Where would you electrify next?

[tbtc]

Oxted to Uckfield and Ashford to Ore, with 3rd rail.

It'd do little or nothing for journey times, but remove these silly islands of diesel in an otherwise completely 3rd rail region and allow a reasonable number of sprinter compatible DMUs to be moved somewhere they'd be more valuable

These would be on my list too (after we tackle the backlog of Things Wot We Promised We'd Do In CP5, e.g. Didcot to Oxford) - I'd generally start from the position of Most DMU Carriages Freed Per Mile Of Electrification - in which case Uckfield should be a priority (long DMUs that already spend a large proportion of their time on electrified track).

Generally though, if we are talking a world with bi-mode, forget about anything with less than an hourly service (Mallaig!), focus on the busy trunks without needing to wire every branch.

If structures are difficult to wire then at least consider wiring the line up to that structure (e.g. wiring Waverley to Dalmeney would remove a lot of diesel fumes from central Edinburgh and significantly improve air quality, even if nobody wants to tackle the tricky bit over the Forth Bridge).

On the subject of air quality, wiring Marylebone - Bicester would remove a few diesel fumes from central London - same with wiring the central core of the Snow Hill lines (without going all the way to Stratford/ Worcester). If bi-modes can switch reliably then you're a lot better wiring up the busy bits (and forgetting about every branch).

A better question might be to limit suggestions to (say) a hundred miles/ five hundred miles of single track, otherwise you'll get wish lists that include various parliamentary routes!

 

[higthomas]

First thing: Set up perhaps 2 teams with a mandate to simply do about 200 line miles of electrification per year every year. No peaks and troughs and loss of skills.

Then, I'd start with fill ins where we can get diesel services out from under the wires. E.G. Didcot-Oxford, Windermere-Oxenholme, etc. Following that, I'd split the teams into one suburban and one interurban. Than probably just slowly and steadily build up electrification around already electrified areas, e.g. Lancashire, Leeds etc.

I'd mainly try and concentrate on commuter lines rather than ones like the MML. I know these aren't as flashy, but lines with lots of stop start are the one with the biggest gains from electrification.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Cheshire lines, wouldn't gain much other than peace and quiet mind you

The CLC would benefit massively from electrification and a new fleet of high acceleration EMUs such as FLIRTs or Desiros. That would allow the glacial performance of stopping services to be improved.

Indeed I'd have done it before going anywhere near Chat Moss. That said, I'd also have done Bolton/Chorley before Chat Moss too.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I wouldn't electrify Marylebone to Amersham via Harrow due to running over 4th rail infrastructure so that would stay DMU.

The solution to that is to electrify at 25kV between Amersham and Aylesbury and order a fleet that can run from both.

Really, "no diesel public transport vehicles of any kind inside the M25, whether road or rail" needs to be a medium to long term aim, and railway electrification is an easy way, using well-developed technology, to make a good start on that.

 

[mmh]

The solution to that is to electrify at 25kV between Amersham and Aylesbury and order a fleet that can run from both.

Really, "no diesel public transport vehicles of any kind inside the M25, whether road or rail" needs to be a medium to long term aim, and railway electrification is an easy way, using well-developed technology, to make a good start on that.

As I said before, I don't see the benefit of yet more small fleets dedicated to tiny routes.

The cost, both financial and operational, of arbitrarily banning diesel public transport would be astronomical for no economic benefit, and highly questionable whether it would have any other benefit.

Why within the M25? What's special about that area?

 

[adrock1976]

An alternative idea which I would do instead of what I suggested in my previous post is as well as finishing off the Great Western bits that have been postponed, I would do the former Midland Railway routes south of York/Leeds/Manchester, working south to Derby and Nottingham. Also the former Cheshire Lines Committee routes as well. As most of these routes are local all stations services, the trains would be quicker off the mark from a standing start.

I would also do the local services around Exeter (although creeping onto former London & South Western Railway metals heading east to Axminster and north towards Barnstaple), this would leave the wires tantalisingly pointing towards Salisbury, for future extension and/or conversion from third rail if feasible.

