains.

There's also the issue that, with modern trains being much more complicated, we tend to have small builds that aren't compatible with other small builds, so we need to take a careful decision over exactly what to order for the line west of Basingstoke (since it might be a lot harder to gain/lose 10% or 20% carriages, unlike the BR days of ordering hundreds of identical trains for across the country, so there was scope to haggle for compatible units)

ISTR Network Rail has Basingstoke-Exeter on its list for ultimate electrification?

If you are being logical about the order of what should be electrified then there are surely much bigger priorities in terms of "services per hour" that we should be electrifying before the route through Yeovil sees electrification .

The 159s along with their maintainance staff at Salisbury depot have done a wonderful job on bringing the Mule back from the dead days of when BRWR had charge of it West of Wilton, the next generation of trains need to reflect on the present times and also the potential for further growth on this route.

That's a very good point - I think that Stagecoach have transformed the route under their stewardship - I suppose that there are some parallels to the recent thread about "what EMUs to order if the Chiltern line gets electrified" - both are the kind of secondary routes that were neglected under BR but improved with private TOCs eager to provide some kind of competition to the faster InterCity services from London to Birmingham/ Exeter - there were enough people willing to sit on a slower DMU than pay full fare for the faster services.

However, if the plan is for a state controlled network then I can't see much appetite for the same levels of competition that we've got used to over the past generation - I hope that the line does continue to grow - the roads in the area aren't particularly fast so the train ought to be fairly competitive - I suppose it might be more about shorter distance passengers than discounted longer distance ones.

 

[The Ham]

However, if the plan is for a state controlled network then I can't see much appetite for the same levels of competition that we've got used to over the past generation - I hope that the line does continue to grow - the roads in the area aren't particularly fast so the train ought to be fairly competitive - I suppose it might be more about shorter distance passengers than discounted longer distance ones

Other than if you don't encourage some to take the secondary route you've got to increase capacity on the primary routes.

That's fine if you've seen a fall in passenger numbers so you don't need to do that, however chances are there'll be a point within a few years (maybe as many as 10, but maybe as few as 3) where capacity could be back to 2019 numbers and you'd need to encourage the wider distribution of passengers.

 

[Bevan Price]

To me, the first question would be:
"When is the DC 3rd rail supply equipment out of Waterloo expected to become life expired and due for replacement?"
followed by:
"At that stage, should we consider converting the whole area to 25kV overhead wiring" (in stages)?

Decisions at that stage will then affect what happens to stock (and electrification) choices for Basingstoke - Salisbury - Exeter.

 

[TSG]

"When is the DC 3rd rail supply equipment out of Waterloo expected to become life expired and due for replacement?"

The third rail system is not a single piece of equipment and thus it's not likely to become life expired in any meaningful sense, much akin to Trigger's brush. The only things that I can see driving the conversion of 3rd rail to overhead is a requirement for 100mph+ line speeds, a requirement for more power (such as interweaving fast container trains with a steady stream of EMUs) or changes in legislation.

 

[The Ham]

To me, the first question would be:
"When is the DC 3rd rail supply equipment out of Waterloo expected to become life expired and due for replacement?"
followed by:
"At that stage, should we consider converting the whole area to 25kV overhead wiring" (in stages)?

Decisions at that stage will then affect what happens to stock (and electrification) choices for Basingstoke - Salisbury - Exeter.

Unless we can convert everything into Waterloo to OHLE then there's likely to be a need for some 3rd rail.

Therefore a bimodal duel voltage train is likely to be needed anyway.

Probably the more important question is could electrification reach Yeovil?

In that if it could there could be a cross platform change from diesel (or bimodal) to electric units with the diesel trains running 0.5tph Exeter to Salisbury via Yeovil and Westbury and running through services in-between run by diesel services.

In doing so you'd reduce the need for the number of bimodal trains, as you could run 1.5tph as EMU's rather than (assuming electrification to Salisbury only) none.

Of course that very much depend on what you may wish to use the bimodal trains for next, which could be an important question if they are going to be longer (4+ coaches) units which may not be that useful on those lines which done justify electrification.

 

[30907]

If you are being logical about the order of what should be electrified then there are surely much bigger priorities in terms of "services per hour" that we should be electrifying before the route through Yeovil sees electrification .

Agreed, but Reading-Basingstoke-Laverstock-Soton at 25kV would be a reasonably high priority, and unless it is delayed till 2070 it is something to be factored in, even if Salisbury-Exeter doesn't get done.