All in all, as a starting point, I would dust down the British Rail report on electrification that was published in 1980 and begin to at long last implement the electrification of the routes that had been identified.

 

[tbtc]

The cost, both financial and operational, of arbitrarily banning diesel public transport would be astronomical for no economic benefit, and highly questionable whether it would have any other benefit.

Why within the M25? What's special about that area?

Why try to improve air quality in one of the biggest/ busiest cities in Europe (that already has big problems with pollution)?

Why introduce trains with faster acceleration at busy stations like Marylebone?

Why, given that the UK taxpayer pay billions of pounds for the railway, despite the railway only being "2%" of journeys, should the railway be concerned about the environment that every else breathes in?

So often, the argument on here is that we should encourage people to move from cars/ buses/ planes to trains because trains are much "greener", but when there's suggestion about replacing diesel trains with electric ones, people aren't interested in making trains greener?

Same goes for stations like Birmingham New Street/ Edinburgh Waverley/ Sheffield (built at the bottom of valleys or underground, particulates sticking around) - terrible air quality - thousands of people using the platforms there breathing in the fumes.

As people don't die in their 20s/30s from smoking/ boozing/ industrial accidents, air quality is becoming a bigger killer.

Cities are introducing low emission zones, charging up to £100 per day for diesel vehicles entering city centres - yet we seem content to keep 1980s diesel trains running into city centres - and some people don't see this as a problem.

 

[LLivery]

- Chiltern & Snow Hill (London - Brum Main Line, Aylesbury, EWR, Cherwell, Stratford-u-A, Worcester)
- Uckfield, Marshlink & North Downs
- West of England ML
- Kettering - Nottingham, Derby, Sheffield, Doncaster, Barnsley, Huddersfield
- Manchester - Leeds
- Derby - Birmingham
- Bromsgrove - Bristol Pkwy
- Bristol TM/Newbury - Exeter
- Felixstowe
- Greenford, Windsor & Eaton Cen
- Chester - Crewe
- Shrewsbury - Wolverhampton
- Sunderland/Middlesbrough - Northallerton
- Pontefract Routes
- Edinburgh - Fife Circle - Aberdeen

 

[AlastairFraser]

If battery trains are genuinely becoming mature technology for 'small' gaps (e.g. Uckfield) then that leavess more capital expenditure available for bigger stuff (e.g. rest of MML, XC, Chiltern, etc)

True, but what's the point of adding complexities to several TOC's maintenance operations by giving them a microfleet of battery trains as opposed to just one fleet with the same type of traction and pickup. It must not cost much to third rail the remaining stretches and Chiltern is an example of where it could work much better, getting rid of the Class 165's to reduce the DMU shortage elsewhere (if Amersham to Aylesbury is not transferred to LU) and have dual-mode battery-fourth rail trains that would charge the batteries when waiting at stations for boarding.

 

[Ken H]

Why try to improve air quality in one of the biggest/ busiest cities in Europe (that already has big problems with pollution)?

Why introduce trains with faster acceleration at busy stations like Marylebone?

Why, given that the UK taxpayer pay billions of pounds for the railway, despite the railway only being "2%" of journeys, should the railway be concerned about the environment that every else breathes in?

So often, the argument on here is that we should encourage people to move from cars/ buses/ planes to trains because trains are much "greener", but when there's suggestion about replacing diesel trains with electric ones, people aren't interested in making trains greener?

Same goes for stations like Birmingham New Street/ Edinburgh Waverley/ Sheffield (built at the bottom of valleys or underground, particulates sticking around) - terrible air quality - thousands of people using the platforms there breathing in the fumes.

As people don't die in their 20s/30s from smoking/ boozing/ industrial accidents, air quality is becoming a bigger killer.

Cities are introducing low emission zones, charging up to £100 per day for diesel vehicles entering city centres - yet we seem content to keep 1980s diesel trains running into city centres - and some people don't see this as a problem.

why is air quality in London more important than air quality in Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham, Burnley, Ilkeston etc?

 

[Ken H]

True, but what's the point of adding complexities to several TOC's maintenance operations by giving them a microfleet of battery trains as opposed to just one fleet with the same type of traction and pickup. It must not cost much to third rail the remaining stretches and Chiltern is an example of where it could work much better, getting rid of the Class 165's to reduce the DMU shortage elsewhere (if Amersham to Aylesbury is not transferred to LU) and have dual-mode battery-fourth rail trains that would charge the batteries when waiting at stations for boarding.

Weren't the 165's designed so they could become converted to electric?

 

[AlastairFraser]

why is air quality in London more important than air quality in Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham, Burnley, Ilkeston etc?

London has the worst pollution hotspots from other modes of transport and ideally we should be electrifying the whole network ,but it would make sense to reduce pollution in the worse hotspots first if there is a limited supply of money given to the railways. Personally, I think we should stop subsidising the trunk road network and increase the rail budget to a point where the whole network can be electrified and a 20 year rollout of ERTMS is carried out, but the government seems to differ.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Weren't the 165's designed so they could become converted to electric?

No, I don't think so, but, the Chiltern 165s, with their 75mph top speed, are much more suited to be Sprinter replacements elsewhere than stay on on mostly electrified urban lines where quick acceleration is needed and/or much higher speeds can be achieved , allowing journey times to be cut on intercity trains along the same line. Angel Trains are experimenting with the Hydrive project to make them bi-mode battery trains,so they could charge at stations in big polluted urban areas like Leeds and Manchester so they could clear the urban areas on batteries and start using diesel outside the cities and towns before electrification gets going or is planned for some lines.

 

[Starmill]

Bangor to Lisburn via Belfast Great Victoria Street. 6tph in the peaks serve Bangor on intensive diagrams with high-powered DMUs. An order of enough appropriate new EMUs may even be able to effect a frequency upgrade to 4tph all day. The route is growing quickly, and this is a short disatance which serves some very intensively used and urban stations on two major commuter routes into Belfast. There is a significant snag however in that many trains currently run through to Portadown or even beyond. Enforcing a change at Lisburn may be unpopular or impossible depending on the timetable. Potential solutions could include a residual through service to Portadown or electrification through to Portadown, depending on how much money there is available (this would add to the number of route miles quite significantly, but it may be much more acceptable to turn Newry - Portadown NIR services into a shuttle as there aren't many). In the long term it would need to be thought about whether the Enterprise services can make use of this electrification, although on the current timetable there is no immediete call for this to change. A significant number of the current DMUs would be released to strenghten and improve services elsewhere in Northern Ireland by doing this, at relatively few route miles of electrification.

Notably a far better case for electrification can be made for a project like this or many other similar urban commuter routes throughout the UK than the current ongoing project to electrify Bristol Parkway to Cardiff Central, which offers very very limited benefits by itself.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Bangor to Lisburn via Belfast Great Victoria Street. 6tph in the peaks serve Bangor on intensive diagrams with high-powered DMUs. An order of enough appropriate new EMUs may even be able to effect a frequency upgrade to 4tph all day. The route is growing quickly, and this is a short disatance which serves some very intensively used and urban stations on two major commuter routes into Belfast. There is a significant snag however in that many trains currently run through to Portadown or even beyond. Enforcing a change at Lisburn may be unpopular or impossible depending on the timetable. Potential solutions could include a residual through service to Portadown or electrification through to Portadown, depending on how much money there is available (this would add to the number of route miles quite significantly, but it may be much more acceptable to turn Newry - Portadown NIR services into a shuttle as there aren't many). In the long term it would need to be thought about whether the Enterprise services can make use of this electrification, although on the current timetable there is no immediete call for this to change. A significant number of the current DMUs would be released to strenghten and improve services elsewhere in Northern Ireland by doing this, at relatively few route miles of electrification.

Notably a far better case for electrification can be made for a project like this or many other similar urban commuter routes throughout the UK than the current ongoing project to electrify Bristol Parkway to Cardiff Central, which offers very very limited benefits by itself.

Good idea, although it would require custom stock or regauging of UK stock. Maybe, to save costs, it could be electrified to 1500V DC like DART, take their newer stock and IE could add-on to their order for bi-mode units.