 

[The Ham]

Agreed, but Reading-Basingstoke-Laverstock-Soton at 25kV would be a reasonably high priority, and unless it is delayed till 2070 it is something to be factored in, even if Salisbury-Exeter doesn't get done.

Given that the target is due net zero by 2050, it's fairly likely that by 2070 we could have gone further than Salisbury, whether that's as far as Yeovil (which could be 2tph all day without much change, but could be more) or Exeter (especially if there's more "GWR" services out from Exeter bridging some of the gap in track seeing 2tph back towards Yeovil).

 

[swt_passenger]

The third rail system is not a single piece of equipment and thus it's not likely to become life expired in any meaningful sense, much akin to Trigger's brush...

Agree entirely, a point I’ve made before. Take a trip through the Southampton area and there’s practically brand new traction power installations every few miles, augmenting the existing stuff, some of which was new with the Desiros. The actual conductor rail itself lasts for ages.

 

[Journeyman]

Aren't the 159s just about the most reliable trains in the country? They certainly were at one point, which suggests it really doesn't matter how old they are.

Anyway, I'd like to suggest HST power cars and class 442s. *ducks*

 

[BayPaul]

If there is electrification from Basingstoke - Salisbury - Southampton, and Bristol is finished off, I could see the logic in a combined order for Battery EMUs (dual voltage) for both the Waterloo-Exeter and Cardiff - Portsmouth services. Both routes would have similar gaps in the electrification for their batteries to cover, and both would need a similar type of train - 5x23m car, arranged to be suitable for long distance work, but also good for commuters (so comfortable seats with decent spacing, sensible mix of tables and airline, small 1st class area, trolley service, large luggage areas, decent ambience, but also doors at 3rds with decent sized standbacks, reasonably wide aisles and plenty of handholds). They could share maintenenance facilities at Salisbury.

 

[30907]

If there is electrification from Basingstoke - Salisbury - Southampton, and Bristol is finished off, I could see the logic in a combined order for Battery EMUs (dual voltage) for both the Waterloo-Exeter and Cardiff - Portsmouth services. Both routes would have similar gaps in the electrification for their batteries to cover, and both would need a similar type of train - 5x23m car, arranged to be suitable for long distance work, but also good for commuters (so comfortable seats with decent spacing, sensible mix of tables and airline, small 1st class area, trolley service, large luggage areas, decent ambience, but also doors at 3rds with decent sized standbacks, reasonably wide aisles and plenty of handholds). They could share maintenenance facilities at Salisbury.

I can see the logic of that, especially in economy of scale.
However, my (non-recent) memory is that the SW route has much less "churn" en route, and not that much short-distance commuting. Standing from Woking may be OK, but Basingstoke passengers should be able to expect a seat!
So I wonder if the two routes need slightly different interior layouts?
Perhaps present regular users could comment?

 

[Kilopylae]

Anyway, I'd like to suggest HST power cars and class 442s. *ducks*

Hooking up 70s diesel power cars to EMUs to replace 159s! Only on the RailUK forums lol

 

[Irascible]

Think we had a thread mentioning these guys before - give it 10 years & then just about every unit in the westcountry is going to be life expired, so might as well replace the lot with one thing. And hopefully by then modular power systems will be defacto, so 3rd-rail/battery/diesel ( if battery isn't quite enough on it's own, hybrid is certainly a good idea on this hilly route ) might be sensibly doable all in one unit. I like travelling on 159s, absolutely no need to replace them right now. Track, on the other hand...

Axminster-Exeter is a growing commuter axis, and Exeter is practically gridlocked every rush hour ( or was in more normal times ). Might start looking into augmenting that a little sooner than the long distance services.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

If there is electrification from Basingstoke - Salisbury - Southampton, and Bristol is finished off, I could see the logic in a combined order for Battery EMUs (dual voltage) for both the Waterloo-Exeter and Cardiff - Portsmouth services. Both routes would have similar gaps in the electrification for their batteries to cover, and both would need a similar type of train - 5x23m car, arranged to be suitable for long distance work, but also good for commuters (so comfortable seats with decent spacing, sensible mix of tables and airline, small 1st class area, trolley service, large luggage areas, decent ambience, but also doors at 3rds with decent sized standbacks, reasonably wide aisles and plenty of handholds). They could share maintenenance facilities at Salisbury.