 

[train_lover]

Bromsgrove to Bristol should be a quick win!

 

[Starmill]

Bromsgrove to Bristol should be a quick win!

Which services would it allow conversation of? On the current timetable... Zero?

 

[train_lover]

Which services would it allow conversation of? On the current timetable... Zero?

Absolutely! But with new stock coming to XC in the new franchise this would allow Bristol to Manchester services to be electric only with Plymouth services being bi-mode units.

 

[Starmill]

Absolutely! But with new stock coming to XC in the new franchise this would allow Bristol to Manchester services to be electric only with Plymouth services being bi-mode units.

I hate to break it to you, but the CrossCountry franchise competition has been cancelled.

 

[Ken H]

Absolutely! But with new stock coming to XC in the new franchise this would allow Bristol to Manchester services to be electric only with Plymouth services being bi-mode units.

they should have made the voyagers bi mode

 

[train_lover]

I hate to break it to you, but the CrossCountry franchise competition has been cancelled.

This won't be forever. The franchise will change hands at some point

 

[VT 390]

Would it not make sense to electrify the remaining routes around the West Midlands served by West Midlands Railway such as Wolverhampton to Shrewsbury, Bromsgrove to Hereford and Nuneaton to Leamington Spa as well as the Snow Hill lines. This would allow West Midlands Trains to get rid of all their diesel trains (except on the Bedford to Bletchley route) as well as increasing capacity on these lines which are very well used.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

1) Leeds - Harrogate - York.
2) Leeds - Huddersfield - Guide Bridge & Manchester Victoria. No gaps.
3) Leeds - Bradford Interchange - Halifax - Manchester Victoria (plus Milner Royd/Dryclough junctions to Heaton Lodge/Bradley junctions).
4) Newcastle Central - Metrocentre.
5) Doncaster and Moorthorpe - Sheffield via both Rotherham Central and Masborough.
6) Metrocentre - Carlisle.

 

[adrock1976]

To eliminate as much diesel running under the wires for local or regional services, I would focus on infill or short extensions as follows:

1) Craigendoran Junction - Helensburgh Upper (tram wire similar to Wolverhampton-Oxley Depot. Bi-modes with power change at Helensburgh Upper being as that is where the signalling changes to/from RETB)
2) Anniesland - Westerton Junction and Anniesland
3) East Kilbride and Kilmarnock, Kilmarnock - Troon, and Carlisle - Dumfries (Dumfries so as to use 100/110 mph top speed electrics rather than 75/90 mph Sprinters)
4) Bishop Auckland - Saltburn and Middlesbrough - Nunthorpe or Battersby (local most/all stations services that interacts with the wired mainline at Darlington. Whitby trains could change power modes at Battersby as they reverse there)
5) Oxenholme - Windermere (short dead end branch)
6) Carnforth - Barrow-in-Furness (trains call at most if not all stations)
7) York - Leeds both routes via Church Fenton and Harrogate
8) Micklefield - Selby
9) Leeds - Guide Bridge/Manchester Victoria via Huddersfield (as part of TPE electrification, done properly without breaks in power supply)
10) Moorthorpe/Doncaster - Sheffield - Nottingham (both via Derby and Alfreton)
11) Leeds - Sheffield via Wakefield Kirkgate, also Castleford, Knottingley
12) Leeds - Manchester Victoria via Bradford Interchange and Hebden Bridge, also Wakefield Kirkgate/Huddersfield - Halifax/Hebden Bridge
13) Preston - Hall Royd Junction (unsure if that is the one east of Todmorden where the line converges with the one from Manchester Vic)/Todmorden Curve/Rose Grove - Colne (although not essential, Rose Grove - Colne section could switch power modes if bi-mode trains are used)
14) Preston - Ormskirk (tram wire similar to Wolverhampton - Oxley Depot as it is low speed and has some low bridges, and to allow a future Merseyrail extension with dual voltage trains)
15) Southport - Salford Crescent via Atherton/Wigan Wallgate - Lostock Junction (Bolton)
16) Liverpool South Parkway - Trafford Park via Warrington Central (mix of freight, local, and regional limited stop services)
17) Sheffield - Hazel Grove/Manchester Piccadilly via New Mills Central/Hyde Central/Bredbury and the Rose Hill Marple stub
18) Hazel Grove - Buxton
19) Wolverhampton - Shrewsbury, routes via Birmingham Snow Hill, and other former Great Western Railway routes in the West Midlands Region
20) Birmingham - Nuneaton - Leicester - Peterborough - Ely - Norwich via Thetford/Ipswich - Felixstowe via Bury St Edmunds/Newmarket - Cambridge (part of the Electric Spine project, if it still exists in some form or another)

This is me restricting it to no more than 20 to start of with.

 

[najaB]

Exactly, I don't understand why the ORR are so against extending third rail further to cover some small gaps and simplify some TOC's operations/cascade DMU's to relieve overcrowding elsewhere.

I know this is a fantasy thread, but the basic reason is that 750V DC third-rail is less efficient and less safe than 25kV AC OHLE, so there needs to be a complelling reason to extend/increase third rail coverage rather than replacing it with OHLE.

As to where I would electrify next, my vote has to be Edinburgh to Aberdeen plus the Fife Circle, plus Dundee to Dunblane.

 

[higthomas]

I think we really need some form of basic criteria for judging what has the most benefit. Something like train miles per week converted from diesel to electric traction / £. Or perhaps train minutes instead to stop penalising stopping services.

Then just work down the list. I wonder what that would look like.

 

[Bevan Price]

Stop / start electrification projects have been a disaster -- you lose expertise between projects, and that adds problems & cost to future electrifation schemes. So, spread over, say 40-50 years, I would pursue a Swiss style solution. Electrify almost everything, just omitting low-traffic rural routes. So it would be more a case of what not to electrify, and what had very low priority:

So, the following are examples of what would not be electrified:

Inverness - Thurso/Wick & Kyle.
Craigendoran - Fort William, Mallaig & Oban
Girvan - Stranraer.
Craven Arms - Central Wales - Llanelli
Hellifield - Carnforth
Battersby - Whitby
Par - Newquay

Low priority for electrification (for example):
Barrow - Whitehaven.
Grantham - Skegness
Norwich - Cromer / Sheringham.
Burscough - Preston
Looe & Falmouth branches.

The starting point for new schemes would be extending existing electrification areas and infilling gaps to eliminate most of the need for diesel working around big cities in England, Wales & Scotland.

 

[AlastairFraser]

I know this is a fantasy thread, but the basic reason is that 750V DC third-rail is less efficient and less safe than 25kV AC OHLE, so there needs to be a complelling reason to extend/increase third rail coverage rather than replacing it with OHLE.

As to where I would electrify next, my vote has to be Edinburgh to Aberdeen plus the Fife Circle, plus Dundee to Dunblane.

Yes, but using third rail to fill small mostly self-contained gaps in third rail network when there is about to be a glut of cheap off-lease third rail stock to make up stock shortages that could be created by electrifying and making several TOC's electric only would solve a lot of problems for certain TOC's and allow certain areas to receive nicer modern diesel stock that could instantly improve services.

 

[Ken H]

Yes, but using third rail to fill small mostly self-contained gaps in third rail network when there is about to be a glut of cheap off-lease third rail stock to make up stock shortages that could be created by electrifying and making several TOC's electric only would solve a lot of problems for certain TOC's and allow certain areas to receive nicer modern diesel stock that could instantly improve services.

not 3rd rail electrifying uckfield is just stupid.

 

[najaB]

Yes, but using third rail to fill small mostly self-contained gaps in third rail network when there is about to be a glut of cheap off-lease third rail stock to make up stock shortages that could be created by electrifying and making several TOC's electric only would solve a lot of problems for certain TOC's and allow certain areas to receive nicer modern diesel stock that could instantly improve services.

That could well be the compelling case that would convince the ORR that additional 3rd rail was justified. But you would need to show that dual voltage and/or hybrid/battery stock weren't feasible alternatives.