I’m not sure a shared fleet would work - you mention a ‘small first class area’ the Waterloo to Exeter’s have quite a healthy first class market, Pompey to Cardiff you’d be introducing it onto a route that it doesn’t exist on presently. So you’d either not end up providing enough (WoE) or providing way too much at the detriment of standard capacity (PMH/CDF)

 

[BayPaul]

I’m not sure a shared fleet would work - you mention a ‘small first class area’ the Waterloo to Exeter’s have quite a healthy first class market, Pompey to Cardiff you’d be introducing it onto a route that it doesn’t exist on presently. So you’d either not end up providing enough (WoE) or providing way too much at the detriment of standard capacity (PMH/CDF)

I can see the logic of that, especially in economy of scale.
However, my (non-recent) memory is that the SW route has much less "churn" en route, and not that much short-distance commuting. Standing from Woking may be OK, but Basingstoke passengers should be able to expect a seat!
So I wonder if the two routes need slightly different interior layouts?
Perhaps present regular users could comment?

Fair enough, so do something similar to the 745s and introduce mechanically identical trains with subfleet small changes in layout, that can interchange where necessary to provide maintenance cover, but still allowing for a decent sized fleet to be ordered.

 

[The Ham]

I’m not sure a shared fleet would work - you mention a ‘small first class area’ the Waterloo to Exeter’s have quite a healthy first class market, Pompey to Cardiff you’d be introducing it onto a route that it doesn’t exist on presently. So you’d either not end up providing enough (WoE) or providing way too much at the detriment of standard capacity (PMH/CDF)

It would of course be entirely possible to have first class but it be used for standard capacity by declassifying it. Although that would have an impact on capacity over it being all standard class probably not all that much.

 

[Kilopylae]

Declassified first class on one route and then having to pay for the same first class on another route, despite it being exactly the same train, would really wind up passengers.

 

[py_megapixel]

I don't understand, can't we just build more DMUs? I mean, what's going to replace the other 158s knocking around British railways?

For now: nothing, as there's nothing wrong with them. Building more DMUs would just be a waste of resources and might serve to delay electrification even longer, which is not sustainable.

I know the 158s are branded as "Sprinters", but they are really a completely different beast to the 150s, 153s, 155s and 156s - which I'd argue are life-expired at this point - and far more modern. They are perfectly decent trains.

 

[The Ham]

Declassified first class on one route and then having to pay for the same first class on another route, despite it being exactly the same train, would really wind up passengers.

It happens elsewhere, unless others can give examples of upset passengers I suspect that the level of upset is fairly limited.

 

[paul1609]

Better get your life insurance in order; there’s trains in service now with a 50mile range, trains available on the market with a 60+ mile range, and I have no doubt the first 100 mile range battery train will be on the market within 2-3 years. It’s well within existing technical bounds.

GWR News

News from GWR

www.gwr.com

I knew it wouldn't be long before we got Battery Rick advocating battery trains for Waterloo -Exeter. Personally I think its more likely that Star Trek style transporters will be available first, negating the need for any railway.

 

[Bald Rick]

I knew it wouldn't be long before we got Battery Rick advocating battery trains for Waterloo -Exeter. Personally I think its more likely that Star Trek style transporters will be available first, negating the need for any railway.

I’m not suggesting battery trains for this line, at least not yet. Maybe in a decade when the units are done, but certainly before teleportation

The answer is probably wires, but they’ll be a long way off. A new diesel / DC hybrid is a possibility if the units are to be replaced in the next 5 years or so, but would be quite expensive as it would have a market of, essentially, this line only.

 

[paul1609]

I’m not suggesting battery trains for this line, at least not yet. Maybe in a decade when the units are done, but certainly before teleportation

The answer is probably wires, but they’ll be a long way off. A new diesel / DC hybrid is a possibility if the units are to be replaced in the next 5 years or so, but would be quite expensive as it would have a market of, essentially, this line only.

Howabouts a new fleet of DC/ DIESEL/ HYBRID (if we must) for WATERLOO - Exeter, Brighton/Portsmouth/Waterloo to Bristol, North Downs, Uckfield, Marshlink, Fawley and Reading- Basingstoke?

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Howabouts a new fleet of DC/ DIESEL/ HYBRID (if we must) for WATERLOO - Exeter, Brighton/Portsmouth/Waterloo to Bristol, North Downs, Uckfield, Marshlink, Fawley and Reading- Basingstoke?

Because the demands for the various routes are very different a commuter train for Uckfield is very different to the needs of Waterloo - Exeter